mf global. a republican from kansas, a member of the budget committee will take your calls about the congressional agenda for the rest of the year. ♪ ♪ host: good morning. it is thursday, december 8. the house is in at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. we have two members of congress on the program later on. congressman henry cuellar of texas will be talking about the mf global bankruptcy. later, tim huelskamp, a

republican of kansas will be here. he is here to talk about year- end spending and the tax battles in congress. as we open up today, it will be a focus on the administration. the administration decided to block an fda decision that would have made emergency contraceptives more available to young girls under the age of 16. we will talk to you, read you some of the news stories, and ask you whether or not that was the right decision on the part of the obama administration. the plan b emergency contraceptive. did the obama administration make the right decision? plan b contraceptives.

front-page coverage in many newspapers. let's give you a quick taste of it. we would like to get your calls on this topic in a few minutes here. we will also show you some of the letters. "the wall street journal" front page here.

host: that is "the wall street journal" this morning. "the washington post" made it the lead this morning. rob stein wrote -- host: we will show you more articles. we will show you pro and con

from editorial pages. we would like to hear from parents of young teens, and also, if there are young people watching, add to our understanding of your thoughts. before we get to your phone calls and your facebook comments on the plan b decision, there are two high-profile hearings on capitol hill today. first of all, jon corzine, former new jersey governor, is asked to testify before the house agriculture committee on the collapse of mf global. in a bit, we will be talking to congressman henry cuellar, who is a member of that committee, about it. eric holder has been asked to testify about the so-called fast and furious investigation. rob will tee up our

understanding of that hearing. good morning. what is the intent of the committee on asking the attorney general to come back today? guest: this wraps up a year's worth of investigation for the committee. attorney general holder appeared before another committee in november. this is really the judiciary committee a chance to ask its questions. host: "the washington times" has a front-page story, "senator grassley demands ouster in fast and furious." that also gets picked up as a writer story in "the washington post."

issa has an opinion piece published by "usa today" saying that the attorney general is protecting his staff over the debacle. host: senator grassley's announcement came after his own committee spoke to the attorney general in early november. i think you will see house members make their own determination. what you really have our different members interpreting the attorney general's testimony and various other a judicial officials, their testimony -- it is sort of a

rorshach test. he has said it is a mistake. you are going to see a lot of questions today about what the attorney general knew and when. do not expect him to -- host: what is at the heart of this investigation? guest: it involves a gun-running program. essentially, officials in the atf knowingly allowed people who can legitimately by guns -- they will buy them in bulk quantities and then sell them illegally. the atf allowed them to sell them across the border in mexico. the reason was that they were using these smaller offenders to

build cases against large targets in the mexican drug cartel. what happened with that -- they lost track of guns. many crossed the border. one of these guns was used in the shooting death of a border patrol agent. this all came to light earlier in january when members of congress began their investigation. since then, the justice department, including attorney have said thatlder, they were just finding out about this and have since gone on to condemn the program and say it was unacceptable. in 2010, the atf was told absolutely not to use this tactic. host: at the heart of this, is it a national security

investigation? is it about politics? is it a combination? guest: its accommodation. there are legitimate national security concerns. it has led to serious allegations. it has led to official saying the atf was absolutely wrong. a lot of the questioning heard so far is sort of what each official knew and when. should the attorney general resigned? should the head of the criminal division resign? the justice department sent a letter to congress in february saying that the atf takes all possible action from stopping guns from crossing the border. host: thank you. we are quickly running out of time. did you set the stage about the investigation. a hearing today is at 9:30.

it is the house to do cherie committee. the attorney general will testify. we will have coverage on c-span3 and c-span.org. thank you so much. guest: thank you. host: let me very quickly go back to set up the question. we will get to your telephone calls. you can call us, tweet us, or post on facebook. this is the hhs decision to overrule the fda about the plan b morning after contraceptive bill. it will continue to be available to girls under the age of 17 by prescription. the fda had been set to make it available without prescription for girls under the age of 17. here are some of the documents

attached to this. kathleen sebelius' memo to the fda. here are the important lines, if we can get in close on the camera. she writes -- host: interestingly, on the fda website, the commissioner writes this -- "i reviewed and thoughtfully consider the data, clinical information, and analysis provided."

host: those are statements from the secretary and from the commissioner, showing their disagreement over this. of course, the secretary trumping the decision. let's begin with your phone calls. samuel is an independent in new york. go ahead. caller: good morning. i think that is a good decision to overturn the fda.

i cannot imagine a girl, a girl, 11, 12, 13, they can get pregnant. i cannot see them just having sex and then going to distort -- goingng this bipill to the store and getting this pill. host: thank you. the you have kids? caller: yes. host: is this a conversation you have had with them at all? caller: no. i have one daughter who is 9 years old. i would not even begin that conversation. host: a little young at nine. thank you for the call. here is steve harrison, who tweets this. next is a call from indiana.

joshua, republican. what do you think about this decision on the part of the administration? are you there? we are moving on. next is georgia. willie, democrat. caller: i agree with the secretary for disapproving the fda's decision to give the pills to children under the age of 17. i have a 13-year-old daughter and i cannot imagine her being able to get a pill like that without the approval of a doctor. i want to know everything going on in her life. i have not had that conversation with her. i think that's a job for my wife. i am in total agreement with the democrats on this. host: american hero tweets --

next is a call from nashville, tennessee. roseanne is a democrat. talking about the administration's decision to block young girls from getting the plan b contraceptive. caller: thank you for taking my call. first of all, a womb belongs to the woman if it is attached to. quite clearly, president obama has been conferring with the catholic bishops who wander the halls of congress -- i would like him to know that women in the u.s. 50.8%. we will remember this attack on women's rights in the next election. he will not get my vote twice. every woman in the military should also have the say. one in four women are raped.

it is unconscionable for a male president have to have this much control over women's bodies. host: you used the word "woman." a female under the age of 17 is in fact a woman and is in control of her reproductive rights? caller: the womb is attached to the woman it is attached to. young girls have the right, if they are raped, especially by their fathers. this is something women in europe can get . i think women in the united states should have the same rights. host: thank you for your call. next is in springfield, ore.. michael, an independent there. you are on the air. go ahead.

caller: i have mixed feelings now. in a male -- i am a male. i do not believe males should have that much say over abortion. i'm a little scared of plan b four women. i know birth control is also very bad for their health. i wish women mwere more empowered to make these decisions. gillabrand wrotel bra about this yesterday in her tweet. we're taking your tweets, as well. you're welcome to join in on the conversation. a tweet -- a democratic member of the house

of representatives. here is covered in "the baltimore sun." "administration overrules fda plan." here are some pros and cons in the peace -- in the article. host: next is a call from

florida. michelle is a republican there. go ahead. caller: good morning. i totally agree with a comment. all these women are upset without realizing we are talking about minors. these are girls under the age of 17. if that was over the counter, i do believe it would be used as birth control and that is absolutely not meant to be used that way -- for health reasons. the minute something happens to a minor who was able to get that -- blood clots, god forbid, or if something happened, it would be a big thing and everyone would be upset. we have to remember this is a child under the age of 17. maybe we need more education. if they want to prevent pregnancies, we need more education with parents involved in those decisions. thank you. host: thank you. "the new york times" writes --

"is likely to have powerful, political reverberations." next call is from connecticut. ruth is a democrat there. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am so depressed about what is going on with the women's rights in this country. i think we're schizophrenic and

9naive. we pretend that girls than boys do not have intimate relationships at young ages. if we just pretend that they do not, of course the female will not get pregnant and we will not have to worry about what this 13, 14, or 15-year-old girl is going to do when she is pregnant and does have a baby and is not ready to parent. i am really devastated by what is going on in this country. it makes no sense. if you are 18-years old on aug. 1 and you happened to have sex on july 31, you cannot get this bill because you are 17. it's absolutely insane. thank you. host: bill is next. good morning. caller: it seems like another triumph of politics over science. in wisconsin, we just got a bill

passed that they can only teach abstinence education, instead of the full range of education. the science proves full education works. now there's a case where the health professionals at the fda say this is a good idea, but politics say we cannot go there. we're going to put our heads in the sand and pretend that our girls do not have sex. i'm a father of three daughters. i want them to have the ability to prevent a pregnancy, rather than have a pregnancy when they are a child, and have to worry about raising a child themselves. it is just crazy. like the other woman said, women make up over half of the voting bloc in this country. it's time to say goodbye, obama. host: here are two views from publications that are very different. "the national catholic reporter"

has a story written by michael williams. he writes -- later on, he writes, "the hhs decision is not about politics trumping science. it is about common-sense. it is about recognizing that an 11-year-old needs supervision." after our next call, we will show you in opposing -- show you an opposing point of view. next is gayle, a democrat. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am a registered nurse. nothing prevents the sperm from

fertilizing the egg. if you're going to take this pill, will have to interrupt the hormone of the women. puberty has a different hormone profile than a mature woman. this just came out a few years ago. we do not know how it would affect the development of a young girl, if she is going to be interfering with her hormones to have sex. i am totally -- i wonder percent agree with this. it is compassionate is thoughtful. it is caring about people. doctors need to intervene, so they can get a profile of this girl and this woman and see that this pill does not cause adverse effects. so often we get pills and we think they are wonderful and the next thing we find out, they are bringing some horrible cancer with it.

i totally agree with kathleen sebelius and president obama. help the women stay alive and healthy. host: "the san jose mercury news" editorial about this. here is what they write.

