our economy, decimating our national security, and i will emerge victorious. i will be that president of the united states. [applause] and i have absolutely no interest in running for vain glory or blind ambition. my interest is for all the young people in this room today. all these young people -- yes, that is you. i want to make sure that once again american exceptional isn't -- american exceptionalism the arrives and we do that by setting our country on in the firmest foundation that we have. it is called the united states constitution. and that is how i will lead as the next president and united states, by following the constitution of the united states. and that is with your help. on january 3 here in iowa, and i am thrilled that we start this process in iowa, with the voice of iowans directly from

the heartland. people say they're too conservative in iowa, there to prague-life. -- they are too pro-life. what people do not understand is this part of iowa, here in sioux county, in orange city, this is america. this is america. this is the most representative voice of the united states that we have, and i am thrilled that it is our voice together here in iowa that will determine who the next president of the united states will be. that is how powerful your voice is. now iowa made a decision four years ago, and they chose barack obama. well, now is our chance for redemption, don't you think, iowa? so we had the chance to choose, and i am asking for your vote on january 3. so let's open it up if you have a few questions, and would be happy to answer them. >> i would like to know your thoughts are on the agenda 21? >> yes, for those who do not

know, agenda 21 is essentially something that came out of the real conference. -- rio conference. it is about 20 years ago. anyone know al gore? ok, all right. al gore was there at the real conference, and is really about -- rio global control. it is essentially a one-world government view, where there's one political body and the united states would have to subsume our sovereignty into a global body. more than that, we would have to give away our wealth. the wealth of the u.s. would have to be redistributed to other countries. that is what the durban conference was about in south africa this weekend, also about redistribution of american money. i want you to know very clearly where i stand on this issue. i oppose agenda 21. i oppose putting united states in an international political body where we you lose u.s. sovereignty. i do not agree with that.

i do not agree with a lot of the goals of the u.n., and i do not agree with taking money away from you and redistributing it across the world. because i believe in america and american sovereignty. thank you for asking that question. [applause] >> i will work to get us out of these bad treaties we have been a part of. i oppose the u.n. right to the child and all of those. >> you did a great job on the debate last night. [applause] you got into an exchange about iran with ron paul and his policy that he would have. can you explain why iran such a threat to the united states security? >> thank you for asking that question. this is a big issue that came up last night. president obama has fallen down on this issue. he has taken his eye off the

most significant national security threat there is to the united states and that is in iran and obtaining a nuclear weapon. the reason why it is so important is because not only the religious leaders but also the president of iran has it repeatedly that if they get a -- has stated repeatedly that if they get a nuclear weapon, they will use that nuclear weapon exactly. -- views that nuclear weapon actively. they said it as recently as august and in september of this year. the president of iran came on u.s. soil and said he wants to eradicate israel off the face of the map. he wants to take a nuclear weapon and use it against israel, destroy them. he also wants to use that weapon against us and in the united states. -- here in the united states. if there is anything history has taught us in the last 100 years, it is this -- when a mad man speaks and is taking steps to make it a reality, we are

full if we do not listen to them. -- we are fools if we do not listen to them. that's why i said to ron paul that his words were some of the most dangerous i had ever heard. i stood on the intelligence committee. we deal with the nation's classified secret and national security. i cannot talk to about those things but i can tell you a report was issued in early november that said under no uncertain terms, we can be looking at iran having that weapon inside of a year. the reason why that could happen is because barack obama gave iran the luxury of time. he did absolutely nothing to stop them. that has gotten them that much closer. our options are to your and our -- our options are fewer and our options are worse than the ones we had before. but i want you to know, as

commander in chief, i think that is the number one duty of the president. i will stand up against in iran to make sure they never a nuclear weapon. -- they never obtained a nuclear weapon. i will stand with our ally, israel. [applause] let me get another question. i will be happy to take media questions. >> would you continue funding for cancer research at the current level? >> the question is will i continue funding for cancer research can do what is being -- and what is being done at the national cancer institute? >> this is a worthy cause to take a look at. i want to see more research, not less. but we have to do it within the confines of our priorities. our big problem now is our national debt. the day i came into congress,

four and a half years ago, we were $8.67 trillion in debt. that is a jaw dropping amount of debt. do you know how much we are in debt today? $15 trillion. it took us who hundred 19 years to get into that hold. -- 219 years to get into that hole. now, four and a half years later, we are at $50 trillion. -- $16 trillion. next year it will be at home over $17 trillion. the one thing we cannot do you and the young people right here is take away your future and your help. -- and your hope. i refused to do that. i am not going to be a president who runs deficits. everything will be on the table. i cannot guarantee we will continue funding at the current level. i want to see stores. -- i want to see cures.

the best way to see cures -- the venture capital for medicine has left the united states. we are not the place to do business any more to create new drugs and cures. that has to end. i want to slow the economy and -- grow the economy and abolished the tax code. through pro-growth policies in the tax code. i also want to get rid of obamacare. you want to talk about hurting health care, i am the chief opponent of obamacare and i wrote a bill to get rid of it. there is no equality on the candidates when it comes to getting rid of obamacare. there is not. we have candidates in this race that had been for the individual health care mandate for 20 years. that is newt gingrich. right up until may of this year. he has taken $37 million on the health industry to promote that

view. i did not share that view. mitt romney is the only governor in the history of the united states to put in place socialized medicine in his own state. i asked the question -- do we really think that people who have made this their signature issue are going to repeal obamacare? this is going to be tough to do it. i am not kidding you. it will be very tough to repeal obamacare but i am committed to it with everything in my being. i am committed to it. i will tell you why. for their first time in the history of united states, we have a taxpayer funded abortion in obamacare. we will never get rid of it. barack obama said in august that we are going to give the morning after abortion pill and contraceptives for free. that was on august 1because he

said so. that is the spending power in obamacare. that is wrong. i want to take that away. [applause] the president just announced last week his plan, he in his administration was to put in the grocery store aisle next to bubble gum a three day abortion pill for the morning after called the plan b. they knew that would hurt his reelection chances. no parent wants to see and a 11-year old girl be able to buy something like that. even the obama administration had to back off. what this tells youit president obama is reelected, you can take it to the bank. the next day, they will put in the same kind of radical social policy. all of the radical policies will be put in place through obamacare. i am the only candidate in the race who knows exactly what to

do to repeal obamacare and bring back high-quality health care for the greatest number of americans at the lowest possible price. that is what i'm going to do as president. >> what to believe about global warming? >> what i believe is that we should not have a political agenda. so much of the political agenda which i talked about and answered to your question on in twenty-one was this durban conference in south africa. it was about global warming. that was the basis of it. that is being used as a political pretext to have the united states tax us with a national energy tax, take that money into the federal government and build upon and redistribute our wealth across the world. i disagree with that. i absolutely disagree with that

agenda. i did you have to follow the signs. -- you have got to follow the science. what does science say? if you look at the issue of carbon the oxide -- where are the sources of carbon dioxide? is it a human activity? i think you have to look at the science and let it make the decision. that is not what is happening now. now it is politics driving this. >> what with the epa look like under your administration? -- what would the epa look like under your administration? >> there would not be one. the epa would be gone because there is already hit the of them in the united states. -- there are already 50 of them in the united states. there is one here in iowa. it is best if you set your standards for your state. who wants dirty water and who wants dirty air?

i think that is kind of the answer, is it not? i what is full of common sense people. i do not want dirty air or water. that is not what the epa is about. the epa is about killing jobs right now and they have been a disaster for farmers. i will set down the epa and the department of education. i have a few others in mind that will go. if that is not grandstanding, i mean it. you can take that to the bank. yes, ma'am? >> since government is not producing wealth and it used to be that 20 people would support one person in government, now it is almost one-one and they want it bigger. how do they expect to get the money? i do not understand how they are expecting to get this money. >> you are right. pick government has grown exponentially. you talk about federal employees.

the average federal employee makes $123,000 a year. that is in wage and benefit packages. that is more than double what people in the private sector make. if there is no relation. i am talking apples to apples. like a librarian in the federal government versus out locally. -- a librarian out locally. a cook in the federal government and a cook at in the private sector. it is almost double. that is why what i intend to do is shut down entire departments, repealed law and sent the authority, back to the states. -- and send it the authority back to the states. we cannot live the way we are living because i am not willing to let these people young people here pay a tax rate effectively of a 75% of your income. that is what some of the experts say. if you take your state and local and federal taxes and with the current rates, as you can have a 75% tax rate.

are you going to get out of bed and go to work to pay out 75% of what you make in taxes? then you have to pay your rent, your car, buy your food, do itunes downloads. it is not going to happen. am i right? it is not going to happen. i think too much of you. i have five biological kids. my husband and i raised 23 foster children. i am the old woman in the shoe print i raised 28 kids. i love this next generation. you deserve at least what our parents gave us. i was born here in waterloo. i am a seventh generation iowan. our family were early pioneers get out of the ground here. -- that felled the trees and plowed the ground here. i will tell you, i am so grateful for these iowa values that i learned here.

here is one of the best animating principles in the united states -- no one owes you a living. have you ever heard of that? that is what i've learned from my parents. you learn to make it on your own garrett the other thing is an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. they also said your word is your bond. those are good values. those are the same kind of the values we will rise again as a great nation. we will restore our greatness. we do not have to lose our opposition to china. if we start acting like a first world nation, rather than like a banana republic like the barack obama is doing right now. we will be that first world nation again and the shining city on the hill. that is what i came to return. -- that is what the founders meant to us. that is what i aim to return. i need your vote on january 3. i will stand for life.

i will stand for marriage. i will stand for religious liberty. i will stand for a strong united states defense. my father served in the military. i will stand strong for fiscal conservatism. i get it. i am a former federal tax lawyer. i get how taxes work. we started our own successful company in business. i believe in profits. i want more profits for more businesses to grow our economy. i also believe in the values that we are taxed enough already. the government should not spend more money than what it is taking in. we should act within the limits of the constitution. one thing that sets me apart -- i have already been proven. i have already been tested. for five years in the lion's den of washington, d.c. -- i stood up to the task. i did not get caught because i -- i did not get bought because i was not for sale. as president, i will not be for sale either. there is only one voice -- the

people's voice. your voice. that is the voice i am taking to the white house. they're very per se party will have is the iowa party. -- the very first party will -- we will have is the iowa party. can you guys supply all the pastries that day? we are going to have a good party. thank you. god bless you. [applause] i am really glad you came out. that is so nice. thank you support coming out. -- thank you for coming out.

>> they have a disrespect for women in their own culture but when they are dealing with their nation --[inaudible] >> she was old. >> i am too, i am 55. [laughter] thank you for coming. what is your name? reagan? that's a great name. can i hold you?

you know how to smile really pretty. is this your sister? >> why don't we get a variety? but make sure i get this one. [laughter] thank you.