host: that to your telephone calls on this. next is willing to and, delaware. good morning to lynn, an independent there. caller: i do not agree with them blocking the plan b. i believe a woman should have control over her own body. i believe they are wrong for trying to block it. thank you for c-span. host: we appreciate you watching. barbara, a republican. caller: the plan b is all fine and well. they should be able to distribute what they need to do. the young girls about having sex should be protected. i do think we have the law about the shots for babies.

there should be a law that when a female or a male, especially a female, there should be a law that there should be some kind of contraceptive or shot, like the shot that women get for not getting pregnant -- should be something that should be done until the age of 18, 19, or whatever. if they decide to keep the shot, they should be able to, instead of having all these pills. there should be some kind of contraceptive by law. thank you for listening to me. i think that's what should be done. host: appreciate your call. on facebook -- "of course it is not the right decision."

below that, tizzie cregan writes on facebook -- host: back to phone calls. rockford, illinois. kathy, an independent, good morning. caller: good morning. i support kathleen sebelius for overriding this for minor girls. she is going against her politics to override this.

people say this is political. democrats are alienating a certain portion of their base. this shows their agenda. the one lady who said she had to ask the has been to take the pill -- that is ludicrous. i support her. she did what was right for the young girls. she went against her political party. these are young children. they are not adults. children get to be on their parents' medical policy until they're 26. why would we say they are able to make a decision like this before they can buy cigarettes or alcohol? this does need to be monitored. host: thank you for your comments. liz smith tweets this. before your next call, another story you are likely to hear more about in "the washington

post" today. hundreds of ashes put in landfills, more than previously thought. host: that is "the washington

post" this morning. back to our conversation with you about the administration's decision on the plan b contraceptive. the next call is from maine. carol, a democrat. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am astonished and delighted. as a parent, we have seen our rights eroded. when it comes down to it, a child's womb is the parents. a child is not an adult. they are not ready to make these decisions. if it was left standing, it would have been another example of how politicians are getting too involved in the relationship between parents and their children. host: peggy is watching us in memphis -- an independent there. your comments on this discussion this morning. caller: you are so right about

kids. i have a two-year-old and 3- year-old. no child should be having sex. i know they're going to do that. as parents and as fathers in our kids' lives, you should check and make sure. no. they should not get no pill or nothing. gothat's the case, say, hey, to the abortion clinic. that's not right. host: use of 40 administration. you believe a parent should be involved. -- you support the administration. you believe a parent should be involved. caller: i would be checking to make sure they have their periods. you know, when they're going to the doctor -- we should be up on that. you should be looking to make sure they have cycles.

no, should not put no pill out. if that's the case, pass a law for abortion. host: next is a call for a louisiana. jonathan, you are on -- an independent there. caller: first of all, i am against abortion, period. -years-old.ch they should not be on pills. [inaudible] host: i apologize. i'm jumping in because the cell phone connection got bad and we could not hear you very well. exas, a democrat there.

good morning. what is your opinion? caller: i do not understand why everyone is talking about women's rights. rights.re girls' we are not talking about the rights of young people. we are talking about little girls being able to go into a store and buy a pill because they made a bad decision. we all know that kids make bad decisions. we cannot think that a pill can take care of everything. we are throwing pills -- there is not even adhd. parents need to be involved. we are not talking about women's rights. we are talking about the rights of children, little girls.

i totally agree with obama. thank you. host: lots of stories in the papers today about the presidential contest. "the washington post" -- "gop rivals coming to a head." next up, "the washington post" also. this is about the latest ad from the romney camp. "romney camp turns battle personal." in "the financial times," "the grinch struggles -- gingrich struggles to build his team."

finally, from your, -- finally, from europe. "the white house press is europe on -- the white house presses europe on debt." host: that is "the new york times" this morning. we are talking to you about the administration's decision on the plan b contraceptive decision, limiting it. next call is from new york. chris is a democrat there. caller: i think is kind of

silly. all these people are calling in. they think this is a victory for parents. kids are going to have sex. they're not going to tell their parents if they're going to get the plan b pill. they're not going to reach out to their parents and tell them. they're not going to go to their parents. they will probably reach out to their friends to try to get the plan b pill. really, it does not affect the parents at all. it does not really -- it is not a victory for parents. you know, it is really just adding the same problems. host: thank you. on twitter, tina tweets this

comment. the next phone comment is from little valley, new york. jennifer is an independent there. caller: good morning. i think plan b is fine. there are too many teen pregnancies. their parents usually end up taking care of them and they're not educated about it. they live a harder life. host: from facebook, jeff writes us -- the next phone call is from new haven, connecticut.

bill is a republican there. good morning caller: -- good morning. caller: good morning. i agree with the decision, one of the few agreements with the obama administration. it's another aspect of our society where we think pills can solve our problems. i think parents and children themselves need to be more involved in digging about their actions, thinking about what their kids are doing -- involved in thinking about their actions host:. a couple of more minutes. we can continue the conversation on our facebook and twitter pages, if you are interested. another newspaper on the record. former gov. blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years. here is the cover of his hometown newspaper. "14 years." "the chicago tribune" banner

headline on this. next is a call from oklahoma city. good morning. caller: good morning. first-time caller. i love you guys. i agree with what the decision was on the plan b. parents, now they do not take enough time. a pill cannot take the place of a parent. i also think that president obama took into consideration his daughters in having this decision made. parents need to be parents and quit depending on technology and pills. host: thank you for your call and for your first time participation this morning. back to facebook. jeff bounds posts this on the c-

span facebook page. host: that is facebook. right below that is otis, who posts this. next, westfield, new york. good morning. mike, an independent there. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm concerned that people keep calling up and saying that this is the lawmakers responsibility

or the parent's responsibility, when this is a question of morality. the law should have nothing to do with it. it is up to the parents to take care of their children in whatever way they see fit. the government has no place in this at all. host: a different story altogether is the lead in "usa today" -- we are driving less. in their story, they write -- that is in "usa today" this morning. miami, florida, your next. jane is an independent there.

good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. i am a 29-year-old single mother. i have a 9-year-old son. i said several other occurrences that have been physical occurrences where people have done things and touched me. i have gotten plan b. i wrote a story about my life and there's a book about it. it is discussing how society wants to create this concept where women are at fault because we get pregnant. i have a father that has six children -- he has five children from. i had my son because my mother told me it was a religious thing. because of the religion, i kept my son.

the father is nowhere around. i want to see where the government picks up and takes care of all these children they are telling us to keep and to have. host: in your life story, you are obviously -- were obviously quite underage and you could not go to your parents because your parents encourage you to have the father -- caller: my mom's husband raped me at 15 years old. my dad is famous. at 17, i was pregnant with the kids. at 18, i was pregnant by a date rape. then i had this child. there is no assistance. there is absolutely no assistance. the government will not help me. there is $3,000 in my bank account. i cannot get food stamps. i cannot get medicaid. i cannot get anything. i want to go to college. i started college. i had to quit. i cannot go back to college.

we are talking about innocent children. my son has adhd and he needs help. i cannot afford to give him the help that he needs. the public-school system keeps them in the classes. what happens to these children after we have them and we develop them into these human beings. i have no help for my child. host: i have to ask you the question that probably on the minds of people this morning -- how are you watching us this morning? caller: i am in my house in miami, florida. i was working out, but i thought i had to talk about this. host: being able to afford cable tv at home when you say you do not have enough money. you saw this at a gym facility. caller: yeah. host: what is the name of your book, by the way?

caller: "i am not my father's daughter,"the story of being luther campbell's daughter. host: the c-span facebook page. you can be part of the conversation. it will also continue on the c- span twitter page @cspanwj. up next, congressman henry cuellar will be here to talk about jon corzine testifying on the mf global bankruptcy. we will be right back. ♪ ♪

>> a dollar an hour for your labor. i have no health care. that's the most expensive single element. no environmental controls. no retirement, and you do not care about anything but making money. there will be a sucking sound going south. >> ross perot spoke out about trade issues during the 1992 presidential debate. he made two attempts for the presidency. the first time, getting over 90 million votes -- more popular votes than any third-party candidate in american history. although he lost, he has had a lasting impact of american politics. to preview the other in video, prospero and see all the programs from our series, -- perot, goo on prospeross

to c-span.org. >> december 7, 1941, a day that will live in infamy. >> this sunday, for 24 hours, american history tv looks at the japanese attack on american military forces at pearl harbor, including the 70th anniversary. live call-in programs with world war ii historian craig shirley. this week's national parks service conference about pearl harbor, a tour of the visitors center, sunday on c-span3. >> why could the congress, as a member -- as a matter of its appropriations power fund with

the mandate that they would be installed? >> the issue of whether they can mandate that they be used intrudes into the judicial power of the court. that is the difference. senator, i agree it is very difficult to know where to draw the lines. >> tuesday, a senate judiciary subcommittee met to discuss televising the supreme court. can find that hearing on our homepage, c-span.org. you can learn more on our special web page devoted to cameras in the courts. you also find a link to the youtube playlist. >> "washington journal" continues. host: let me introduce you to congressman henry cuellar of

texas, a member of the agriculture committee that will be hearing testimony today from senator and former governor jon corzine, who was the head of mf global, which recently declared bankruptcy. congressman henry cuellar, there's a possibility that the former senator might invoke his fifth amendment rights. do you expect to hear from him today? guest: he might just talk in generalities. i think his attorneys will probably advise him to take the fifth. host: what they want to hear from him? guest: we want to know what happened. we want to know how the $1.2 billion of customer accounts was put at risk. i want to hear from him. did the customers know they were taking that risk? did he attempt to tell them at any time? why did he do this? we have a lot of basic questions

to him and to the folks in the commodity commission, also. host: the decision to subpoena him was unanimous. is that correct? guest: that is correct. host: what do people take away from that? we often see fractured politics. both democrats and republicans agreed he should come in. guest: i think that happened in other committees, also. i'd been there is a subpoena out there for him already. from what i understand, it was both democrats and republicans. i'm a democrat. he is a democrat. i think we have to do our jobs. when we are concerned about the farmers, the ranchers, the mine operators. host: would you explain to people what the powers the ag

committee has? guest: the ranchers and farmers who have to rely on corn and oil -- the go-ahead with the commodities. they try to do that. when you have ranchers and farmers, then the agriculture has jurisdiction. host: we want to open the phone lines for your questions or comments about the house of representatives agriculture committee, one of several investigating what happened at mf global, and its leader, who was a former u.s. senator and former governor, jon corzine. you can tweet us a question or comment, and you can also send us an e-mail. we will tell you how to do that. do you find yourself surprised

that the person you've asked to testify came from such high places in government? guest: i think the last time we had a senator -- i believe it was 1908. i believe it was some sort of corporate scandal at that time. it is rare to have somebody of this stature to come before us as a former senator, a former governor. again, you get involved in these types of situations. there will be a lot of questions. i think both democrats and republicans anwant to ask him some questions. host: since the big financial meltdown in 2008, the dodd-frank bill has been passed. why do you think we find ourselves in a situation where a large brokerage, financial firm can have these kind of problems when safeguards have been put in place? guest: these are some of the

questions we are going to ask the futures commodities. if we have this in place, were there any red flags that came up? was there anything that set off any alarms? if somebody does not go in and ring the alarm, it does not matter. the other side -- we cut the funding for the commodities commission, so therefore, there are two sides to this treaty will probably hear from democrats that the funding has been cut -- to this. we will probably hear from democrats that the funding has been cut. host: you mentioned you are also interested in the commodities futures trading commission leadership. what are your questions? guest: first of all, did they see any red flags.

also, was there any lobbying? the reports are that the senator have lobbied to hold off on this particular rule. we will be asking questions about what sort of role was involved. we will be going into those questions, also. did the watchdog do its job? host: the commodities futures trading commission is chaired by gary genslar. "the new york times" had "10 questions for jon corzine." here is what they asked.

do you agree that is an area of inquiry? guest: without a doubt. there's nothing wrong with lobbying. if you use the connections that you had and there's a situation where the result was that the company ended up in bankruptcy, there were about 2800 jobs lost so far, $1.2 billion of customers' accounts still missing. i think that's an area you will hear a lot of questions from. host: let's get some calls for the congressman. good morning, jennifer.

caller: good morning. i would like to make a comment and then a question. ok, good morning. good morning, representative. guest: good morning. caller: ok, i would like to ask you this question. how many people lose their land or their house on the bet he made with the company? guest: we are going to have about three different panels. we will hear from the commissioner of the commodities futures trading commission, the lead counsel for the trusty on the liquidation of this company, and a second panel will be the former senator. from there, the third panel is we will hear from different groups that have been impacted. we certainly want to hear from the customers, or the people who

represent the customers. at the end of the day, we want to know what happened to the $1.2 billion, and will there be enough assets to recover to repay those folks? small ranchers, small farmers, other folks who thought they were -- whether it is corn, oil, they thought they were looking at something safe. it turned out that instead of hedging, there was speculation that money was put in the european the situation. host: "the new york times" mentions that the board reportedly signed off on the trade. what does that raise for you in the whole area of board oversight of publicly traded companies? guest: that means there might be some fiduciary responsibility for those individuals, if they signed off on that. again, we go back to one of my basic questions. did they tell the customers?

they turn this into an investment bank and use the own capital -- and use the capital for the vets, that's one thing. if they coaming goal of the there is theney -- former senator or the board, that's the area we need to go into. host: mf global was a brokerage house. people gave them their money thinking it would be handled in a different way. guest: right. what we call the hedging. that is trying to set a price but we want to buy corn or oil at this particular price. you set it so there can be some stability in the future. instead of hedging, there is speculation. if jon corzine or folks wanted to move this commodity brokerage into an investment bank, then they should have used their own capital, instead

of using the customers. host: what they speculated on was european sovereign debt, which was inherently risky. guest: it has been very risky. host: the next call is i will move on to las vegas. caller: hello there. i can tell you that they did not tell the customers they would use those funds. it is illegal for them because the it is supposed to be customer segregated or secured funds. -- or segregated funds. they try to hide this. was a big argument about whether they should be shown in the balance sheet -- there was a big argument. they needed to shore on the

balance sheet and orzine was -- was trying to hide that. both own stock in the company that will probably lose everything. the customers are first in line. host: if you have to ask a question of senator k andcorzicorzine, what would ait? caller: may be introduced a bill -- the way that compensation schemes are setup on wall street and this -- this encourages this kind of gambling. when they take a leveraged of twice that the collapse to lehman brothers and corzine was

said there would wrapped up their risk because they wanted to make a bigger profit. that would mean more bonuses and more salary for corzine and the top executives. so they rolled the dice and a gamble. if they lose, then they lose the stockholders' money and the bondholders' money. they were not supposed to go into the customers' money. if we have the ongoing schemes which reward risk-taking -- they get a win and the stockholders and the customers get the loss, isn't there something we can do to make them personally responsible? did not take the customer's money if you want to gamble. if you do something wrong, we're

coming after your house. host: thank you. guest: you are right. the company, mf global, was a commodity brokerage company. they hedged on prices on something that would be saved. corzine command and there were trying to move more into investment banking -- corzine came in. they would have been held accountable by the stockholders and people that invested. they brought in monday's from customers and they looked like fromhey brought in monies customers. they lost that money. anytime you can -move those

assets and you'll find yourself in trouble. we want to make sure we get all the facts. if you bring in the customer accounts and you're not supposed to do that, that is a problem. host: a former senator has released his prepared testimony and it looks like he will be testifying before the committee and it has been posted to bloomberg news. can i share that with you? guest: yes.

guest: and basically my staff got this late last night. the bottom line is that he did a good job and they know where it will be at. our understanding is he will go in and might enter some questions but some questions like it tricky for him and he may plead the fifth. host: we have a tweet. host: would you posit whether there is a criminal

investigation? guest: we will leave that to the proper law enforcement agencies. anytime you have this sensitive corporations doing this, i think you'll probably be looking at an investigation. i can cite what i think is going to happen but i will leave it up to the investigators. anytime the mess with customer'' money, that is not good. host: we have a question by e- mail. guest: right. i get to talk to ranchers and farmers on the ag committee. the subsidies -- the help for farmers is less than half of 1%

of the entire federal budget. will we see some changes? yes, we are. i think that the ones that are struggling from day-to-day will probably get some assistance. the last thing i want to say is us importing food as we import oil. look across the country is in different parts of the world. the agriculture is subsidized by other countries. host: the hearing begins at 9:30 eastern time. we'll street live on our website, c-span.org. it will be scuttled later on television. -- it will be scheduled later on television. a republican caller. caller: why did mf global --

counseling? host: it was hard to understand your question. caller: pay bill clinton $50,000 a month for advisory? host: do you know? guest: i have no idea about that. host: thank you for your call. don from texas. caller: i would like to ask if c-span would make a pledge to me and the american people to ask this congressman or senator or anybody else whether they be republican or democrat where they get their money from, do they have super pacts and how that affects their loan? guest: as you know, members of

congress have to reveal their contributions and how to spend those moneys. that is part of the fdic. that information is available right now. you do have pacts and they do release that information. certain moneys cannot be put into some pacts and they don't have to reveal their sources. i want to know who has contributed to the pacts. right now the supreme court has ruled that certain pacts can get money. for members of congress, that information is online and please say hello to my friends in texas.

host: our guest represents the 28 district of south central texas, parts of san antonio and laredo. he is vice chair of the policy committee. he was in the texas house and served as the texas secretary of state. a u.s. customs broker specializing in import-export work. he has more degrees than any other member of congress, five advanced degrees. he has a b.s. from georgetown, mba from texas a&m. what did you do with all those degrees? guest: my father and mother went only to a sixth-grade education. they used to say we didn't get

the education because they put us out in the field to work. host: so you proved them. next up is cliff from texas. caller: good morning. a couple of comments. this corzine issue needs to be looked into. it is part and parcel of left or right on the political spectrum of what all of us are so upset about. i find it ironic when if you start talking about commingling funds and president lyndon johnson started taking funds out of what was supposed to be a secure social security fund and this is our federal government, and putting it into the operating funds or whenever

areas of government that never should have been commingled with, and then you have medicare, which is fraudulent to some estimates of up to 30% and there's no oversight. solyndra issue. everybody that is responsible in the government sort of froze their hands up and walks into the next door to prepare a meeting to interview what happened with jon corzine and was a graduate of the system that is responsible for comingling the medicare and what is happening with solyndra. so on one hand u.s. surprised that corzine could be involved in all this. he is an honor graduate from the

same school that is promoting it. let's get the government on a sound basis so we can have confidence even in interviewing jon corzine. i'm from texas. i love west texas. i appreciate the congressman's service. i have traveled the world. i've been to the white house after winning the davis cup. i love this country. i have traveled the world. there is no greater country than the united states of america. guest: cliff, say hello to my good friend that i serve with in the texas house and now he is a federal judge. you have a great university. i have been there several times.