>> thank you. god bless you.

i will be glad to take pictures. wolft need to johump on

blitzer right now. >> hear what the candidates are saying at the newly designed c- span website for campaign to the other 12. >> if you cannot live with a nuclear iran, you have to say what do we do? >> if we took that oath of office seriously, we could get rid of 80% of the government. >> if your question was who is the proven constitutional conservative in this race, that would be me. >> read the latest comments from candidates and political reporters. lee to media partners all at c-

span.org/campaign2012. "coming up, a wrap up of our contenders' series. later, president obama's wrote remarks at the 71st general assembly at the union of reformed judaism conference. tomorrow on washington journal, kaiser health news on medicare costs. kevin mccormally on tax issues for 2012. washington journal is live at 7:00 eastern here on c-span. >> which part of the u.s. constitution is important to you? that is our question in the year's studentcam competition. make a video by-eight minutes

long and tell us be part of the constitution that is important to you and why. include more than one point of view and a video of c-span programing. submissions are due january 20, 2012. for all the details, go to studentcam.org. i [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> richard norton smith, "the contenders," 14 weeks -- what was your idea? >> first and foremost, it was the stories -- personal stories within the historical context of these 14 individuals. each of them had the unique experience and made a unique contribution to the story of the country. above all else, it was a chance to, in some cases, remake the acquaintance with some people who unjustly by and large had been forgotten. >> when you look back at the 14

week series, what is your broad thought about what you saw? >> because of the fantastic job done by a lot of people behind the scenes, the experts, and the folks who were brought together, i think we succeeded. >> jean baker, do you have a reaction to the series? >> none of my relatives work for c-span, so i just want to say it was absolutely spectacular. the combination of the stories, the folks who called in, the physical settings, and the relatives of the contenders -- i give it an a +. >> the great-grandson of hannibal hamlin called from texas. >> did you learn anything? >> yes. i learned a great deal,

especially the early ones -- henry clay and james p. grant. my skepticism lasted about the first minute of the first show. i got an e-mail from jonathan martin from politico. be said you should watch it. i said, ok. there you go. this is relevant about every one that cares about politics today. every one of the contenders and everyone of the show's be as valuable insight to what is going on in the country today. >> gene is absolutely right. the calls were an enormous contributing factor. it was because x-factor. we did not know going into this that as we got further along in the schedule, these people would begin to be real. people who define themselves as young people cheering for

wendell willkie are going mad for adlai stevenson. 50 years from now, will people make the same calls to c-span about the current set of people? >> this is the first time we have heard any discussion like this. we started with a discussion among these three historians about the 14 people we work featuring who lost in a campaign over the last couple of hundred years. we will spend the next 85 minutes looking at some of the video and getting their reaction to what they hear in these clips. first up, a number of folks appeared in the series who are relatives.

we will get our group's reaction. >> i was born down on south street by the oak fish seaport. he raised his children here. he went to school here right around the block. when his mother died, he had to go to work. >> he was a large man. some called him a big bear of a man. actually, his brother was a heavyweight greco-roman wrestler in the olympics. he would put on a suit and it would become ruffled. he cannot keep his hair straight. his wife would have to tell them when to get a haircut. he was not so worried about his outward appearances. what he was worried about what

the idea. >> were you out on the campaign trail with your family posing for pictures? >> no. >> do you have memories of the campaign in 1948? >> not really. >> were you here on election night? >> yes. >> what is your memory of that? >> watching the returns and being sent to bed. the next morning -- it was relatively early in the morning -- i remember dad coming into the bedroom where john and i were and said, "well, we lost." >> for him, democracy was not a device for acquiring power. it was a system for informing the people so that they could make a sound judgment. he said, "trust the people with the truth, all the truth."

what wins is more important than who wins. >> my father, to me, in my heart, he was not a racist. ifhe was a politician. that does not make it right what he did. >> carl cannon, what do you see? >> i see wonderful continuity between these contenders and their families. the first show was henry clay. heardclay, i've learned, patrick henry speak in virginia as a young man. abraham lincoln gave the eulogy at clay's funeral. lincoln formed the republican party. the republican party was saved in 1960 by getting it back together.

john roberts is seen in this series as consoling charles evans hughes. that is so enriching. >> richard norton smith, we were watching the thomas dewey interview. the is not the interview of your dream. he was saying no, no, no. what was your reaction? >> a lot of people ask me about it. the last question -- he and his brother seemed to be so detached from the events that had engulfed their lives, everyone thought there were going to live in the white house. it did not seem to really be

part of their dinner conversation. the only response i have -- i recently did a project on gerald and betty ford and i talked to the four children. the remarkable thing is, in the summer of 1974, they may have been the only family in america that did not have the dinner table conversation about what would happen if they never discussed the possibility that their wives may be offended. -- that their lives might be up anupended. as strange as it may seem to people who are not involved in politics, there is a family dynamic. parents consciously decide to shield their children from all

of this. >> jean baker, you wrote a book on the stephensons. did you rely at all on the family? >> indeed. his sister, buffy, i would spend hours in her house. she was the beloved sister. this is bloomington, illinois. adlai moved to libertyville. i was struck by adlai iii comments about his father, who he adored. he told an antidote about giving his credit card and the clerk looked at the credit card and saw adlai stevenson. they said is that resonate with you? she said, nope. it is a cool name. after all of their contributions to american political history -- only a

stevenson could have said that. >> hear are a couple of callers from the adlai stevenson show. >> the 1952 election was my first presidential -- in other words, i went door-to-door and did whatever i could. i was crushed that he did not win. but on retrospect, i thought he would contribute so much more on the world stage as a statesman and in a way he did. but i will never forget how disappointed we were. >> go-ahead, dave. we are talking about adlai stevenson. >> i just want to tell the story -- >> hello, congressman. how are you doing?

>> i just want to tell the story about adlai stevenson. this was madison, wisconsin in the 1960's campaign. i was a student at the university of wisconsin. he came to madison to give a speech at the civil war roundtable. afterwards, he was scheduled to appear with the governor. we had a large crowd of democrats gathered. they were over an hour late, and the crowd was very restive. finally, the two walked in. they went to the thought of the room. gaylord said, "folks, i am sari -- sorry i am so late. i have to get the governor over to the mansion and get him to bed. he has a long day tomorrow. i would give one of my short speech is."

-- speeches. adlai stevenson said, "i will give one of my typically longer ones." nelson said, "you do, and i will leave without you." stevenson said, "go ahead, we will see who leaves with you." he was quick on his feet and clever in making the audience feel good. he was my hero. >> always an interesting surprise when a congressman calls. >> a woman's life was profoundly affected. she was one of millions of people who heard his voice come out of the dark, probably over the radio, in the first time the summer of 1952. that is why we did the series. >> of the gentleman in the picture i remember for the vast

wasteland speech in 1961. >> one of the eye witnesses -- jean baker, this is your subject. how do you respond to the calls? >> adlai stevenson encouraged lots of young americans and to get into politics. these are the kinds of stories that are lost when we tell presidential history. we do not get the cracks and we do not get the other side. it is important for all americans to understand that adlai stevenson never got beyond 45%-46%, but his impact on american history it was considerable. he believed that he was, as he told all of the people that

said they were the shakespeare vote, -- he would say, you flunked the course. he was trying to educate the american people? it was less partisanship than we have today. who is trying to educate us today? >> that woman who called in was the perfect bookend to an antidote told on the show. eisenhower had a heart attack and adlai stevenson was running again. he was grousing about running in the primaries. politics was changing. you have to run in the primaries. the reason he ran again was because the young people kept coming to him and insisting that he run.

there was a great groundswell of people who loved him. >> george mcgovern is very much alive. he is close to 90 years old. unfortunately before the run-up of the program, he fell. been some of you who saw it have seen some of the press. he spent about five days in the hospital out in sioux falls, south dakota. he fell right before he came in to where the studio was set up in mitchell, south dakota. unfortunately, we never got him on the show. here is a clip that was not on the program i think you might find interesting -- an interview that george mcgovern gave us before that night. >> this is the most corrupt administration in american

history. she said that on "meet the press." she was right. nobody believed that they figured it was just politics. open the door to china, which is good. i give them credit for it. i went to richard nixon's funeral. i figured he was president of the united states and did a lot of good things as well as bad. i was listening to all of the eulogies, including one by my friend, bob dole. i thought, gosh, even from nixon's standpoint, it would have been better if i had one.

-- had won. i bet you he had the same feeling. he would not have been thrown out of office. historians would have talked about the opening to china, detente with the soviet union, he was pretty good with civil rights. the only problem is he was perfect. -- he was crooked. that is a big problem. >> george mcgovern got 37.5% of the vote in 1972. >> i will tell you a quick mcgovern a story. he also attended mrs. nixon's funeral in 1993. afterwards, there were reporters who ask them why. -- who asked him why.

his initial response was the sort of think you would expect. they wanted to press -- why would you in effect honor a man sharing his grief who destroyed your career, etc., etc.? mcgovern had the classiest reply i ever heard -- you cannot keep campaigning forever. >> carl cannon -- why did richard nixon win so big? >> the country was doing well economically. we did not know about watergate. >> we knew about it. >> not in time. not really. but, you know, george mcgovern said on his first day in office he would bring all of the troops all from indochina. people were not ready for that yet. he gave a speech to a small audience in the wee hours of the morning. >> 2:30 a.m.

>> he had every problem you could have in a campaign. when i think of mcgovern -- maybe it is a function of my career -- he was equally quixotic. he did not know he was appointed by ronald reagan. i got to know him in iowa. you would be alone with him went i asked why he was doing it. at some point, he said winning is not the only thing. you have to have a message. you have to conduct yourself well. to me, that was sort of -- >> look at what he did afterward in terms of his programs. that is something we should

probably bring up about all of these contenders. they lost -- that is their definition for the program -- but they contributed in marvelous ways. >> most of them after they lost as well. he continued contributing. as a third-party candidate -- he is very much alive. i understand he was watching the progress of the other night. let's watch. this is not seen in the ross perot show. let's watch mr. perot. >> let's put my life in perspective. again and again on complex difficult task, i have stayed the course. when i was asked by my government to do the pow project, within a year the vietnamese had sent people into canada to make arrangements to have me and my family killed. i had five small children. my family and i decided we would stay the course.

we live with that problem for three years. >> does anybody have anything else you want to raise all the problem of the people coming across my front yard? >> did you see the five men? >> i was asleep. >> who saw them? somebody did see them? >> of course, they saw them. they released the guard dogs. the guard dog chased them off and bit the seat of fauve one of the guys. it is none of your business. it has nothing to do with the presidential campaign. if you want to know if on i am telling the truth, i have given you multiple reputable people. you are pursuing this logistical money. wait a minute. i find it fascinating you will pursue this story but not about the money wasted on saddam hussein. i am it will not waste any more time on trying to satisfy you on every little problem you may have about it. >> carl cannon, how does that

look in the present day? >> it was exactly like it was at the time. ifthis was a compelling figure who was saying things no one had the courage to say, but he dropped out of the race. he gave a strange explanation. what he did was revealed he did not have the temperament for the presidency. he got back in in october and played the spoiler role, but ross perot had not held that press conference, it would of been a close a three-way race. we would have seen something we had never seen before because it had not happened since 1912. a close three-man presidential race. >> i remember during the show we had a clip, where he said we were over $3 trillion in debt. he then talked to the media -- you are pursuing this story,

but not that story? >> the justification, if you will, for his candidacy and the discrepancy between the age old stated desire of the american people. for a non-politician, for a businessman, for someone who should street. the reality of what we saw, which was someone seemingly almost unhinged about a question he found offensive. >> what did you think about him then and what do you think about him today? >> i am a great supporter of third parties, not necessarily his. but i do think one of the issues that comes up when you look at a broad span of presidents and presidential

contenders is the issue of temperament. surely this is on the horizon right now. what are these people going to do if they get into the provincial office in terms of their ability to deal with the media and make their case? third-party candidates are sometimes loose cannons because they do not have the discipline of the party structure. >> remember herman cain a few months ago. he was accused of sexual harassment. the reacted kind of like ross perot did. this is not important. nobody uses this phrase anymore, but the president of the united states does have his finger on the button.

you have to be calm in times of stress. the herman cain issue was about his character -- his temperament. we have to know about it. we want to know about it. >> people talked about wendell willkie. someone who comes out of nowhere who suddenly bursts upon the scene. for most americans, ross perot was an unknown commodity. that was reflected in the initial polls. is this, for example, a preview of michael bloomberg? you can see parallels between at ross perot running of the debt issue in 1992 and mayor bloomberg challenging the two party system 20 years later.