there is a lot of frustration about the system. i have been frustrated with the system. we have to make sure we go after those folks. you talk about a number of issues. you talked about the social security trust fund. it is wrong to take money out of the trust fund. that social security trust fund should stay there. medicare and those and talbott issues that make almost half of the budget, that money is something that we should make sure that we go after the fraud and the waste. solyndra -- both democrats and republicans are complaining about this. the loan guarantees for this

energy. it is interesting. the senator -- we need to go after those folks that are not doing it. sometimes people talk about too much regulation. i think we do have a reasonable amount of regulation. there has to be regulation to make sure that this doesn't happen. they got delayed and this would have prevented the mf global problem before they could go out and invest in this european debt. that did not happen at that time. you talk about certain rules. there have to be a reasonable amount of rules so the government can play umpire to

make sure we don't have this type of corporate scandals. host: we have more information about the caller that linked this to bill clinton. their stories from "the there are stories from "the new york times" and fox news. this is the national review online. oakland tied to the mf global -- bill clinton tried to mf global.

host: that is what we know. guest: i need to bring my ipad. i have in my car. host: we can look things up quickly. we have a comment. guest: well, there's been no conviction, no indictment yet. we have to wait for the process. i know that you have to go through the legal process.

if they go into a process where they investigate and make indict and convict, then a person will be in jail. the constitution is what rules at this time and we will be following the u.s. constitution. host: do you have any sentiment for the sympathy behind the comment? guest: 10 years ago was a enron. then we've seen other ones in recent years. i can see how individuals feel that the people that have money think that they are untouchable. we have seen some folks that have ended up in jail and nobody is above the law. host: if you're wanted to follow-up on the conversation and asked this question -- a viewer wanted.

guest: we are not trying to muddy the waters. investigators will fall the paper trail and they will do their job. we have certain responsibilities in congress. basic oversight is one of them. we have jurisdiction over agriculture and will be involved in this one. host: hearing is chaired by senator lucas from oklahoma. people have referred to this. if you're not familiar with jon corzine's by our free, he was appointed in 2010 and served as the governor of new jersey from 2006 until 2010. he was chairman and ceo of goldman sachs.

last call for the congressman comes from baltimore. the morning to donn -- good morning to donna. caller: i have a question about banks investing their customer'' money. i stumbled upon something kind of weird, which is kind of complicated. four different banks, four of i haverger banks -- the changed banks four times because they would be double charging me. after three years of trying to figure it out, they are investing the money, but they are only investing the money on social security accounts.

at one point my husband had a regular direct deposit and i had it social security direct deposit. they only did the double charging on the same charges on the social security account. that is why president obama was so quick to bail out the banks in 2008. i believe that the banks in addition to taking high-risk with their own money, have lost everybody's social security money in the mix. host: ok. let us stop right there. it is about their banks and their investment strategy. guest: limit thank you for your question. the tarp -- let me thank you for your question. investment banking, the regulators are there to look at

that and whether to keep banking fees and the services that they charge, that is something that is under the regulators. we're talking about it commodity brokerage firm that apparently looked like they were trying to move into investment banking and using accounts, customer accounts to to that speculation dealing with european debt. it is a little different on that. you can call your member of congress and they can follow up. host: the hearing begins at 9:30. you can watch live coverage of c-span.org. congressman cuellar, thank you so much. senator george mcgovern who was injured last friday night as he was making his way to making

has been released from the hospital. his condition continues to improve and we're happy to report that to you. our final installment will be on friday night at 8:00 p.m. and the subjects will be ross perot. we will take a quick break and we'll la will be back with our l guess, congressman tim huelskamp. we'll be right back. >> standard and poor's may downgrade the rating of the 27 nation european union. this comes one day before the debt crisis summit. in number of countries have been put on notice for a possible downgrade. the central bank has cut its key interest rate by 1/4 of a

percentage points. the new president has said the economy could be heading for a mild recession. markets are waiting to hear if more bonds will be bought. economic issues on capitol hill. house republicans will meet to try to extend the social security payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits. early thisninner morning at 9:00 a.m. on c-span. >> part of the point of the book is to make us think about change. the potential suddenness of collapse. what happens to the soviet union and to financial systems

and what is happening to the european union is the kind of thing that can happen to when it complex system. it can suddenly malfunction. >> this weekend, neall ferguson, saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern and sunday night at 9 eastern and specific -- pacific. also, a look at the attack on pearl harbor. saturday at 1:00 p.m. and again at 9:00 p.m. like partisan politics are hurting the country. what americans must do to save the republic. sunday night at 11:00 p.m. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: we have representatives tim huelskamp in for a conversation. you'll be sitting in on the panel. what do you think are the central questions about mfp global? guest: we need to know what happened with the money. this is the money of the customers. it looks like they were illegally used by mf global for their own investments. so the main question is, where's the money? jon corzine is responsible for holding those funds and i'm worried about that. host: what would come out of any

knowledge that you would cle glean? guest: i often an ast will my first question would big -- and what my first am often asked question would be. it is illegal for mr. corzine to miss use customer funds -- to misuse customer funds. many of my own constituents, they don't have access to those funds. they lost trading positions as a result of his actions. it might not be much to lose a day of trading, but for many farmers and ranchers in kansas, this is a serious situation.

host: the payroll tax holiday extension. it has been back and forth between house and the senate. where are you and will it go? guest: it is hard to tell where it will go. the tax holiday that was passed last year is up again. the president talked about the jobs plan back in september and he promised that everything would be paid for. this has gone lost from the white house. we have blown up the deficit. there seems to not be a way to pay for it. we're talking about paying jobs and we need to provide some

certainty for employers and we should exclude the extension of the bush-obama tax cuts so we can get some job creation going on. host: you call this the social security tax holiday. we have been hearing more and more emphasis on how it gets paid for. there be less money going into social security coffers. is there a way to fund this other than social security? guest: we are fighting this by borrowing from the chinese. the government is running a huge deficit of $1.2 trillion. the gimmick that was put into place would transfer the money out of the general fund. it is running a huge deficit. so essentially becomes out of the coffers of social security.

that's a real concern for many people. host: it is popular with the public. i have a poll here. the echoes to the politics -- that goes to the politics. guest: i know folks worry about politics. we came up here to change the way we do business. spending money now is like taking a vacation to disney world. you would not take the mortgage on your home to pay for it. they do not want to pay for it this year and paid off over 10 years. i think that we need to look at

what would help grow the economy and that is certainly in terms of tax policy. the house is talking about dealing with some of the over regulations coming out of the epa that is pulling back and job creation. the first party should be, does this create jobs? the tax holiday does not do what it is supposed to do. host: here's a headline from "usa today." the talks about temporary tax measures and how they often become permanent parts of the tax code. most are extended year after year. we're talking with congressman tim huelskamp. he is a freshman and came to congress with many of the tea party ideals.

how would you say that your freshman class did in its first year in changing the way the house works? guest: it remains to be seen. there remains a big battle. we want to change washington before it changes us. this idea of spending money first and paying off in the future -- we have been doing this for years. i am disappointed that we have not cut spending. it is the same as last year. to go home and say that we could not get spending cut -- the debt ceiling was increased. we have a lot of work left to do. we have a senate that has not passed 25 of our jobs bills.

they have refused to pass a budget for almost three years. host: st. petersburg, florida, michael. caller: good morning. i have a prediction and a statement. the prediction is that even if corzine does get thrown in the can, that by the time obama leaves office, he will pardon him and he will get out, being that corzine has funneled money to him and clinton. what is a light to be in a -- what is it like to be in it once-respected profession? host: are you talking about the 9% approval rating?

guest: i appreciate the question. i represent a rural area of western kansas. it is quite an honor. people seem satisfied because i shoot straight with them. so people respect that. kansassident's was in earlier this weekend. one line of the speech of my attention when he talked about wall street insiders or folks with insider connections, that they shouldn't have special privileges. i thought of corzine. given he was eight bungla bungle was given special privileges to misuse funds.

he had two conversations with cftc about this issue on the one-year anniversary of the dodd-frank. if he broke the law, it is disturbing that someone who happens to be a u.s. former governor and is a close friend of the white house come that they would get favored treatment. that's what we want to have the hearing. host: robert in maryland. caller: hi. i am all for these conferences mr.inquiries as to what corzine did. what happened to the money that enron lost?

to hold individuals irresponsible for those losses -- do you hold individuals responsible for those losses? we have one of the best presidents and one of the best groups of people in his administration that we have never held in the white house and i think you're barking up the wrong tree. guest: i appreciate the comments. that is why we're having a common, to figure out what happened to $1.2 billion. this is money that his company used. the buck stops at the top. he claims he did not know what happened. either he is not being honest or he is incompetent. if you're a ceo, to take $1.2 pocketsout of people's

and misusing for your own speculation, that is wrong and that is illegal. he should know that as a former governor and a former u.s. senator. he should know what the laws are. he helped pass some. host: a number of people on twitter are asking if you signed grover norquist's tax pledge. guest: i did. it is a pledge to meet in the first district of kansas in which i said i would vote not to raise taxes. my constituents believe taxes are high enough already. the indian that we need to raise more taxes is something they do not support. they are supportive of giving your word.

"washington has already taken too much of our money." it is the spending side. we should have a spending pledge. we're happy to sign the pledge. host: let me put this column in front of you from "the washington times." host: they will campaign behind a congress that kanaka behind a stalemate -- that cannot get behind a stalemate. guest: co-op and visit with folks and take their questions and instead of giving speeches, i listen to them. they are saying that we would

like to spend less money and have less regulation. they do what more certainty and that there is a climate of uncertainty. if you went up and did nothing, that is what they are looking for. if congress cannot pass laws to the senate bill would limit the regulatory powers from the epa and elsewhere, that is what is restricting growth. people are looking for work. it is a shame we cannot pass policies. the president disagrees with me. he thinks some of the economy will get moving. after three years, that approach has not worked. host: here is the latest.

the number fell to the lowest number in nine months. with the it applications dropped by 23,000 to 381,000. the number that economists was looking for was 375,000 and it has to do that for a number of weeks consistently. do you have a sense the economy is turning for the better right now? guest: it is hard to tell. i come from an area of the country where we were doing comparatively better than other parts of the nation. i still talk to small businessmen and women and they are saying, we like to hire one more person our goal from part- time to full-time, but we are worried about what is coming out of washington. on december 31 of next year, if

congress does nothing and the president stands in the way, all the bush just about tax cuts will go away -- all the bush- obama tax cuts will go way. that is holding back their desire to invest and to hire more folks. host: juan in michigan. caller: good morning. i have a question that i would like answered. why in the world is there a complete transparency in washington, d.c., when some protecting the names of people that contributed? can you tell me that? why is the not complete transparency? guest: great question.

i support transparency and i believe in that. transparency in pacts. if they influence an election, they are required to report their donors. the real transparency is what goes on in washington, d.c. this administration promised to be the most transparent in history. c-span will be in the room and that is not been the result. i think you have the right to know what is going on in washington. you have a right to know how your money is being spent. if you ask how we're spending

the trillions of dollars, i do not know and nobody knows. there is legislation that would put our faith in mac and freddie fannie mae and freddie mac on the books and that is not transparent. a great question. host: each of these pieces of legislation faces a deadline in the next couple of weeks. they include unemployment benefits -- host: are you anticipating that there will be compromises found for each of these, or will things break apart? guest: i think we'll get them all done. washingtony when

agrees, we add to the deficit. folks ask me about the doc fix. that was part of a budget agreement that would provide cuts to medicare under bill clinton. washington hass, said, we cannot make those cuts. that is what worries me is that washington promises cuts in the future. this is one of those sometime in the future, and they still cannot make any cuts to programs we are talking about. host: with the breakdown of the super committee, that process lays dormant. guest: that was a disaster. i voted against the debt deal. i thought there should be

something guaranteed in return, and that did not happen. if washington cannot act, we will move to sequestration. there will not be a single cut until after the next election. so congress and the president have a desire to have someone else make the cut. you cannot guarantee those cuts. congress is to step up to the plate and talk about intimate reform. many of these popular programs are in serious jeopardy unless we make strong reforms. the senate refuses to vote on such things. host: we have a tweet.

guest: deregulation -- kansas farmers and ranchers are required to have two permits for the same pesticide application, and so they have to hire people to get these done. it makes them less able to do other parts of their job. they are wasting money to get two permits. regulationsing with with our power plants. this would reduce our electrical generating capacity in america by up to 4%, which means it will raise energy prices and that

will increase costs. competitivery internationally with our current energy system and it is getting worse as we get more regulations out of washington. the impact my constituents in kansas. host: he was elected to the kansas senate and reelected in 2004 and 2008 before coming to the house of representatives. he has a ph.d. from american university. guest: i finished that and return home and worked on farms. host: do you get agricultural subsidies? guest: not my portion of that. host: how do you feel about the debate? guest: we need a good debate in

moving the export markets and we need more freedom to farm as we please. i was disappointed with the farm bill proposal that was attempted to be put in the super committee product. next year will debate the farm bill. farmers are looking for risk management tools. that's what mf global is before our committee. they have made difficult for folks for risk-management. if you think that jon corzine and others are misusing your personal funds, that makes them more uneasy about the markets. i think that is critical for agriculture and for many other industries. host: charles from alabama.

caller: i have not called in -- i have a brief thing -- this payroll tax. i have never heard of it until recently. i'm on social security. i went to webster's dictionary. i could not find "payroll tax" in webster's dictionary. "a charge imposed by --" social security was established in 1935 to include old age and survivors insurance. the obama administration and the democrats have been playing this word. they have called it a tax. people say, i am in favor of a

tax. if it wanted a tax, they should have taken it out of the income tax, not the social security fund. social security is not the payroll tax. it is a contribution. i think the republicans should remind people not to use that term again. it is not in the dictionary. it is something the democrats have made up. the republicans want to give money to the wealthy. host: thank you. guest: thank you for calling in. it is the social security tax. there is also a medicare tax. over the years, they have continued to borrow and spend those funds for other purposes. today i think we owe more than

$2 trillion to the social security trust fund. there will be no more boring because there will not be any surplus funds -- there will not be more borrowing. this first the social security trust fund. the social security tax holiday to not help in job creation. we still have some of the highest unemployment rates since the great depression. long-term unemployment is at record highs. i think we need to make us certainty that washington needs to look at in terms of making the type of climate available so people will invest more in america. the issue of repatriation. we have $1.4 trillion of money

sitting offshore that they would like to bring back to america and reinvest the up to2.9 million jobs. that should be part of our package, as well. why would we let american money come back and and lower the taxes to let that money flow back in? i think there should be part of any package to finish out this year. host: we have about eight minutes left. caller: good morning. i have one question from a congressman there. he is all for investigating corzine. i want to make sure you would be in favor of investigating the bush administration. we lost millions of dollars and

no reason to pay for that war. would you support an investigation of the bush- cheney halliburton war? guest: i am not sure the connection. halliburton is a private company. the wars continue under the president's leadership. they have expanded into other countries as well. the president did promise to pull the troops out. this seems to be a bipartisan issue. if we're going to put american men and woman in harm's way, we should have a reason to do that and it should be authorized by congress. that was an issue with libya. the president is continuing the war in libya without a proper

congressional approval. the issue of mf global is that jon corzine and others apparently took $1.2 billion of customer funds applied them to speculation in europe, and that brought the company into bankruptcy and could have bankrupted some of my constituents because of illegal action. that is what i hope to fight from mr. corzine. hopefully he will not plead the fifth. host: back to the politics of the social security payroll tax extension. there is a story about the difference between the parties and maneuvering for a vote on this. democrats united to pressure house leaders.

host: what do you think? guest: wait and see if the senate is going to pass anything. this is been the case for the year i have been here -- they have not passed much of anything. there is many things -- there is unemployment. we have a system where you can have 99 straight weeks of unemployment checks. there isn't a small-business

owner that visits with me about this issue that doesn't say, the system does not -- i am asking and begging peoplet to come. 99 weeks -- that is a very long time. that is part of what they are demanding. if you're offered a job, you ought to take it to keep receiving those checks. we need to look at employment benefits. we have 24 million americans out of work in this economy. that is a shame. 20,000 jobs would be created if we built the keystone pipeline. maybe it would take a couple of months. 20,000 jobs. the president said, "i do not

want those jobs." fromn't want to buy oil canada." that makes no sense. that hurts our economy. that would go a long way towards putting 20,000 americans to work. host: al from georgia. caller: thank you for being on this morning. before corzine the fiasco, 60% of the loans from the citibank were known to be bad, and then that went to 80% thenext year. jack murphy is being sued for $70 million for running his bank

into the ground. my question is this -- can you get me protection under the endangered species act? guest: i don't know what type of protection i can give you. just because jon corzine is a bungler for this white house and just because he was brought obama's -- barack obama's go-to guy on wall street, he should not be treated different than anybody else. his company allegedly stole $1.2 billion funds. that is illegal. jon corzine was on the phone

with the head of the cftc. what did they talk about? we do not know yet. i looked at his testimony. those are the kind of things you wonder about. the president said that people should not get special privileges just because they can hire lobbyists. jon corzine had that special type of privilege. host: last question is from lisa. caller: i have two questions. i am glad that people could get jon corzine and the party made in front of the committees as soon as possible. why hasn't chris dodd ever been

held accountable for everything that happened during the housing debacle? host: our time is running out. guest: a lot of corruption to me, as a new member of congress. i'm excited wheel of a chance to question -- i am excited we have a chance to question mr. corzine. hopefully we can find out what happened. did he have special privileges/ ? host: thank you for being here. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

my call for compromise, even sacrifice on both sides. as true statesmen and women, may they find the fortitude to make judgments to benefit all

americans in their time of need. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> madam speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule 1 i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal, those in favor signify by saying aye. opposed say no. the ayes have it. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. mr. pitts: i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of order a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from texas, mr. poe. mr. poe: please join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it

stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: madam speaker, the justice department appears to have gone rogue. instead of enforcing the law they seem to be wreck leslie encouraging violations of law. the justice department with the aide of the a.t.f. apparently facilitate the the smuggling of over 2,000 weapons to the drug cartels south of the border. the national enemy of mexico, the drug cartels. those weapons were used to kill at least 200 mexican nationals and two u.s. law enforcement agents. who's responsible for this conduct? attorney general says he was unaware of fast and furious. he claims he either didn't get the memo or didn't read it. that's a lame excuse. the attorney general is the

chief lawyer and law enforcement officer in the country. if people under him violated u.s. or international law, they need to be held accountable, even if it means somebody goes to jail. we need an independent special counsel to investigate the justice department and the a.t.f. the department of justice cannot be trusted to investigate themselves because the agency has lost credibility. even washington insiders responsible for fast and furious cannot hide from the long arm of american justice because justice is what we do in this country. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina rise? the gentleman is recognized. >> wall street may be in disrepute with most americans, but their political power in congress is undiminished. americans strongly support a consumer watchdog, the new consumer financial protection bureau, but the cfpb has become the republicans' least favorite agency which pleases their