>> there was c-span, but no 24- hour cycle. it has changed a lot. he was on c-span in 1987. i did not see that. he said the greatest country in the world does not have the will to pass a budget. he was a compelling figure. i remember in 1992, i began hearing about ross perot -- just whispers. do you remember the movie they made "on wings of eagles?" richard crenna was ross perot. there is a picture of the two of them. i remember seeing larry king and this guy with the ears, the twang, and the unfashionable

short hair cut. i said who is this? someone said, that is ross perot. i said this could not be ross perot. >> when he went on larry king and everybody got all excited, we looked at each other -- we had him on the national press club. we sold more tapes of ross perot's speech at the national press club than anybody who had ever been there. it was a couple thousand. today it would not be that impressive. >> one other footnote to this -- it is the nature of businessmen, especially hugely successful, self-made men who set their own rules. they do not cotton to having one of the reporters telling them what is important.

>> before we go to william jennings bryan, what role, jean baker, does peace-making itself make in politics? ge does speech-making itself make in politics -- does speech- making itself make in politics? >> it has a big role, whether you are barack obama, who gets high marks for this, or whether you are william jennings bryan and you have this centurion voice. i never quite understood it -- and never quite understood this -- 20,000 people can hear you and, beyond that, another 40,000 or 50,000 would be there. but>> [unintelligible]

>> was going ahead and run this. >> we will restore bilateralism. england will have bilateralism because the united states has. defending the gold standard is the good thing. we will fight them. supported by the commercial interests and the toilers and everywhere, we will answer their demands for the gold standard by saying to them, you shall not press down on the halls of labor and the crown of thorns. you shall not crucify mankind. >> he gives a speech -- he had a wonderful voice. the tape that you played was 1893, not 1896. the technology did not exist

yet to record a speech in 1896. he was robust, he was vigorous, he had an amazing voice that could be heard by 10,000 people at a time without amplification. the sets it up so that he would give a speech at a time in the convention where you knew the majority of delegates were for him, but at the same time, no risky speech had been given yet at the time. -- no routing speech had been giving yet at the time on the cause of gold. they found his moment and he used it to great effect. >> what time the president would he have been? >> i think a very good one. his skill as an agitator, his skill as an orator, he could rally people to support his ideas. he was probably not a very good administrator. as president, he would have been

a very divisive figure. it would have been very difficult for him to work directly with congress. >> who is the greatest speaker that you have ever seen in your life or ever heard of? >> seen? >> seen them on television or could have been in the audience. >> churchill. >> why? >> a combination of eloquence, passion, and the context. when you think of world war ii and you think about britain and the survival and all that that meant to the survival of western civilization, you think

of winston churchill's speeches. >> jean baker. >> franklin roosevelt. >> why? >> at the time we needed someone who could make speeches that, in a sense, reassured the american people. franklin roosevelt used the medium of the fireside chat to great advantage. in the clips that you see, it is all roosevelt speaking. there is a certain emotional intensity. from the audience's point of view, you cannot help but note that this is a person that has connected to the audience and responded to them.

"we have nothing to fear but fear itself." i suppose it is an upper class, elite accent, but everybody in these clips seem as if they all came out with the same unspeaking a voice. >> not my guy. >> hubert humphrey. i will tell you why. when i was covering the white house for the baltimore sun -- i was covering bill clinton -- people said how eloquent bill clinton was. i get back to my office and i did not have a very good quote. i call william lee miller and said, "is bill clinton eloquent?" he said, "presidential eloquence was put in place by lincoln." hubert humphrey never made it to the white house.

william lee said the way you measured eloquence at that time was a person said something that had never been talked about before, or something that was talked about a lot. when hubert humphrey told the democratic party those who said we waited too long for civil rights, we need to wait longer -- he said it is time to march forthrightly out of the shadow of state rights and into the sunshine of human rights. to me, that is the most eloquent thing any contender has ever said. >> if you are just starting us, we are talking about a series of programs we did for c-span called "the contenders." it went on for 14 weeks from september to december.

this group sitting here all per dissipated in that initial 90 minute discussion we had about what the series would be. now we are back. before we go further, give me a 10 second biography. are you still teaching? >> yes. working on my syllabus. getting ready to have the students come in january. i am going to teach a seminar on american history. i am teaching seniors and freshmen -- an introductory class in american history from the founding to -- i hope we get to appomattox. >> richard norton smith, bring us up-to-date. >> i am teaching a graduate course at george mason university on the american presidency. still working on the nelson rockefeller biography. in between, oral history

project. >> mr. cannon? >> i am washington editor of real clear politics. i am writing a book. we have been e book that is out called "campaign 2012, the battle begins." >> how many words is the first one? "the publisher wanted 20,000 but it came in about 40,000 or more. >> if it is only $2.99 on amazon. go to amazon, google my name, and it will pop up. you can get it for kindle, ipad, or your computer. >> jean baker, can you get yours as an e-book. >> yes. >> richard norton smith -- the reverse of who is the best, who

is the worst figure you can think of who succeeded in being president? >> gosh. succeeded as president? >> no, got elected. >> warren harding. h.l. mencken invented a phrase. it is a lot better than anything harding ever said. mencken gave us the word "boviating." >> you are impeaching your own witness. >> harding gave one great speech as president.

he gave to birmingham, alabama and gave a speech that was the most forthright in terms of race relations of any president since lincoln. he went into the deep south and basically told people the time had come to outgrow segregation. it was a very courageous act. >> he also gave a speech in which he said "do not ask why your country can do for you." >> there is an embryonic poem about him. >> i am a junior american

studies major. i am excited to be here. how has president obama affected you in this pregnancy flow far? -- in his presidency so far? >> i went to siena. very good. one of the things that there is a great parallel between the two is working with a legislature that is seen as hostile, the partisanship smith states that every year he was in office, he only had control of the senate for two years. the other eight years it was eight years of republican dominance here in this chamber and in the other house, the only served one term. i think the problem of dealing

with the other party is something that smith had to battle with and undertake. that is something the current president has a problem with as well. the other thing he has -- a remarkable sense of humor. president obama has a very good sense of humor. he handles press conferences the same way. al smith is the same way. he could be funny on occasions, but not all the time because people would not taken seriously. he could play a very good statesman with a sense of humor. >> i am not sure that barack obama has learned how to make it all happen. >> one of the first things i noticed was the cigar. al smith had a cigar in his mouth barack obama -- we have never seen him smoke.

could a candidate smoke and get away with that? >> in this current campaign, herman cain's campaign manager did an advertisement on youtube smoking a cigarette. even a campaign manager smoking a cigarette now is taboo. >> franklin roosevelt was famous for his cigarette holder. >> she started by asking them to compare at barack obama and al smith. >> going back to that campaign, 1928 -- al smith was a catholic. it had a lot to do with new york city. he was the urban candidate. the immigrant experiment. it struck americans as being alien and difficult to embrace.

it was not just his catholicism. there has been an attempt by some to repeat history in suggesting that quality applies to president obama. >> al smith sticks out for what he did not do after his defeat. most of the contenders have been loyal supporters of the party and whoever it is who got the nomination after their defeat. some of them, of course, unsuccessfully tried again and again, as did william jennings

bryant but smith had some sort of vitriol and, therefore, did not play the game. the game is if you lose and you are a good democrat, and surely al smith was that, you support your successor. wendell willkie goes overseas as a republican to help roosevelt in the war effort. >> it was seen by republicans as much as a patrol as the -- as much as a betrayal as the democrats did al smith. >> when i think of his relevance to us today, i think it is the catholic issue. he loses in 1928. the loses for a lot of reasons. the economy is going great, at least he thinks it is. he is a city guy. there is a clip where he saw a horse and thought he was in the

country. it was thought after 1960 that doctrinal issues were taken off the table. now, this year, we have two candidates from the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints. mitt romney is being attacked for his more monism. it is a cult. there are whispers. that goes back to the smith campaign. i am wondering if we do a show like this 20 years from now, will we be talking about mitt romney, not as a contender who paved the way for someone the

president in the future. >> let me ask you a question you have been asked more than once. why did you stop the series in 1992? >> a number of reasons. first of all, we had x amount of time. we managed to extend 12 to 14. it was tough to do more than that. you need time to form perspective. the passions of more recent campaign to being what they are, be it seems that 20 years was a good cut off point. that took us up through prospero. -- through ross perot. >> who were the contenders that did not make the show up through ross perot. >> the contenders' that did not make the show? >> al gore. a young man said he felt very

passionately about our oversight of leaving out [unintelligible] >> there is probably a finite constituency out there. >> our viewers ought to know that you can go to our website -- c-span.org -- and watch all 14 shows. if you missed them before, we recommend it to you who are interested in this type of thing. we now go to barry goldwater. >> hubert is sitting there try to listen to you reminds me of trying to read playboy magazine with my wife turning the pages i happen to think i am in a pretty tough race. i am spending the money i

legally can. that is the action. >> that is a stupid question if you don't mind my saying so. but i never said that airplane would not fly. >> people all over the country keep talking about legalizing gambling. i thought we already had it. it is called election day. [laughter] i now realize what it takes to become the president. apparently it helps to have a brother who sits at a gas station drinking beer all day. [laughter] when i was campaigning in that razor-thin election in 1964, i should have told everyone that

dean is my brother. [laughter] >> more than the humor thing, where has it ever worked in politics and where has it not? >> piven what wendell willkie said when asked about his religion, i think he said he liked to sleep in on sunday mornings. i think the sort of contrarian stuff has disappeared from contemporary politics. i think we've gotten to this bitter, too serious, and politicians worry about making the kinds of mistakes you can make, although it surely they have made a lot.

but it has not been from their efforts at humor. >> as someone who spent part of his career working for a would- be president -- bob dole. people are trying to homogenize and dehumanize the campaign process. i guarantee they tell candidates not to take a risk. do not take a chance. humor may offend someone. what you think is funny, other people may not think is funny. there are examples of that. >> what do you tell a candidate? >> be yourself because if you

cannot be yourself now, what are you going to do in the white house? >> who is the funniest man in politics today? >> obama. >> and bill clinton, when he came into office, the first year he gave a speech. he essentially attacked bob dole and john boehner. he attacked his enemies. i ran into george stephanopoulos and he said, "this is funny stuff, is it not?" i said no. the difference between a person who laughs at himself and laughs at another is the same difference between someone who is funny and someone who is a bully. eight years later, they did the funniest sketch of any president. he is running around, making hillary's lunch. jay leno said, "how am i going

to follow this guy?" i was at a southy breakfast. mitt romney walks in. this was the last campaign. the massachusetts supreme court had issued a decision directing the legislature to legalize same-sex marriage. mitt romney walked in and did not want to address the think it yet. he said, i believe marriage is between -- i am a mormon, so i believe marriage is between a man and a woman and a woman and a woman. the place cracked up. he had them after that. you would not hear him do that joke today. >> joe biden still speaks that way. >> i will be the devil's advocate on that. i think these guys are still funny. but we used it against them. >> rick perry has been funny

about his mistakes. he has, to me, shown some humor. he has the ability to laugh at himself. i do not see it so much in the others. as to the republican front- runner right now, i do not think he has a sense of humor. >> if it did not start with barry goldwater. abraham lincoln when accused of being too faced said, if you think i am two-faced, do you want to see the other? it is later in life when lincoln learns the lesson about self deprecatory humor.

>> we ask you for your favorites and irrelevant at once. you called henry clay the best. >> one of the best. >> one of the best candidates? >> here is a bit from henry clay. >> if henry clay were standing here today, what would we see? what would he look like? what would he sound like? >> i do not think anyone could see henry clay and not like henry clay. he was not a handsome man. i always talk about his large mouth.

he liked the ladies, as i said. when he opened that mouth, a great oratory came out. a person of the opposite party onetime came to a party and said, "would do not like to meet the famous mr. clay?" the man said, "no, sir. i do not choose to submit myself to him." he have the charisma of charm. anybody who met him would like henry clay. >> why do you think this was one of the best shows? >> there was something about the series before on the radio. this is a very cold medium because you do not have the still pictures.

you have lots of stories and anecdotes. you also had the pictures of henry clay's home. you are able with or historical imagination to put in more than you can if there are clips and speeches and radio programs and movies, etc. of these people. i found myself using what i thought was my historical imagination about these elections. trying to within the range of history to fill in the blanks.

>> do you really think he is that ugly? >> i do not think so. he looked all right, but it must of been the voice. on that show they said he gave a speech in dayton, ohio that attracted 100,000 people who are these guys? there is no television, so there are no tv stars. he is newt gingrich, kim kardashian, and michael jordan combined. >> james blaine was one of the best. let's watch from the program. >> i think he was considered a

very handsome man, very well dressed. extremely well spoken. beginning in the late 1850's, he started out his career in agusta as a newspaper editor. he got bit by the political bug. by the late 1850's, was immersed in the emerging republican party. he had lots of experience in the late 1850's and late 1860's. that gave him a lot of practice toward being able to articulate his ideas as he emerged as a national figure. charismatic was another board attached to him. >> my understanding is that he had a terrific memory for names. he could really make you feel that he knew who you were, what your particular concerns were. that made him a very powerful

bigger. >> i don't know if he is handsome or ugly. it is the difference between radio and television. people listening to the radio in the 1930's -- you are using a different set of imaginative muscles. you are called upon in a way that you are not when it is put in front of you. blaine, i would argue, is one of the most obscure to modern- day americans. therefore, getting a vivid word picture of who he was and why he mattered is disproportionately an accomplishment. >> when you ask people who was the president, it is hard. >> eugene debs was a 5 time

candidate for president. >> when people get old, there should be social insurance for them. there should be retirement benefits. that is what we call social security. the same people that hated debs when he was alive now want social security. that continues today. i think it is fair to say that many of the huge advances made during the 1930's under president roosevelt, the great society in berlin and johnson as well, those were ideas that people like debs probably brought to the attention -- the first person to bring to the attention of millions of working people. >> i introduced senator sanders

as if he was eugene v. debs. they are both socialists. >> he is a modern incarnation. >> he speaks highly of debs and i'm not a socialist. >> what does it mean to be a socialist? the debs' case? >> in barry sanders' case you don't want to caucus with the democrats or republicans but want to be independent. what does it mean? we were talking about william jennings brian, occupy wall street criticizes, saying they don't have a message or order. if they had william jennings brian they'd be in business and they don't have to do that thing with the mega phone and talk because brian could be heard through the whole crowd no matter what was going on. debs is the same way if you allow me to say the rhetorical meeting phone. -- if you allow me a metaphor -- the megaphone. i wrote this down and want to get it just right. but at his trial, gene debs

said - this is 1918, while there is a lower class, i am in it. while there's a criminal element, i'm of it. while there's a soul in prison, i am not free. is he said this in 1918, 21 years before john steinbeck writes in "grapes of wrath" whenever this is a fight and hungry eating i'll be there and whenever there is a fight, i'll be there. and 50 years before bruce springsteen brings back the ghost of john aldman and repeats -- tom joad and repeats the words of steinbeck and this comes from debs and is our conscience in a way. bernie sand serious right. the words he said literally echo through our time today. >> you mentioned warren harding earlier. why did warren harding invite him to the oval office after he left prison? he pardoned him. >> he pardoned him, and -- because warren harding, for all of his failings, was a decent,

kindly human being. and i believe he felt that an injustice had been perpetuated on debs and he wanted him out of jail in time for christmas so he could spend it with his family. i think that tells you all you need to know. >> any comment on debs? >> a hero. and i think -- >> because you like him politically? >> for sure. and i don't like the fact that socialism has become an epitaph that you hurl at people without any understanding of what it means and in simple terms it's the naturalization of production -- the nationalization of the means of production and distribution. it's a question of how far we're going to go. debs is to some extent written out of the history books. and this is a man who stood by

his ideals, knew he was going to be arrested when he gave that famous speech in ohio and was willing to go to jail for his beliefs. worth something that is remembering in american politics. >> and got close to a million votes when he was in jail. >> yes, 1960. >> i think the highest vote, the percentage was 6% in 1912. >> the percentage vote. >> and you asked about his socialism. what he really was was a radical labor leader and today we'd say he was sticking up for the working man. you could argue there are plenty of liberal democrats today who didn't view economics much differently than debs. >> let's go to charles evans hughes and i think, mr. smith, you called the best or one of the best shows. >> certainly one of the best contenders. >> you just like the beard. let's go to charles evans hughes.

>> hello and thank you for a wonderful program. i would like to know the opinion from your panelists to what you believe charles evans hughes might make both politically and judicially of what's going on in wall street right now. >> well, can you project? - >> well, you know, everybody has their own perspective what's going on at wall street right now but i do think charles evans hughes was in some respects one of the great, early reformers and if you think about the trajectory of his career, he didn't seek out public service, you know, for sort of his own sake or as something he really wanted an elective office. he kind of came through public service through his law practice and through an opportunity to kind of investigate industries where there was a lot of corruption, and i think this is something that was a hallmark of his career. i think even in his presidential run, it's probably consistent with the idea that he wasn't necessarily the world's best back slapper or knew how

to build alliances with people, because i think he was very focused on getting rid of corruption and not caring if that meant if a few sacred cows were slaughtered in the process. >> buchanan because he was on the court before and after he ran, i want to ask you about this current election. what role do you think, there are a couple big huge cases coming up the court will play in the 2012 election. >> probably in march or june but sometime in the spring render a verdict on the health care law. and you know, you had paul clement on there and he's been the former solicitor general and he would believe in hughes. f.d.r. said when he tried to pack the court, the people are with me. hughes' response essentially was, well, maybe the constitution isn't. and we're refighting that again. we're relitigating that same battle between the power of the president and the power of the people. >> if you've just joined us, we're talking about "the

contenders" series that played on c-span in september, october, november, and a little december, most of them were on- site, mitchell, south dakota, albany, new york, in front of the supreme court you just saw there and lots of other places. but i want to remind you if you're interested in watching them, you can go to c-span.org and look under "the contenders." we have a little less than 25 minutes to go in this discussion and we're going next to wendell wilkey, a hoosier. -- wendell willkie, a hoosier. >> jason is joining us next from stanford, north carolina. go ahead, please. >> i just wanted to comment that in the fall of 1940, wendel willkie did a whistle stop tour and i happened to be a trainee in melbourne, florida, and he came through melbourne and was on the rear platform of the train and about a crowd of 50 or 60 people and i had the opportunity to shake hands with wendell and that was either

september or october of 1940. and it was very interesting. >> you remember when you saw him on that whistle stop tour what you thought when you saw him campaign? >> i was a kid of 18 years old and i just was in awe of here's a guy who could be president of the united states, i really looked up to him. i'm 89 now and just 18 years old, a kid. so i was really, really visibly impressed with him. he made a majestic appearance being on the back of that train. it was something very, very special. >> jean banker, you remember the first president you saw in person and where was it? >> eisenhower, in washington, at his inaugural. and of course i had voted for his opponent, and my husband and i had gone to the inaugural parade, and of course

eisenhower was a very comforting figure, and stevenson, at the time i didn't know this, infer had much of a chance, i think one of the things you could tell the future contenders, try not and run against generals. it won't work out well. >> who was your first president? >> i saw richard nixon in 1968. at the republican convention. i was 14 and carrying my rockefeller sign in the floor demonstration hitting iowa delegates over the head with it because i knew we were going to lose. but i was there for nixon's acceptance speech. and then at some point we met him actually at mr. nixon's funeral. >> mr. canon? >> mine also is richard nixon -- no, excuse me.

i take that back. it's lyndon johnson, i saw him in a rally. i was a kid, a teenager. >> when you heard the caller, 89 years old, he could still remember it and excited about the fact he saw mr. willkie in person. just in your experience, what importance is it to have seen a candidate? >> well, you contrast that and, again, you wonder if 50 years from now there will be folks like that because television, of course, has intervened between then and now and transformed the relationship between americans and their politicians and americans and their presidents. >> brian, this is "the contender" show and he saw willkie, he didn't see a president. the first time i met a contender was gene mccarthy. i had a sign, me and my friend, sophomore, at mcclatchy high school that said "all the way with l.b.j." and the college

kids were shaking their fists at us. and mccarthy called us over there, why are you for the president? we didn't know. we said we think we have the war going on and need to support the commander in chief. he said, boys, that's a good reason, i'll tell lyndon i said that. and i was hooked. >> here's a clip from the thomas e. dewey program. >> the most difficult time but an opportunity to be of great help to the people of this city, what can we do for you? >> i need a small squad of detectives who will go to work on this job as they never have before, who will know that the mayor and the commissioner are behind them personally all the time. >> is everything said? >> every gangster in the mob is being watched this minute. >> any signs of leaks? >> they don't expect a thing. >> then it's 10:00 tonight, pick up the 15 ringleaders first. here are the sealed orders for

the men. >> the roundup was skillfully directed. mob after mob was taken by surprise. simultaneously all over the city, the underworld was rounded up. >> we have made a real start on cleaning the gangsters out of new york. for 20 years the underworld has preyed on our people and robbed them and then frightened them into silence. but now the day of fear of the gangster is coming to an end. >> mr. smith, you wrote a book about tom dewey, did you ever see him with a sense of humor? >> oh, yeah, he had a sense of humor. but like a lot of us, he mellowed with age. >> are you mellowing with age? >> i said "like a lot of us." sensek i'd be losing my of humor if i were. you know, he said near the end of his life, everything came too early for me.

you know, he had achieved a kind of perspective. one thing about dewey that makes him very contemporary. he was a celebrity before he was a politician. he was the gangbuster. that rather clumsily re-enacted scene anticipated a whole host of movies you can see on late night tv to this day with the likes of george raft and betty davis, hollywooders cranking out film after film, dewey, long before anyone thought of him as a president was the gangbuster, the prosecutor, the guy who got the bad guys. >> that's crazy in some ways. i think we forget that these are human beings sometimes and we just think of them as sort of figures that run for office and they don't have feelings and passions and whatever. i mean, what a terrible thing to think you won, to have that famous headline and lose.