friends on wall street. months ago republicans in the other body announced they would block the confirmation. unless congress stripped the agency of its independence and powers to protect consumers from the abuses rampant in the last decade. in the next day or two, the other body will vote on the confirmation of to head the cfpb. if the vote goes as respected the republicans will abuse their confirmation powers. they don't want richard, they don't want anyone because they don't want the agency and they don't want the agency because they don't want to protect consumers. republicans are willing to leave consumers vulnerable again to predatory lending practices, they are willing to leave the economy vulnerable again to another financial crisis to please their friends on wall street. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? . >> to address the house for one minute.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> another example of rampant government regulation. mr. hultgren: the food and drug administration has sought to ignore congressional intent and create a dietary regime for supplements. many of my constituents and my family rely on supplements for their dietary regime. they need to take preventive health care. we all can agree that the f.d.a. should not limit americans' access to dietary supplements. in january president obama issued an executive order to ensure that the f.d.a.'s new rules will not limit access. last week, the comment period on the f.d.a.'s draft guidelines closed. now they heard from the public and i'm sure they heard from countless americans, i urge them to go back to the drawing board and ensure they do not limit americans' access to dietary supplements. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the

gentlelady from connecticut rise? ms. delauro: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. delauro: at a recent horse sale in kentucky, one sold for $8.5 million as part of the sale of the late so you haddy prince's farm. three of the saudi's other horses also sold for seven figures, a total of 22 horses were sold that day for $1 million or more compared with only eight sold in 2010. every millionaire who purchased these horses benefited from a republican sponsored taxpayer subsidy written into the last 2008 farm bill. it allows them to recover the cost of the horse. even as they call for more budget cuts, republicans used that bill to transfer wealth. nearly $500 million from the pockets of ordinary taxpayers to the coffers of wealthy racing interests. one example of how republicans

will go to absurd lengths to support the wealthiest 1% of americans while turning their backs on the middle class and working families. now they refuse to take up a payroll tax extension and expansion that would mean $15 -- $1,500. they refuse to extend unemployment insurance to save 200,000 jobs. our nation deserves better leadership than this. republicans need to stop giving out handouts to millionaire racing owners and start addressing the needs of the vast majority of american families. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. pitts: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pitts: in an article in last monday's quks "weekly standard" shows the execution and harvesting of organs in china's prisons. the article provides firsthand accounts of the targeted eliminate of religious prisoners, prisoners including

the uighurs, house christians and tibetans. executions followed by organ transplant surgeries some being still alive numbering in the tens of thousands. furthermore, foreign companies are already making investments to benefit off the thriving organ transplant market. pharmaceutical companies like rohrabacher and pharma have been involved in critical drug testing of transplant patients. one is proposing a medical facility that would include an organ transplant center. before they follow suit, u.s. companies must understand the unethical climate that exist in china and our state department and the u.n. must treat these actions as an abuse of china's international agreements and human rights of their own people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. altmire: madam speaker, i

support for the lions club commemorative coin act. it commemorates the lyons club act as the cost will be paid for by sales to the public. as former president and zone chairman of my local lyons club in allegeny county in pennsylvania, i know firsthand the great work done by lyons club international which has 1.3 million members and chapters spanning every corner of the globe. they focus on the five goals of providing sight, combating disability, serving youth and disaster relief where the club donated over $50 million in relief funds to japan, haiti and most recently to our own southern states. i commend the great work carried out by lyons club international and can't wait to

celebrate their centennial. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. baca: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. raisess: many have their social security targeted as part of the debt reduction talks. now more than ever we can't -- every senior deserves the dignity in their retirement. every senior, no exceptions. for almost 2/3 of america's seniors, social security is the primary source of retirement income. social security is also a lifetime or a lifeline, rather, for workers who became disabled and for families who have lost a breadwinner. in the 16th district of texas that i represent, over 98,000

el pasoans receive social security benefits. they depend on these benefits to buy groceries, fill their gas tanks. as their representative i want to ensure we uphold the decades' old promise. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise to encourage my colleagues to give a little something back this season to those who give so much. every year we accumulate thousands of frequent flier miles. mr. barrow: i donated my miles to those who provide free airline miles to soldiers and

children. most came from congressional travel and i don't think it's right to use them for myself. what i do know is that there's no better way for us to use ourer miles to help soldiers see their families and to help sick kids. i ask you to donate your congressional miles to those like the fisher house and the children's miracle network and do it this holiday season. with that, madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house rules 487 and ask for its immediate consideration. the clerk: house calendar number 96. house resolution 487. resolved, that at anytime after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18 declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on

the state of the union to establish a temporary prohibition against revising any ambient air quality standard applicable to course particulate matter, to limit federal regulation of nuisance dust in areas which such dust is regulated under state, tribal or local law and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. after general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on energy and commerce now printed in the bill. the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against the

committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member any member may demand a separate vote on any amendment adopted in

the committee of the whole in the bill on committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: madam speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house the senate has passed s. 1958, an act to extend the national flood insurance program until may 31, 2012, in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one hour. >> for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague from colorado, the gentleman, mr. polis, pending which i also yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of the resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. mr. webster: madam speaker, i

ask for unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. webster: madam speaker, i rise today in support of the rule and the underlying bill. house resolution 487 provides for a structured rule for consideration of house resolution 1633, the farm dust regulation prevention act. the rule makes eight of 11 amendments submitted to the rules committee in order. a majority of which are democrat amendments. in order to have our best debate here on the house floor of the house of representatives. h.r. 1633, passed out of energy commerce committee with bipartisan support after proceeding through the committee process under regular order, a subcommittee hearing was followed by a subcommittee markup and markup was held by the full committee. which passed the bill with bipartisan support. the farm dust regulation prevention act is quite simple. it seeks regulatory certainty in

a time -- in the short time in a regulatory commonsense approach in the long term. specifically this legislation does two things. first, the short term, the farm dust regulation prevention act would temporarily prohibit the e.p.a. from issuing a new course particulate matter standard for one year, h.r. 1633 does not prohibit e.p.a. from issuing a revised standard for course particulate matter. it is also known by a much more common name, dust. second, in the longer term, this legislation would limit future e.p.a. regulation of nuisance dust to areas where it is not already regulated by state or local government where it causes substantial adverse effects and where the benefits of the e.p.a. stepping in would outweigh the cost. nuisance dust is particulate matter that is generated primarily from natural sources,

dirt roads, moving, or other common farm activities. a nuisance dust is pieces of plants plowed up during the tilling of soil, distributed by movement of livestock or bits of rock kicked up by a truck driving down a dirt road. the definition specifically precludes combustion emission, coal combustion residues, and radioactive particulate matter from mining operations. h.r. 1633 does not eliminate e.p.a.'s authority to step in if local or state regulatory efforts fall short of what is needed to adequately protect the public. the bill would allow e.p.a. to step in and regulate nuisance dust in areas where states and localities do not do so. if substantial -- it substantially hurts the public health and if benefits of applying these standards outweigh the cost. in summary, if it isn't regulated, would harm the public

health, and the benefit of regulation would outweigh the cost of regulation and the e.p.a. could and presumably would fill that void. while e.p.a. administrator has announced she does not plan on changing this standard, e.p.a. has been actively considering more costly and stringent standard as part of the review process. the same review process increased the stringency of that standard in 1996 and most recently in 2006. prior to the administrator's announcement, e.p.a. staff had recommended further changes to the standard. despite the administrator's statement, there is nothing currently on the books preventing the e.p.a. from adopting a stricter regulation. further, as we all know, the environmental law could force a more stringent standard regardless of what the e.p.a. announces, finalizes, or proposes through legal action. this legislation provides ironclad certainty to farmers,

ranchers, small business owners, and -- that farm dust would stay off the e.p.a.'s to-do list for atless another year. for that very reason -- for at least another year. for that very reason, farm business organizations ever all shapes and sizes have put their steadfast support behind this legislation. to them certainty means the ability to grow their business by creating jobs in their communities, feeding every american, and providing for their families through the sale of the fruits of their labors. the agriculture community and more largely rural america is critical to the economic growth of job -- and job creation. the agriculture sector alone supports 1.8 million american jobs and represents 5% of our nation's total exports. the obama administration has acknowledged the importance of economic health for rural america. in fact, the president's white house council on -- white house rural council has claimed that rural america is central to the

economic health and prosperity of our nation. unfortunately it is often rural communities, particularly those in western united states, that suffer from the highest rates of unemployment and are least equipped to bear the burden of additional costs stemming from washington. once again, madam speaker, i rise to support this rule and the underlying legislation, the relevant committee of jurisdictions have worked to prode us with a bipartisan -- provide us with a bipartisan bill which at its core offers regulatory certainty in the short term and commonsense regulatory relief in the long. this bill is not a cure all but a step in the right -- cure-all but a step in the right direction. while a small step it is a commonsense approach to fixing what's wrong in washington, d.c. it's a step that many -- many in congress on both sides of the aisles see ready and willing to take. as i mentioned the farm dust regulation prevention act passed out of subcommittee and full committee with bipartisan support. the bill has over 100 bipartisan

co-sponsors. companion legislation also in the senate enjoys that same bipartisan support. let's assure rural businesses and american farmers that at least for one more year they can cross dust off the list of the potential bureaucratic burdens passed down from washington. i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on the rule and yes on the underlying bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: madam speaker, i rise today in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. madam speaker, today there are very serious challenges facing our country, facing rural america, suburban america, and urban america. the next three weeks congress has to address the payroll tax cut issue. or there will be an enormous tax increase, over $1,000 per family, to the american middle class. this congress has to pass a budget or the government will