>> but how much of that is their fault? that they delivered that, to know, to take that with you, to know that you've become a bye word for losing the sure thing. i mean, that's a negative legacy that you can't escape. >> but yes, this presidential -- it's not a race, it's a tennis game, so if you lose, you can always forget your mistakes and think that the other person was simply better. that i think did not help dewey. i don't think it helped al smith who was always angry that he had lost. so i think we need to show a little bit more compassion sometimes to our contenders and even our president. >> if you were a presidential candidate today and looked at

thomas e. dewey and what not to do. >> dewey didn't lose because of that. we had a candidate last time out, rudy giuliani who wanted to do what dewey did, he was a prosecutor and put people in prison. he didn't get the nomination. our politics have changed and wasn't right on the issues for the moderate republican party. but it's not enough. putting people in prison is a necessary thing. we admire prosecutors. we don't normally choose them for president. >> here's your favorite speaker, i don't know if he's your favorite candidate, hubert humphrey. >> all right. >> i worked for hubert humphrey, my husband in the 1960's was his press secretary. i was muriel humphrey's press secretary. >> my goodness. >> and we were involved in his 1960 campaign. we were with him through all of 1968. we were at the democratic

convention and the horror and tragedy of what was unfolding. we were with him as he stood there looking out the window at the violence and terrible tragedy unfolding in grant park. and the atmosphere in the room was almost of a funeral. and humphrey was the saddest man you can imagine on the night that he had achieved his greatest political victory to be the democratic presidential candidate. >> this moment -- this moment is one of personal pride and gratification, yet one cannot help but reflect the deep sadness that we feel over the

troubles and the violence which have erupted regrettably and tragically in the streets of this great city and for the personal injuries which have occurred. [applause] >> i look at hubert humphrey and comes to mind in the current campaign, newt gingrich had a lot written about how much people that work with him don't like him. and i wondered looking at hubert humphrey, was he liked by people? >> he was beloved, and by republicans, too. he was close to barry goldwater. he had a lot of friends on the other side. i think in that show -- he gave a speech in iowa once and who was the republican? it might have been goldwater and they were attacking each other and then afterwards were seen having dinner together. you know, the 1968 convention for people who don't know, there were riots in chicago and

left the democrats wounded coming out of that. they were already wounded by robert kennedy's assassination and torn in half by the war. but i don't think we like to say humphrey lost to richard nixon because of that convention but he probably lost to richard nixon because he hadn't done the one thing hubert always did all his career, was speak his mind and speak his heart and stand up. he didn't speak out -- he didn't stand up to lyndon johnson on the war. he didn't tell democrats how he felt. the party would have been unified a lot earlier and humphrey would have looked a more courageous figure and that's sad because that's really who he was. this one time in his life he didn't really do it. >> except, think of september 30 in salt lake city where he gave this famous speech which even there was perceived as a break with the white house -- with the white house. you could make the break gene mccarthy contributed to humphrey's loss and if mccarthy had been more forthcoming in his support of humphrey who

after all was much closer to his world view than richard nixon. >> jean baker, go ahead. >> i think we're leaving out something when we personalize presidential politics too much. and that is the effect of the machine and the affect of how voters are influenced by the past, but also by these grassroots campaigns to get out and vote for nixon or get out and vote for humphrey. i mean, often the american people don't deconstruct politics and the leaders to the extent that we are doing this afternoon. sometimes it's simply a wrote -- rote vote. sometimes it's i'm going to challenge my father and vote a different way than he does. and sometimes it's the party discipline. >> but let me ask about the

likeability thing again. any of you have examples of where behind the scenes likeability either got somebody a nomination or prevented them from getting a nomination because people didn't like him personally? >> i would argue on the contrary. i mean, i'll give you two quick examples. tom dewey was not a beloved figure. even among his supporters. we're hearing some of that today, parallels being drawn with mitt romney, for example, but he managed to win the nomination not once but twice. general ford was universally liked. and yet it wasn't enough to hold on to the presidency in 1976. >> but i've got one that speaks directly to your point and it's from our books, here you get this free, not to pay $2.99. mitt romney last time out four years ago was not well liked and disliked by the other

candidates and was considered aloof and attacked him for ads and they kind of didn't like him, the other candidates. and when mitt romney lost in iowa to mike huckabee, he didn't call huckabee and stalk in his mind and put it in his book a year later. but john mccain called him to congratulate him and both knew the campaign was then going from iowa to new hampshire where mccain was going to be stronger and mike huckabee said to john mccain, now it's your turn to beat the son of a bitch. he was talking about romney. that didn't help romney. the likeability didn't help him because huckabee stayed in that thing long after he could have within nominated in part despite mitt romney. four years later romney has learned his lesson and tim pawlenty got out and romney greeted him like a friend and put his arm around and asked

about his family and he was a decent guy. there's a very human element among the contenders themselves, especially in a primary process. >> can i think to estes kefauver? may i speak, not can i? >> arguably should have been the democratic candidate when stevenson was. and also like tom dewey had been a crime buster in chicago. and everybody thought that he -- not everybody, but those folks in the democratic party who had power thought that he was a phony. and there was something about the political presence in which i think the american people understand who is authentic and

who is not. adlai stevenson who defeated kefauver in the convention was not let's go in the back room and smoke some cigars kind of guy, he really was let's go have a glass of the best brandy from france. but none the less, he could convey this niceness estes kefauver could not. and in that convention one sees the importance of being somewhat accessible and personable. >> very quickly, i would say we saw the charming side of barry goldwater and i would say for all the differences, goldwater and humphrey are two illustrations of candidates who are more likable than the men who defeated them. >> all right. we have only seven or eight minutes left. here is george wallace.

>> i feel, and i must say i've climbed my last political mountain, but there are still some personal hills i must climb, but for now i must pass the rope and the pick to another climber and say climb on, climb on to higher heights, climb on to reach our peak and then look back and wave at me. i, too, will still be climbing. my fellow alabamians, i bid you a fond and affectionate farewell. [applause] >> karl cannon, your reaction? >> george wallace burst on to the scene of america not sitting in a wheelchair but standing and looked like a middleweight fighter,

segregation tomorrow, segregation forever. he runs as a candidate. he runs as a racist candidate, really and spoke in code but there was no mistaking it. and late in life after he's wounded by an assassins bullet he recants on race and he goes and is a sympathetic figure at the end of his life, and he is the last candidate -- it's the last time -- it's a signpost in america and the last time you can really run a racist campaign and get any traction at all and people aren't even tempted to do it after that. >> i read somewhere brenner who tried to kill him is a janitor today and out of prison. you know anything about that? >> i would say that clip is distorting because it testifies to a remarkable human story and also because of that fact conceals the historical significance of george wallace which as far as "the

contenders" are concerned would argue is not in his subsequent transformation, moving as that is, but in his politics and the campaigns he waged before that transformation, that's why he's on this list. >> i think some of these contenders, most of them probably, the majority, are harbingers of the future, in that they knock on the doorway with programs, public service commissions, etc., etc., but others are statements of a real turning point in american life. and surely george wallace is that. i'm wondering whether he's using that quotation from martin luther king on purpose. it was something about climbing up. is he doing that on purpose or not? it's really a quotation from king's famous speech, isn't it?

>> i tell you what, jean baker, i think you're going to get the last word and leave it as a question. and we'll thank you for doing this with us from -- it teaches history at goucher college, richard norton smith is a long time author of the rockefeller book. >> work in progress. >> going to be out when? >> 2013. >> and karl cannon and you're writing a book -- >> in 2012, the election begins, the battle begins. >> i can't wait. >> thank you all for spending this time with us both before and after the series and richard, for your idea in the first place and our executive producer of this show. we're going to end it, this 90 minutes here, with a bunch of clips on the lighter and funnier moments of the series. thanks for watching. >> in one side note, he did not drink but did enjoy eating. >> oh, yes. sometimes when he was on the

campaign trail giving the speeches today, sometimes he ate as many as six meals a day and he was known -- he could devour three chickens at one sitting. >> the mansion of course had five children. its own zoo. this is true, he had a zoo. a zoo. >> was it there when al smith got there? >> no, he brought them all with him. a lot of things were given to him. he had bear, he had deer, he had elk. at one point someone gave him an alligator. >> why? >> smith always loved animals. when he was a kid, he used to collect dogs and down in the south street and the seaport and everything, people would come in -- sailors would come in and have these exotic animals and give him monkeys and goats and he'd take them home and put them in his attic and then have them in his back yard. >> your brother is now a republican, correct? >> yes, he is, but i still love him very much. >> as adlai stevenson iii, if you have to go to a store or

show your name somewhere, do people react? >> the old folks, some of the old folks, i was in a store the other day and saw this young woman at the counter looking at my credit card and she's looking at my name and i said, is that name familiar to you? and she said no, but it's cool. i think we're forgotten, i think our politics are largely forgotten, too, it's been a >> you can listen to this again on sunday at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. for more information on our series, go to our website at c- span.org. you can find a schedule of the series, biographies of all the candidates, portions of their speeches when available.

>> today on "washington journal," marilyn werber serafini and kevin mccromally. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c- span. >> sometimes i think it would be best for government to stay completely out of sports. a lot of the times, when congress gets involved, the hearings are basically television shows designed to give the congress exposure. >> john feinstein on the intersection of sports and government. >> the flix site is sports is a multi billion dollar business in this country. it has a huge effect on the lives of people. people in terms of raising money, for universities, for education, and there's some many different ways that sports

affects our lives. a stadium that exist are built with government funds. oftentimes the federal government should be more involved. >> his new book is "one-on-one." you can watch the rest of the interview sunday night. >> now remarks from president obama at the 71st general assembly of the union for reform to judaism. during his remarks, he talked about sanctions against iran and its nuclear program, and the middle east peace process. from national harbour in maryland, this is about 40 minutes. [applause] >> thank you so much. thank you, everybody.

thank you. please, please have a seat. you're making me blush. [laughter] thank you, eric, for that extraordinary introduction and for your many years of leadership in the reform movement. and even though it is a few hours early, i'd like to wish all of you shabbat shalom. [applause] now, there are a lot of familiar faces in the house -- david saperstein. [applause] alan solow, rick jacobs. [applause] howard kohr. i want to welcome israel's deputy prime minister and defense minister ehud barak.

[applause] the cooperation between our militaries has never been stronger, and i want to thank ehud for his leadership and his lifelong commitment to israel's security and the quest for a just and lasting peace. [applause] i also want to recognize israeli ambassador michael oren, who's with us here today. [applause] and finally, i want to give a shout-out to nfty, i understand is in the house. [applause] young people are going to lead the way, and they're leading the way. [applause]

there you go. i'm fired up just listening to them. [laughter] [applause] i am honored to be here because of the proud history and tradition of the union for reform judaism, representing more than 900 congregations, around 1.5 million american jews. i want to congratulate all of you on the golden anniversary of the religious action center. [applause] as eric mentioned, when president kennedy spoke to leaders from the rac in 1961, i was three months old, so my memory is a bit hazy.

[laughter] but i am very familiar with the work that you've done ever since, and so is the rest of america. and that's because you helped draft the civil rights act and the voting rights act. [applause] you helped to liberate soviet jews. [applause] you have made a difference on so many of the defining issues of the last half-century. and without these efforts, i probably wouldn't be standing here today. so thank you. thank you. [applause] you have brought to life your faith and your values, and the

world is a better place for it. now, since my daughter malia has reached the age where it seems like there's always a bar or bat mitzvah -- [laughter] every weekend, and there is quite a bit of negotiations around the skirts that she wears at these bat mitzvahs -- [laughter] do you guys have these conversations as well? [laughter] all right. i just wanted to be clear it wasn't just me. [laughter] what time you get home. as a consequence, she's become the family expert on jewish tradition. [laughter] and if there's one thing i've learned from her, it's that it never hurts to begin a speech by discussing the torah portion.

it doesn't hurt. [laughter] [applause] so this week -- [applause] congregations around the world will retell the story of joseph. [applause] as any fan of broadway musicals will tell you -- [laughter] there is a lot going on in this reading. [laughter] but many scholars have focused on a single word that joseph uses when he replies to his father jacob. in hebrew, that word is

"hineni." it translates -- [applause] it translates to "here i am." hineni. it's the same word abraham uses to reply to god before the binding of isaac. it's the same word moses uses when god summons him from the burning bush. hineni. the text is telling us that while joseph does not know what lies ahead, he is ready to answer the call. in this case, "hineni" leads joseph to egypt. it sets in motion a story of enslavement and exodus that would come to inspire leaders like martin luther king as they sought freedom. it's a story of persecution and

perseverance that has repeated itself from inquisition-era spain to tsarist russia to hitler's germany. and in that often-tragic history, this place, america, stands out. [applause] now, we can't whitewash the past. like so many ethnic groups, jews faced prejudice, and sometimes violence, as they sought their piece of the american dream. but here, jews finally found a place where their faith was protected, where hard work and responsibility paid off, where no matter who you were or where you came from, you could make it if you tried. here in america, you really

could build a better life for your children. i know how much that story means to many of you, because i know how much that story means to me. my father was from kenya. my mother was from kansas - not places with a large jewish community. [laughter] but when my jewish friends tell me about their ancestors, i feel a connection. i know what it's like to think, "only in america is my story even possible." [applause] now -- i have to interrupt. my friend debbie wasserman schultz just got in the house. [applause]

now, the jewish community has always understood that the dream we share is about more than just doing well for yourself. from the moment our country was founded, american jews have helped make our union more perfect. your parents, your grandparents, your great- grandparents, they remembered what it was like to be a stranger, and as a result treated strangers with compassion. they pursued tikkun olam, the hard work of repairing the world. [applause] they fought bigotry because they had experienced bigotry.