shut down. this congress has to address a number of other expiring tax provisions, all, all in the next three weeks. this is real work to do, real work that needs to be done for the american middle class, american people, for farmers, for business men and women, and for workers. and yet today this body is not taking on real work. instead we are addressing illusionry problem, a think problem. my colleague from florida mentioned the specter of someone, somehow regulating the dust kicked up by a truck on a dirt road. i don't think there's a single member of this body that wants to regulate the dust that's kicked up by a truck on a dirt road. the e.p.a. certainly doesn't. the farmers don't want us to. members of congress don't want us to. so what are we talking about? instead of addressing the serious problems facing the nation, we are talking about a bill that satisfies talking points. has a few unintended consequences which i'll get into in my remarks, ignores the real

problems of today. this bill before us claims to block the e.p.a. from implementing a rule that doesn't even exist. hasn't even been thought up. is opposed by the head of the e.p.a. that's right. we've got millions of unemployed americans, massive tax increase looming, and yet here we have a bill to stop the e.p.a. from doing something it's not doing. e.p.a. administrator just told congress specifically that they have no intention of doing a rule in this area because the existing rules passed during the reagan administration are adequate. instead of worrying about a nonexistent farm dust rule, maybe we should pass a ban on blowing smoke because that's what congress is doing with this bill here today. not only does this bill seek to address a nonexistent problem, madam speaker, but it also has a number of unintended consequences. the new loopholes it creates in the mining and other sectors will have severe public health and environmental impacts. there will be a number of

amendments that have been allowed under this rule that will go into discussion and at this tailoring of this bill to hopefully roll back some of the unintended consequences. this bill would create a slew of new problems. it is chock-full of exemptions for major industries, and allows more arsenic and lead pollution from industrial sources. disableds the am bient care quality standards. this bill won't help farmers at all because it won't fend up any regulation, the only regulation being contemplated isn't even being thought of by anybody in the e.p.a. interestingly what this bill will do is it allows more pollution from industrial sources like owe pen pit mining, coal processing facilities, cement kilns, and smelters. this has nothing to do with the family farms you are going to hear people talk about debating

this bill. that's why this bill its main supporters are not farmers but the mining industry. this bill has gained vocal support from the mining association and one of the biggest groups representing farmers, the national farmers union, has said this bill isn't necessary. in october national farmers union president said the national farmers unedown is pleased to see e.p.a. administrator jackson provide final clarification for members of congress and the agriculture community that the agency does not have plans to regulate farm dust. he went on, lately there's been considerable anxiety within the farming community that e.p.a. is going to regulate dust on farms. we hope this action finally puts to rest the misinformation regarding dust regulation and eases the minds of farmers and ranchers across the country. yet instead of letting sleeping dogs lie and quelling the ridiculous rumors that somebody plans to regulate dust kicked up from cars on dirt roads, here we have members of this body reinvigorating and giving

credibility to these false rumors. scaring the hardworking farmers of america into thinking somehow government is about to regulate something that no one is purporting to regulate. furthermore, during committee consideration of this bill, an amendment by congressman butterfield would have explicitly limited this bill to agriculture, which is what the proponents of this bill purported to be about. yet the majority voted down that amendment, sending a clear message this bill is not about farmers. let us see this bill for what it really is. another effort to attack the e.p.a. and prevent the e.p.a. from implementing the clean air act under its commonsense rules to protect our public health. it's time to get serious with the business of the house. take on the real tasks that we have of expanding the payroll tax, passing a budget, and stop making up problems and then making up solutions that cause more problems than they purport to solve. we have already got enough problems that this congress and this country needs to work on. let's get to work.

i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado reserves his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: thank you, madam speaker. it's my honor to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from wisconsin, ms. baldwin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wisconsin is recognized for three minutes. ms. baldwin: i thank the gentleman for yielding time. madam speaker, the bill before us today is entitled the farm dust regulation prevention act of 2011. i want to make something very clear. if we were here today voting on a bill that actually stopped farm dust from being regulated by the e.p.a., i would support it. agriculture is hugely important to my home state of wisconsin. and the thought of regulating farm dust on a federal level is simply ridiculous. however there is no attempt by the e.p.a. to regulate farm dust. administrator lisa jackson said

that the e.p.a. has no intention of regulating farm dust. the republican senate sponsor of this bill, former secretary of agriculture, mike johanns, states, that the e.p.a. has provided, and i quote, unequivingal assurance that it won't attempt to regulate farm dust, end quote. . this legislation is not about farm dust. instead, this bill creates a new category of pollution called nuisance dust and exempts it from the clean air act entirely. to be clear, nuisance dust is a madeup term that has no basis in established science. under this legislation, particulate pollution from open pit mines, mine processing plants, sand mines, lead smelters and cement kilms will

be exempt from the clean air act. these facilities emit arsenic, lead, mercury and other toxic substances. now, i don't know about you, madam speaker, but this doesn't sound like farm dust to me. i agree with my colleague, congressman john dingell, who said this is a solution in search of a problem. during the energy and commerce committee markup, the majority showed us that this bill isn't about farm dust at all. it's about hacking another hole in the clean air act. americans are so sick of these political games. they want jobs, not fear mongering and baseless accusations. we shouldn't be wasting our time and theirs dealing with myths. we have real problems that need real solutions.

we should be extending the payroll tax relief for hardworking american families. we should be passing a transportation bill that puts americans back to work, rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges. we should be extending unemployment insurance to millions of americans who are still out pounding the pavement day in and day out trying to find work. republicans need to stop stoking the fears of farmers and rural americans and get back to fixing the real crisis facing our country, the jobs crisis. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: continues to reserve. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: madam speaker, if we defeat the previous question i'll require that we vote on an unemployment benefit extension and we vote on a payroll tax holiday extension for next year before we leave for the holidays. i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, mr. lewis.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. lewis: madam speaker, i'm going to thank my friend and colleague for yielding. madam speaker, i rise today to urge my colleagues to extend unemployment benefits now. it is amazing that we have time to debate this farm dust bill. it will pollute our air. we don't have time to create jobs or to help people who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. it is a moral -- it is our moral obligation to give just a little bit of hope, a little bit of justice to help people survive these cold, difficult, hard times. during this holiday season, i ask each and every one of you to take a deep, hard look

within and ask yourselves -- is this how i wish to treat my mother, my father, my sister, my brother, my son, my daughter or my neighbor? the unemployed lost their jobs through no fault of their own. they don't want a handout. they want a job. unemployment money is just enough money to squeeze by while they look for a job. please help them keep a roof over their heads, shoes on their feet, food on the table and heat in their homes. madam speaker, this is the least we can do. it is the right thing we can do. it is the fair thing to do.

families cannot wait. you give just a little bit of hope in the names of those elected to serve them. let's come together and put politics aside and just get it done. vote no on this rule and extend unemployment insurance here and now. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: thank you, madam speaker. that's a good reason why we should pass this bill. if we can remove uncertainty out of the marketplace for farmers and other places in this country through limited regulation, good regulation but not overburdening the businesses and the job creators of this country, then we have the opportunity of solving that problem and solving it by hiring people and i'm hoping that this bill will pass,

knowing that it probably will in the house, i hope the senate passes it and i hope the president signs it. i hope we have regulation in an area where many, many jobs could be created, certainty could be provided if we only pass this bill. i reserve the rest of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i don't see how this bill will create any jobs because the purporting to undo regulations that doesn't exist. nobody is doing that. so this bill does absolutely nothing. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from washington, mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for three minutes. mr. mcdermott: thank you, madam speaker. well, you know there is a lot

of mourning among the comedians of this country that herman cain has left the field, but i think the republican caucus is now stepping in to give the comedians things to laugh at. this bill is about dust. ha. this is dust to throw in the people's eyes, dust to throw in the american people's eyes so they won't see what's going on here. we're going home a day early. why aren't we staying here tomorrow? well, because they haven't got anything to do. well, they can't figure out how to do it. i don't know which it is. in fact, we have never put out a jobs bill in this house now in 11 months of republicans who said jobs are the issue. boy, we ought to get jobs. they haven't produced a single job in 11 months off this floor. they are letting the un

employment extension expire. beginning in january, five million americans are not going to get benefits from the unemployment insurance because the republicans have to throw dust in the people's eyes so they won't be able to see, so they won't see, but they know. they're not stupid. the american people can see through this game. they know we're going home because you can't get your act together. you run this house and you can't put a bill out here to extend unemployment benefits. now, you also -- i understand that the unemployment bill is an issue, but you can't extend the payroll. madam speaker, what's wrong with the republicans that they can't get their act together that they can somehow extend the reduction in the payroll tax?

that's going to take $1,000 out of every middle-class person's pocket in the next year. and what are we talking about today? dust. ha. dust. i can just see it on jon stewart, this is a perfect -- or many it will be sean hasity, i don't know which it will be -- hannity, i don't know which it will be. this congress has been a do-nothing congress on the issues that affect american people. the middle class is getting clobbered, and you're talking about dust. it reminds me of this business we went through, this manufactured stuff about raising the debt limit and it was such an awful thing so we created this committee that was going to cut $1.2 trillion. that was magician talk. you don't want to talk about raising the debt limit. you want to talk about this committee that did nothing because the six members of the republican side who came to that committee said from the

very start they would not raise taxes. they would not look at revenue. mr. polis: an additional 30 seconds. mr. mcdermott: and in my view, if you're serious, you sit down and talk about everything. the last three weeks of that committee they never even met. that was dust in people's eyes. get them to talk about a commission. we had all this talk about commission, are they going to do this, are they going to do that, what's going to happen? in fact, everybody around here knew it was a lot of baloney from the very start and that's what this thing is today, more baloney. you know, yogi berra, who is one of my favorite philosophers, said, this is deja vu all over again. we did this last christmas. we didn't extend the benefits, and we're doing it again this year. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: madam speaker, yes, yogi berra, it ain't over till it's over.

we have time. we have a plan, the house republicans have a plan that's on this card. 25 of those issues have already passed this house that went to the senate and where are they? i don't know. they're there. they're ready to be acted on. let me just give one which was -- the union labor in this country rallied around that bill a couple days ago and said we want a bill, the pipeline. it's tens of thousands of jobs. many of the democrats opposed that, and yet it's thousands and thousands of jobs. is it a job creator? absolutely. do we have a plan? we have a plan. and that's just one of the 25 that's waiting in the senate for action. we need to have action there. we have a plan. we have job plans. this is it. and we're ready to move this country forward, get our economy rolling again, creating jobs and making this economy better for everyone in america. i would reserve the rest of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i am the -- we have no remaining speakers on our side but i'd like to inquire if

the gentleman has any remaining speakers. mr. webster: i'm ready to close. mr. polis: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: you know, madam speaker, we get it and the american people get it. just because you repeat something enough times doesn't make it true. what businesses need in this country is long-term certainty and predictability, a fair playing field with clear rules for all and yet here we are with a bill like this creating more uncertainty by introducing ambiguously drafted bills and new ambiguously drafted manners making to tougher and tougher for small businesses, entrepreneurs and innovators who don't have teams of lobbyists in washington, d.c.,

money terg every bit of legislation to get -- monitoring every bit of legislation to get by and succeed. it wasn't the environmental protection agency that caused this recession, that caused this economic mess we are and in and the economic recovery won't come through creating lop holes in public health laws. -- loopholes in public health laws. if we're serious about helping farmers, there's plenty that we could be doing, but increasing industrial pollution for mining and coal processing isn't something that farmers in my district and across colorado have asked me to do. farmers are concerned about many real-life challenges. farmers are concerned that their kids can't get financing to carry on the family business because the startup liability costs are too high. farmers are concerned about the estate tax. farmers are concerned about getting sued because their crops were contaminated by roundup ready pollen. farmers are concerned about rapid swings and commodity prices because of the instability in the market. political brinksmanship and gridlock creates market

instability. and bills that create corporate handouts, loopholes and more uncertainty like this one aren't helping farmers, they're hurting farmers, and they aren't helping the rest of the country either. in addition to ignoring the needs of farmers, this bill ignores our national vet. in fact, it ignores our own house protocols to pay for things. oddly enough, not regulating this nonexistent regulation isn't cheap. because of the bureaucratic changes that would ensue from this bill, the nonpartisan c.b.o. score have scored this bill costing the federal government $10 million. so this bill violates the republican rule for discretionary authorizations. in fact, while the authority has pledged to adhere to spending limits on all spending bills, this bill includes no

offsetting language which is particularly grading because this bill doesn't actually do anything besides create more federal bureaucrats. madam speaker, with only one committee hearing and a quick vote, this bill shouldn't be before us here on the floor today. we have real work to do. we need a good-faith effort to get to the bottom of the real issues that affect this country and helping the middle class. this bill is not aimed at doing anything for farmers. it's not even aimed at a real problem. . i urge my colleagues to follow the house cut-go guidelines, to table this bill, and focus on the real problems we should be working on. we almost stop pretending the answer to this country's problems is giving handouts and loopholes to those with the most lobbyists here in washington, d.c. as i mentioned earlier, madam speaker, if we defeat the previous question i will offer an amendment to the rule and i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the

record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poll cloins thank you, madam speaker. i urge -- mr. polis: thank you, madam speaker. i urge my colleagues to vote no so we can do the right thing for working families and millions of americans looking for a job and vote on an unemployment benefit extension, a payroll tax holiday and extension before we leave for next year, three more weeks. i urge a no vote on the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: thank you, madam speaker. this rule provides for ample open debate, allowing for colleagues here on this floor and across the aisle both on our side and theirs, to offer amendments to this bill. the underlying bill isn't particularly controversial. it's rather simple. this bill has no effect on direct spending.

it does not appropriate any money or has any new appropriation in it at all. this bill creates no new programs. it has nothing to do with cut-go. or pay-as-you-go. either way. it doesn't do either. and in the end i can't imagine 186 different groups being so stirred up in this country to write and call and to ask for this legislation, groups like the corn growers association and the sheep growers association and the association of cooperatives and the farm bureaus across this country and the soybean association and the corn growers association, and many, many more getting stirred up about nothing. no, that argument is her dust. it is. this -- is hheiffer dust. it is. this argument is real. the underlying bill is quite

simple. it provides much needed certainty in the short-term for agricultural ranching and rural businesses by hitting pause on the e.p.a.'s run away regulatory machine for just one measure, for just one year. h.r. 1633 simply says that now is not the time to thrust yet another burdensome, costly, and e.p.a.'s own judgment unnecessary regulation on rural job creators. in the long term, it offers regulatory relief to rural america by acknowledging that states and local communities are better suited to manage dust in their own communities and thus grant them the flexibility to do so. it's particularly offensive because it's like the old cookie cutter approach that washington uses. the same program that's good for florida is good for butte, montana, and inner city new york. we ought to get rid of the cookie cutter approach and go back to local communities and

state governments and let them solve their problems as opposed to one-size-fits-all federal government. given the current state of the economy, given the e.p.a.'s administrator's own comments about the lack of need to further regulate farm dust, given the dearth of scientific evidence that says that this is a danger, or some sort of danger from farm dust, this legislation represents a commonsense effort to create an enenvironment for job creation that all members should support. it gives farmers, ranchers, and other rural small business owners the certainty at least when it comes to dust that costly regulations would not shackle their ability to focus on growing their business, providing for their families, and creating much needed jobs in rural america. i ask my colleagues to join me in voting this favor -- in favor of the rule. and i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor will signify by saying aye. those opposed will say no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. polis: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house will stand in recess subject to the ca

we spoke to a cup of milk reporter this morning for a coup for him. up our understanding of that hearing. good morning. what is the intent of the committee on asking the attorney general to come back today? guest: this wraps up a year's worth of investigation for the committee. attorney general holder appeared before another committee in november. this is really the judiciary

committee a chance to ask its questions. host: "the washington times" has a front-page story, "senator grassley demands ouster in fast and furious." that also gets picked up as a writer story in "the washington post." issa has an opinion piece published by "usa today" saying that the attorney general is protecting his staff over the debacle. host: senator grassley's announcement came after his own committee spoke to the attorney general in early november.

i think you will see house members make their own determination. what you really have our different members interpreting the attorney general's testimony and various other a judicial officials, their testimony -- it is sort of a rorshach test. he has said it is a mistake. you are going to see a lot of questions today about what the attorney general knew and when. do not expect him to -- host: what is at the heart of this investigation? guest: it involves a gun-running

program. essentially, officials in the atf knowingly allowed people who can legitimately by guns -- they will buy them in bulk quantities and then sell them illegally. the atf allowed them to sell them across the border in mexico. the reason was that they were using these smaller offenders to build cases against large targets in the mexican drug cartel. what happened with that -- they lost track of guns. many crossed the border. one of these guns was used in the shooting death of a border patrol agent. this all came to light earlier in january when members of congress began their

investigation. since then, the justice department, including attorney have said thatlder, they were just finding out about this and have since gone on to condemn the program and say it was unacceptable. in 2010, the atf was told absolutely not to use this tactic. host: at the heart of this, is it a national security investigation? is it about politics? is it a combination? guest: its accommodation. there are legitimate national security concerns. it has led to serious allegations. it has led to official saying the atf was absolutely wrong. a lot of the questioning heard so far is sort of what each

official knew and when. should the attorney general resigned? should the head of the criminal division resign? the justice department sent a letter to congress in february saying that the atf >> that hearing is underway as the attorney general before the house ditch's your committee is finishing up questioning from darrell isi, head of the oversight committee. you can call them on our companion network, c-span 3, and online at c-span.org. we are also covering the house agriculture committee. the hearing with the jon corzine is also under way. henry cuellar and joined us on this morning's "washington

journal." we will show you this as much as we can until the house cavils in. do you expect to hear from him? guest: i think he might talk in generalities. we hear he may talk up to a particular point, but not up to the end. his attorneys will advise him to plead the fifth. >> what do you want to hear? guest: we want to hear what happened, how the customers of the $1.2 billion of customer accounts were put over and and risk. i want to gear from him, did the

customers know that he was taking the risk? did he intend to tell them? we have a lot of basic questions, not only to him, but to the folks in the commodity commission also. host: the decision to subpoena him was unanimous. is that correct? what should people take away from that? today, often we see french politics on capitol hill. both republicans and democrats agree that he should come in. what do you think of that unanimity? guest: i think there is a third subpoena out there already for him. from what i understand, certainly in our committee, it was both democrats and republicans. he is a democrat also, but we have to do our jobs. especially when we are concerned about the farmers, ranchers, mine operators, other folks involved with the $1.2 billion. host: that leads to my next

question. can you explain what the agriculture committee has to do with the overseeing of the imf global -- mf global? guest: with the high commodity swings, it went ahead and played with commodities, to be in the futures. they tried to do that. when you have ranchers and farmers, agriculture has jurisdiction, and that is why we are involved in this area. host: we want to open up the phone lines for your questions or comments about the agriculture committee investigating into what happened with mf global, and its leader, former senator of new jersey jon corzine. the phone numbers are on the screen. you can also tweet and e-mail a