they fought for freedom of religion because they understood what it meant to be persecuted for your religious beliefs. our country is a better place because they did. the same values that bring you here today led justice brandeis to fight for an america that protects the least of these. [applause] those same values led jewish leaders to found rac 50 years ago. [applause] they led abraham joshua heschel to pray with his feet and march with dr. king. [applause]

and over the last three years, they have brought us together on the most important issues of our time. when we began this journey, we knew we would have to take on powerful special interests. we would have to take on a washington culture where doing what's politically convenient is often valued above doing what's right; where the focus is too often on the next election instead of the next generation. [applause] and so time and time again, we've been reminded that change is never easy. and a number of the rabbis who are here today, when i see them, they'd been saying a prayer. they noticed my hair is grayer. [laughter] but we didn't quit.

you didn't quit. and today, we're beginning to see what change looks like. and eric mentioned what change looks like. change is the very first bill i signed, the lilly ledbetter fair pay act, which says in this country an equal day's work gets an equal day's pay. that's change. [applause] change is finally doing something about our addiction to oil and raising fuel- efficiency standards for the first time in 30 years. that's good for our economy. it's good for our national security. [applause] and it's good for our environment. change is confirming two supreme court justices who will defend our rights, including our first amendment rights surrounding

religion -- happen to be two women, by the way. that's also a good thing. [applause] change is repealing "don't ask, don't tell," so that in the first time in history, you don't have to hide who you love to serve the country that you love. that's change. [applause] change is working with the reform movement, and other faith-based groups, to reform the federal faith-based initiatives, improving the way we partner with organizations that serve people in need. change is health care reform that we passed after a century of trying, reform that will finally ensure that in the united states of america, nobody goes bankrupt just because they get sick.

that's change. [applause] change is the 2.5 million young people -- maybe some of those nfty folks who have already -- [applause] who have health insurance on their parents' plans because of affordable care act. that's change. [applause] it's making family planning more accessible to millions of americans. [applause] it's insurance companies not being able to charge you more just because you're a woman, or deny you coverage if you have breast cancer. [applause] change is committing to real, persistent education reform,

because every child in america deserves access to a good school and to higher education -- every child. [applause] and change is keeping one of the first promises i made in 2008: after nearly nine years, our war in iraq is ending this month and our troops are coming home. [applause] that's what change is. and none of this would have happened without you. that's the kind of change we'll

keep fighting for in the months and years ahead. and just last night, you took another step towards the change we need and voted for a set of principles of economic justice in a time of fiscal crisis. [applause] and i want to thank you for your courage. that statement could not have come at a more important time. for as you put it, we're at a crossroads in american history. last tuesday, i gave a speech in osawatomie, kansas, where i described that crossroads. and i laid out a vision of our country where everybody gets a fair shot, and everybody does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules. [applause] and these are not democratic values or republican values. they're not christian values or jewish values or hindu or muslim values -- they're shared values, and we have to reclaim

them. we have to restore them to a central place in america's political life. [applause] i said it last week, i'll say it again -- this is not just a political debate. this is a moral debate. this is an ethical debate. it's a values debate. it's the defining issue of our time. it is a make-or-break moment for the middle class and for all those who are fighting to get into the middle class. [applause] and for those of us who remember parents or grandparents or great-grandparents who had to fight to get in the middle class, but they understood that the american dream was available to them because we were all in it together -- that's what this is about. [applause] and last night, you reaffirmed the moral dimension of this debate. [applause]

we have to decide who we are as a country. is this a place where everyone is left to fend for themselves? the most powerful can play by their own rules? or do we come together to make sure that working people can earn enough to raise a family, send their kids to college, buy their own home, have a secure health care and a secure retirement? that is the story that almost all of us here share, in one way or another. this is a room full of folks who come from immigrants, and remember what it was like to scratch and claw and work. you haven't forgotten.

you know what it's like to see those in your own family struggle. well, we have to apply those same values to the american family. we're not a country that says, you're on your own. when we see neighbors who can't find work or pay for college or get the health care they need, we answer the call -- we say, "here i am." and we will do our part. [applause] that's what you affirmed last night. but more importantly, it's what you affirm every day with your words and your actions. and i promise you that as you pray with your feet, i will be right there with you every step of the way. [applause] i'll be fighting to create

jobs, and give small businesses a chance to succeed. i'll be fighting to invest in education and technology. i will fight to strengthen programs like medicare and social security. [applause] i will fight to put more money in the pockets of working families. i won't be afraid to ask the most well-off among us - americans like me - to pay our fair share, to make sure that everybody has got a shot. i will fight alongside you every inch of the way. [applause] and as all of you know, standing up for our values at home is only part of our work. around the world, we stand up for values that are universal -- including the right of all

people to live in peace and security and dignity. [applause] that's why we've worked on the international stage to promote the rights of women -- [applause] to promote strategies to alleviate poverty -- [applause] to promote the dignity of all people, including gays and lesbians -- [applause] and people with disabilities -- [applause] to promote human rights and democracy. and that's why, as president, i have never wavered in pursuit of a just and lasting peace -- two states for two peoples, an independent palestine alongside a secure jewish state of israel.

[applause] i have not wavered and will not waver. that is our shared vision. [applause] now, i know that many of you share my frustration sometimes, in terms of the state of the peace process. there's so much work to do. but here's what i know - there's no question about how lasting peace will be achieved. peace can't be imposed from the outside. ultimately, it is the israelis and the palestinians who must reach agreement on the issues

that divide them. [applause] and the fact that peace is hard can't deter us from trying. because now more than ever, it's clear that a just and lasting peace is in the long- term interests of israel. it is in the long-term interests of the palestinian people. it is in the interest of the region. it is the interest of the united states, and it is in the interest of the world. and i am not going to stop in pursuit of that vision. it is the right thing to do. [applause] now, that vision begins with a strong and secure state of israel. [applause] and the special bonds between our nations are ones that all americans hold dear because they're bonds forged by common interests and shared values. they're bonds that transcend

partisan politics -- or at least they should. [applause] we stand with israel as a jewish democratic state because we know that israel is born of firmly held values that we, as americans, share: a culture committed to justice, a land that welcomes the weary, a people devoted to tikkun olam. [applause] so america's commitment -- america's commitment and my commitment to israel and israel's security is unshakeable. it is unshakeable. [applause]

i said it in september at the united nations. i said it when i stood amid the homes in sderot that had been struck by missiles -- no nation can tolerate terror. and no nation can accept rockets targeting innocent men, women and children. no nation can yield to suicide bombers. [applause] and as ehud has said, it is hard to remember a time when the united states has given stronger support to israel on its security. in fact, i am proud to say that no u.s. administration has done more in support of israel's security than ours. none. don't let anybody else tell you otherwise. it is a fact. [applause]

i'm proud that even in these difficult times we've fought for and secured the most funding for israel in history. i'm proud that we helped israel develop a missile defense system that's already protecting civilians from rocket attacks. [applause] the heanother grave concern - and a threat to the security of israel, the united states and the world - is iran's nuclear program. and that's why our policy has been absolutely clear: we are determined to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. [applause] and that's why we've worked painstakingly from the moment i took office with allies and partners, and we have imposed the most comprehensive, the hardest-hitting sanctions that the iranian regime has ever

faced. we haven't just talked about it, we have done it. and we're going to keep up the pressure. [applause] and that's why, rest assured, we will take no options off the table. we have been clear. we're going to keep standing with our israeli friends and allies, just as we've been doing when they've needed us most. in september, when a mob threatened the israeli embassy in cairo, we worked to ensure that the men and women working there were able to get out safely. [applause] last year, when raging fires threatened haifa, we dispatched fire-fighting planes to help put out the blaze. [applause] on my watch, the united states of america has led the way, from durban to the united nations, against attempts to use international forums to delegitimize israel. and we will continue to do so.

[applause] that's what friends and allies do for each other. so don't let anybody else tell a different story. we have been there, and we will continue to be there. those are the facts. [applause] when i look back on the last few years, i am proud of the decisions i have made. i am proud of what we have done together. but today is not about resting on our laurels. as your tradition teaches, you're not obligated to finish the work, but neither are we free to desist from it.

today, we look forward to the world not just as it is, but as it could be. when we do, the truth is clear. our union is not yet perfect. our world is still in desperate need of repair. each of us still hears that call. the question is how will we respond. in this moment, every american, every faith, every background has the opportunity to stand up and say, "here i am. here i am puzzled i am ready to keep alive our country's promise. i am ready to speak up for our values, at home and abroad. i am ready to do what needs to be done.

the work may not be finished in a day, in a year, in a term, in a lifetime. but i am ready to do my part. and i believe that with tradition as our guide, we will seize the opportunity. in the face of the odds, we will make choices that are hard but are right. that is how we have overcome tougher times before. that is how we will overcome the challenges we face today. together, we will rewrite the next chapter of america's story and prove our best days are still to come. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> tomorrow on washington journal, medicare costs.

and what tax issues to expect for 2012. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern, here on c- span. sunday on "newsmakers," the republican conference vice chairman on how republicans view congress's record in 2011, and what his party plans to do in 2012. that is at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., on c-span. >> sometimes, i think it would be best for government to stay completely out of sports. a lot of times, when congress gets involved, the hearings are basically television shows designed to give the congress men and women involved exposure. >> author and short -- sports commentator john feinstein on the intersection of sports and government. >> the split side is sports is a multibillion-dollar business in this country. it has a huge effect on the

lives of people. it is fans. it is people in terms of raising money for universities, for higher education. there are so many ways sports affects our lives. stadiums that exist are built with government funds. often, i think the federal government should be more involved. >> the new book is "one on one." you can watch the rest of the interview sunday night. >> next, remarks from presidential candidate mitt romney on his jobs plan and the economy. he spoke at the missouri valley steel fabrication plant. this starts with remarks from republican presidential candidate tim pawlenty, who endorsed mr. romney earlier this year. this is about 45 minutes.

>> i am glad to be back in iowa. i am tim pawlenty, the former governor of the state just north of here, the state of minnesota. this is a state for jokes. people get a. a couple of quick thoughts, as i introduce an romney in a moment. in iowa, i had a chance to meet a 10-year-old boy. he came up to me and gave me his theory about how we can grow jobs in the united states of america. he said this. he said if you keep the taxes low, people will have more money. and if people have more money, they will buy more things. and if they buy more things, and businesses will be busy. and if businesses are busier, they will hire more people.

then, those people will have more money, and so on and so on. we should not have to have a 10- year-old boy know more about jobs and the economy than the president of the united states, barack obama. [applause] and i sure that story with you because we have somebody running for president of the united states who in my view is the most capable, knowledgeable, and electable candidate in this field by far. on one of the most pressing issues facing our country -- how we are going to grow jobs in this country -- the answer to that question of how best to grow jobs in the united states of america is not best answered by politicians in washington, d.c. the answer is to go to people who started businesses, invested in businesses, and provided jobs. mitt romney is the only candidate in this race who for almost his entire life has

invested in businesses, growing businesses, provided jobs, and is vitally important. when you talk to people in iowa and across this country and ask about your hopes and dreams, they always say things like "i am worried about whether i can get my health care premiums paid." "i am worried about whether i can get my kids to college." "i am worried whether i or my spouse will have a job. i hope it is a good paying job." i grew up in a meat packing town. my dad was a truck driver. my mom was a homemaker. i saw what it means to the family to have opportunities, mostly through jobs. the gentleman to my right is, i think, the best equipped to lead the economy back to a pro-growth economy. and now i want to introduce before the governor comes up, i want to introduce ann romney. she's had so many wonderful characteristics and traits. some

i want to introduce ann romney. talk, it's another thing to walk the walk. and when you look at the life that the romneys have led, a life of character, integrity, leadership, service, and reaching out to serve their state, their country, these are individuals of incredible depth and character. i'm really proud that people of this quality and character and integrity would step forward and say i want to lead this country. we're never going to wake up any day during this campaign or when mitt romney is president of the united states and be embarrassed by anything he does or anything ann does. these are two wonderful, amazing people. their hearts and their heads are connected. i'm proud to support them. i hope you'll get out and support them in the iowa caucuses coming up real soon. and i want to introduce to you somebody who will be a fabulous first lady for the united states of america. ann romney.

[applause] >> thank you, tim. thank you all for coming. i look at these faces and they could be other places this morning doing other things. christmas is just around the corner and mitt and i appreciate the fact that you're here. so thank you. when tim was talking about his upbringing and his family, i think all of us can have our own stories. i have my own story, too. my father grew up in wales, my grandfather was a welsh coal miner and there was vy little bread on the table at times in my father's life and they struggled. my grandfather had a terrible coal mining accident, and ended up coming to america, like so many of your ancestors did, for opportunity. i feel so many times as though i have one foot still in wales, and so close to those lives and the sacrifices and the

difficulties o people's lives and how close we all are in so many ways and share so many things. we're worried about america right now. i think all of us recognize that america is heading in the wrong direction. and that the sacrifices that our ancestors made and we're making and you're making to make sure that your children have all the opportunities in the world, we worry about those things right now. and mitt and i are running -- he's the one really running but i'm supporting him. it's not about us. it's about america. this land and this country is the ho of the earth. and it's got to remain that way. and i feel very stronglyhat there is only one person that truly can turn this country around and keep america the way we tnk it should be, the hope of the earth. so i'm thrilled to be here. i appreciate all of you coming

out this morning. and let's hear from mitt. >> thanks, sweetie. thank you. [applause] >> now, bob, i see you have constructed a stage this morning that is not about to go anywhere. look at this thing. what do we have here? how many -- looks like about 20 different pieces o steel here that have come together. i am reminded, as ann was speaking and i see this stage of steel of our experience in debuick four -- dubuque four years ago. we were on a stage higher than this wh two parts assembled there and we're on two sides and i'm on one side and she's on the other. suddenly the stage she is on collapses anfalls down and hits her back side and a big ooh from the audience and i turn from her and a little later ask her, what do you think? she said i fell on debutt in

dubuque. she took i pretty easy and we're not worried about anything like that happening this morning. what a great place this is. i hope you appreciate this building and what it represents. and why it's here. good men and women have jobs as a result ofeople who built this. and it's not just the outside of this building that makes it unusual, it's what goes on here and the thinking and innovation that occurred here that allows the people who work here, what, 70 some odd people, those jobs are associated with a number of things that make it work. and ifny one of those things stopped working, why, those jobs would be done. -- would be gone. what's happening here is happening in places all over the country. this is how i spenty life is in businesses like this learning how they work and trying to make them better, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. ann didn't tell the story, she came in and as soon as she walked in the room she said this reminds me of jared, her

dad's company, like this, a steel fab shop and made specialty parts and so forth, largely for the u.s. navy and shipbuilders and made various parts, you might look into that. there's a lot of opportunities there. and so she came in and she smelled the smell and looked around, yeah, this is like jared. and i knew how much that meant to her. let me tell you i think why this happens, how it is that industries like this begin, why jobs occur. and it goes back to something about the american spirit. my dad was born in mexico. and ann's dad born in wales. similar in some respects in what happened to their lives. my dad's family came back to the united states, they were american citizens, they came back several yearsfter he was born, i think five or six years, his dad was a contractor and construction goes up and

down a now and again they went bankrupt but my dad was a carpenter, a drywall carpenter, they called it lap and plaster back then, a drywall carpenter but never got the time and money to get a college degree but didn't think that would prevent him from realizing his dreams and he ultimately became head of a car company and then became governor of a state. he believed in america and believed in america, the circumstance of your birth doesn't prevent influence accomplishing what you might want to achieve. he came into the company he was going to run called american motors. they made ramblers and jeeps. it was -- i see a couple nodding heads. did you have a rambler? >> a gremlin. >> oh, i'm sorry. it was not our finest hour. but he came in and the company stock -- the chief executive of the company, a fellow named george mason passed away and my dad was suddenly made the new head othe company and the stock collapsed and i remember

mom and dad talking about whether or not the banks would provide ongoing financing or whether the company might not survive and my dad went around and convinced the banks and employees the company could survive and he brought in a new idea. they were making great big cars called nashes, nashes and hudsons. there was a nash band, nashes and hudsons. and they'd made a car a few years before called the nash rambler, and my dad thought that was the future. so he reintroduced the same car and brought that car back. i think he did that actually when george mason was still alive. they brought that back, sold the nash rambler and increasingly focused their company on the small c. he called it a compact car. and he coined that term, the compact car. my english teacher in high school would say to me, your dad is ruining the english language. i said why, he said it's not compact. a compact is what a woman uses to powder her nose.

it's a compact car. it's compact. not compact. anyway, my dad coined the term compact car, i believe, and so did selling these ramblers and helped turn the company around and as a result of that a lot of people had a lot of good jobs for a long, long time. innovation. risk-taking. vision. that's the nature of what allows a place like this to be in business. some years ago you were a fab shop here, as i understand it. and that business got real tough. and the margins got squeezed more and more until it looked li the business wouldn't be able to survive, and someone had the idea to come up with a slagger. whose idea was that? >> all these guys. >> all these guys. people from the shop. said you know, why don't we make cutting tables, why don't wereate this thing and sell it aroun the world? at the high point you're selling over 100 a year of those things. right now the economy is struggling. but innovation here by men and women with innovation in their

mind and seeing opportunity keep this place going. by the way, if you don't have any new ideas for 10 years, you'll be out of business in 10 years. because competition will copy what you've done, steal your ideas and your designs, try to outcompete you. so you have to always be innovating and creating. that's what's extraordinary about america is that we have in this country men and women with ideas, technology, thinking, and we also have the freedom to be able to implement those things. we allow risk to be taken. we do those things that allow enterprise to grow and thrive. it's a remarkable thing, business. very few things stay the same over time. what concerns me is we have in washington a class of people who spent their whole time in washington and they don't understand what u do. they don't understand how the economy works. you see them from time to time. i watch our president.

i think he's a nice guy. i just tnk he has no appreciation of what it takes to work in the facility like this to come up with ideas to create new products to compete around the world, to be able t sell a product to let's say germany knowing that china is also trying to sell the same product. he doesn't understand that because he hasn't done it. and in the past it didn't make much difference because we were so strong and everyone else was so weak, why, america could just outcompete anyone in the world. now we've got some tough competition, not just from our european ancestors, if you will, but also from the more populous nations like china and ultimately india will become competitive. we face rea competition around the world and need a government that sees their job as encouraging you in the private sector, making it easier to take risk, making it easier to get capital and loans. so you can be able to make the investments necessary to keep a place like this going. and i watch our president over

the last three years shake my hand and say he's over his head. he doesn't understand what's needed. he goes to the banking industry and puts in place a 2,000 some odd page bill with hundreds, thousands of pages of new regulationo be written, and those things make it harder for banks to make loans. to businesses like this. which make it harder for you to sell products around the world and get the credit you need to do so. and then he puts in place something called obamacare. there are a lot of this i don't like about it. but one of them is it's scaring small employers, small businesses. they're saying i'm not sure i can afford to hire people anymore. now he has another idea. how about this, how about businesses that are union businesses where the employees don't want unions and they have their right to choose but they're going to take away t right to a secret ballot from america's workers.

now, that's a bad idea that he's been promoting. why? well, because it would allow intimidation to occur to encoage people to vote in a certain way. let me tell you, that wl scare away employers and entrepreneurs and innovator. i want to keep america the most attractive place in the world for every kind of innovation, investment, and job growth. i'm a product of a mom and a dad who took risks, were highly successful, and then i went off on my own and started my own business. i've learned from that, had experience working in businesses that in my opinion help me understand what it takes not just to keep this business going, but to see more businesses and enterprises around the country grow and add jobs and just like that 10-year-old, was it, tim, this 10-year-old who said yeah, the more businesses we have successful, the more we'll have people working, the more they're working and the more

they can buy, the more ty can buy, the better business is here. one more thing i'll mention. it's good for us to have trade with other nations. how many of these slaggers do you sell to countries outside the united states? what proportion do you think? a small portion came. -- portion today. what are some of the places you've sold them? [inaudible] >> china, sweden, denmark, germany. where did you say? >> israel. >> saudi arabia. >> saudi arabia. sohey'll go out around the world. i want more places for our goods to go. i want people to think it's easy to buy products from the united states of america. i want more marketspen. i also want to make sure that as we compete with other people who make something like a slagger, there's nothing quite like a slagger, right? but those people who will try and make something like a slagger, i want them to understa that they better not cheat or the united states is

going to step in and stop them from cheating. and there are some cheaters out there when it comes to fair trade. one of them is china. they've been stealing designs, patents and technology. they've also manipulated their currency so that their products are artificially low-priced. you can't allow that to go on year after year after year. i want to use the experience i have in the world of the free enterprise system to make sure america gets working again. and i'm running in this race because i understand how to get middle class americans prosperous again, working again, buying things and putting more americans back to work. and i happen to believe that's what america needs and what america wants. now -- [applause] >> i'm going to turn to you gu here and ask if you have a

question or two. this is kind of a daunting scenario with the lights here and fabulous flag hung back there and -- but nonetheless, i'm going to ask you for some questions here in just a moment. you probably don't need a microphone, i can repeat the question if you can't hear it but i do want to hear your thoughts. i want to say one more thing, though. and that is ann mentioned that these are tough times. and they are tough times. you guys have jobs. hope your spouses do. but i know these are tou times. even for those with jobs. the average -- or the median income in america has dropped 10%. in the last four years. 10%. and the prices of things you're buying are not going down like that. gasoline isn't. food isn't. health cost isn't. and so there is a real squeeze in america for middle class families like those in this room. and so it feels tough. and then weee 25 million, 26

million people out of work or stopping -- having to stop look for work and part-time jobs and need full-time work. you see home values in a lot of the parts of this country having dropped by a 1/3 or more. they feel like tough times. ann says there are tough times. there are a lot of people who think the future is not as bright as the past. let me tell you this, i think the future is a good deal brighter than the present and for our kids and grandkids i will be every bit as great as we have enjoyed and as the greatest generation enjoyed. why do i say that? well, we're still the most inventive nation in the world. we still have ideas. we have extraordinary assets and technology we can draw upon. we have financial resources. we have a powerful economy. we're the hope of the earth and we have a highly patriotic people that will do whatever is necessary to keep america strong. one of the things that most impressed me about my chance to go off and run the olympics. you may not have known that.

but i got a chance to run the olympics in 2002. it was noticing that when the national anthem was played, that the young people in america, if they were standing the podium and got the gold medal and our flag went up, the national anthem played, they'd put their hand over their heart. and you could see them sing the words to the national anthem, and sometimes they got them right. and i've asked, where did this tradition begin of putting our hand over our heart during the playing of the national anthem? and it began during the second worlwar, f.d.r. asked us to do that in honor of the blood that was shed by america's sons and daughters in far off places. we're a very patriotic people. we love america. we're willing sacrifice for america. if called upon by leaders who tell the truth and who live with integrity and who know how to lead.

and i hope to be one of those leaders. i need yr help at the caucus. i know that bob was telling me that the caucus site at the high school gets full so get there early. i need you guys to get there. i'd love to have your support and your vote at the caucus because i want to be one of those leaders that will tell the truth, live with integrity and knows how to lead and will put america back to work with rising incomes again because i love this country and because i know how to do it. thank you so much for your help this morning. thank you. [applause] . >> now, last night you saw a debate if you had nothing better to do. and so that means two or three of you saw the debate. but if you did see the debate you were all questioned out but if you have any further questions i'm happy to respond to anything you may have this morning. yes, sir. [inaudible]

>> the question -- i won't repeat all the compliments though i'd wished i'd given you a microphone so everybody could hear them. the question is what am i going to do on the first day. and i've long list. one, there are a series of bills that i will file. and number two, there are a series of executive orders of things that happen immediately. and let me mention some of those. number one, i'm going to direct the secretary of health and human services to grant a waiver from obamacare to all 50 states so we can stop obamacare in its track [applause] >> and i'll go on to find legislation -- to file

legislation to repeal obamacare and to instead return to the states their constitutional responsibility and right to care for the needs of their poor and those that are uninsured. that's one item. number two, i will direct the secretary of energy to provide licenses to drillers, wildcatters, gas drillers, to start developing our energy resources in this country and get the oil and gas that we need. th's number two. [applause] >> number three, and this is a little controversial. i will designate china as a currency manulator. under our law, that allows the president to apply tariffs where the president bieves that chinese currency manipulation has cost american jobs or is unfair. i'll look at whathey've done with regards to stealing technology, intellectual property, designs, patents and so forth as well as where they hacked into computers to steal technology and will apply those

tariffs where i believe they're neceary to make sure that they understand we're not going to allow them any more to play on an uneven playing field. that's the next. i will also make sure that the president's policy, he said, look, you can't work on a federal work site unless it's a union organization. i'm going to say, no, no, it ought to be alevel playing field. i'll change that executive order as well. there's something else i want to do and will do this on day one and that is i'll file a piece of legislation that relates to taxes for employers. this goes back to what governor pawlenty mentioned. we havright now the hhest taxes in the world for employers. we're tied with japan. europe is about 10 points lower for employers. we're about 35% tax rate. europe is about 25%. i'll bring our rate down to 25% for employers and take out some special deductions and exemptions that companies currently get so we don't lose revenue. but at the same time bring our rates down so that businesses

are able to stay in this country and not have t pay higher taxes to do so. otherwise, they'll leave. i don't want businesses to leave here going elsewhere because they can get a huge tax break. i want the jobs to stay here. and there's something else i'll do. and it relates to taxation and the other big burden on small business. and that's regulation. sometimes in my party i think we misspeak. we say we're for deregulation. well, what we mean by that is it regulation has become too heavy and burdensome, we want to shrink it down but we don't want zero regulation. you have to have regulation and law to make a market work, to let players know how to compete with each other. but i want to get our regulation down to be -- to be supportive of industry rather than overwhelming and burdeni industry. and i've watched this president and his administration has been out of control when it comes to regulations.

the rate of regulatory introduction in this country, new regulations, has quadrupled under this president. and so i will on day one put a halt to all the regulations that were put in during the obama years and then i'll take a look at them one by one and get rid of any of those that are costing american jobs. those are the first things i'll get going on day one and the list goes lorninge. i've got an economic pl that includes9 different steps we'll get going them from the very beginning. thank you for the question. thank you. [applause] what are you planning on doing for agriculture? it is hard to get started. machinery is terbly expensive. we have large farmers that are using themselves and their employees to get tax dollars

from the governmentor their farm program. i think we should completely do away with the farm program. they can sink or swim on their own. get some incentives to get young people back in there. >> i love the idea of having people who want to have a chance of starting a farm have that dream come true. i had the chance when i was 15 to work on a ranch in idaho. my awful later in his life had gotten out of the business world -- my uncle later in his life had gotten out of the business world and bought a ranch. the work there was real tough. i loved it. it was one of the greatest experiences to work on that ranch. for people who want t work in farmin that is a wonderful thing. what of e biggest challenges we have in agricultu today is

getting pilons. i have talked to community bankers and say how come i keep hearing you are not providing loans like you have in the past? what i hear from them is a bill called dodd-frank has scared the dickens out of them. they have pulled back, not sure if they will pass inspection from government inspectors. as they pull back, it makes it harder and harder for young people get the loans they need to get started in farming. i'd like to change that. there is another thing i would like to do. this is also controversial. some of my friends. we should not worry about ethanol. i actually like the fact that ethanol as part of our energy mix. in my view, ethanol is an important part of our energy security. i do not want to keep sending money overseas to buy energy there when we have resources here.

one of the renewable resources is ethanol. i believe the subsidy put in place and in the past made sense to get the industry going. that subsidy is going away because the industry is on its feet. i wrote believe the renewable fuel standards should be kept in place so people will invest in the agriculture sector. it has been good for agriculture. it has been tougher for people trying to bu a farm because prices for land have gone up. i want to keep the american agricultural system alive and well. i do not want to -- i do not want to see us do to forming what we have done to manufacturing. we have allow manufacturing to leave this country. i do not want to see that happen to agriculture. thank you. i apeciate it. [applause] yes, ma'am. >> there will be many more caucuses this year. you do not have to worry about getting their an hour early. >> that is great.

by the way, if you are voting r me, the date is january 3. [laughter] the other folks are taking theirs on january 4. [laughter] just kidding. yes, sir? >> what do you plan on doing to get "in god we trust" back into this country again. our children cannot celebrate christmas without fear of offending someone else. i would like to see that backn this country again. "i know there are some people who would like to make this nation a secular nation, who want to take god out of everything that exists in our country. they say it is constitutional. it is hard to the fact that the declaration of independence notes that we were in doubt by our creator with certain unalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

how you take god out of america with the declaration points out it was god who gave us those rights and in the first place? i believe we should be able to have religious ornamentation and celebration in the public square. whether that is a manger, a menorah, or representatives of other faiths -- it is important to recognize that we look to god for manyf our blessings. i have had the chance to read some of the stories -- i have had the chance, i am sure you have, toead some of these stories about the early days of the revolution and how many times weere in a tight spot. and how many times george washington felt that it was only through the blessings of providence that this nation was able to become a free and able to win our independence militarily. we have been blessed by our creator. i think it's appropriate for us to recognize that in theublic square. i think that at sool celebrations, we should be able to have prayer there. i am not looking for teachers

to have prayer every day in the classroom, but i do think at special ceremonies, graduation, football games, and the like, that calling on our creator is a good idea. and to recognize that on this earth, they're sending more than just ourselves. -- theres something more than just ourselves. by the way, i know there are a lot of people that do not believe in god, and that is their right. we do not want to impose on those folks. one of those things i love about the country is that whether you are believing or non-believing, you typically ha something that is more important to you in your life than just yourself. it is the greathing about our country. we are bigger than ourselves. we're willing to sacrifice for things to believe in. for many of us, it is our god. for others, it is our country and our family, the future of this country. those things combined to be a great source of sacrific it is part of who we are. we live person to greater than -- we live for somethg > --

bigger than ourselves in this country. if we lose that, we lose a great deal of what makes america american. i love the stories o that french historian, the french historian came here long ago and tried to understand what made america an extraordinary land. one of those things was our willingness to help care for one another and to sacrifice our own interests for the interest of our fellow citizens. it is a great country, and i trust in god. and i know you do. and i believe that it is appropriator in the public -- appropriate in the public uare for us to recognize that we do, indeed, have a creator and that we trust in our cator, particularly at this time of the year. thank you. [applause] yes, sir? >> i was wondering if you could touch on entitlements a little bit. your first day in office will be busy, but maybe sometime later in the week you can talk about entitlements. >> [laughs] thank you. i help identify that bill on day one.

-- i hope to file that bill on day one. it might be that paul ryan is able to get that under way in completed before then. probably not, but i sure hope so. but i do not think this president is likely to take any bold or courageous step as it relates to an issue as important as that. last night i mentioned a couple of things. one is you have all heard that we have a huge deficit every year. we spend more money than we take in. that igetting to be a big problem. and this president, by the end of his four years, will have put in place as much total deficit or a total debt as all the prior presidents combined, almost. it is extraordinary how much he has borrowed. so the national debt has come to a point of about $15 trilon, and that threatens america, because as some point the people who loaned us that extra $1 trillion of a deficit each year, the people who loaned us the money will say i am not willing to loan it anymore, unless you pay me a lot of

higher interest rates. then evens start happening, and it starts eating up our budget. interest rates from everything, fromars to being able to get financing because diesel products around the world and around the country. higher and higher price. if that happens, the economy slows down and a l of people have got to work. this does that matters, and we have to stop that. -- this deficit matters and we have to stop that. there is something else that matters. that is the promises that we have made to one anoer that we have not put money aside to pay for. and the total of those entitlement promises comes to about $62 trillion. the big ones are medicaid, medicare, and social security. that money has been spent, the money you have put in over the years was abbed by congress and spend. -- grabbed by congress and spent. so how are we going to pay for that? for those who are retired or

near retirement, we're fine. we can care for those. but for young people coming along in their 20's, '30's, '40's, and early '50s, we have to make sure we're telling people the truth. this week was a big week. because of republican congressmen and a democrat senator came together and said we have got an idea for making medicare work. now knows the kind of proud, because it was the same idea to -- i am kind of proud because it was the same idea put forward about a month ago. so i am pretty excited about it, and the fact that a democrat and republican came together and proposed it is gd news. in means that there is a willingness on both sides of the aisle to deal with a tough problem. the idea was this -- with regards to medicare in the future -- i will call it medicare version 2.0 for young people coming along, for medicare in the future, yo'll be able to get a premium support payment as a retiree, and you can use that to the by traditional mecare or to buy a private plan. and they will compete. the private plans with the government medicare. and, by the way, people of gher income will get a

smaller payment. they will get a smaller subsidy or premium support payments. people of lower income will get a higher payment. and if you do those things, we can make medicare sustainable forever and get rid of that huge overhang of over-promise. on the social security said, -- on the socl security side, similarl we can bring down the rate of growth in the social security payments for high-income recipients of the future. again, no change for people already retired or near retirement. but that means for someone in their 20's, they know that they're going to make a lot of money in their life, and their social security payment is going to be less thafor some new lives through their life with more modest means. again, thoseinds of changes allow us to keep those programs solvent and protect them and provide them for the next generations. finally, medicaid. you wonder what medicaid is, those that are not into all this government stuff. i have to admit, i do not know

the differences between these things before i got into government. then i got into it and understood that medicaid is the health care program for the poor, by and large. that is a program that runs very, very fast. the federal government picks up half the bill. the state picks up the other half. i would go to government and take its money and give it back to iowa and say, i like, you -- iowa, -- iowa, craft your own program in the way you think best to take care of your own poor. we're not going to get the federal government tell you how to care for your own people. because, by the way, their differences between being poor in mississippi or michigan or massachusetts or montana or iowa or ohio, so let states craft their own programs and then run that program, that inflation plus 1% -- if we do that, by the way, we said about $100 billion a year. by the fourth year i would be in office. so i get those programs to work by making relative modest changes, and you might think,

how are you going to get this through congress? good news if we have democrats and republicans seeing eye-to- eye on this right now. number two, we need to have a leader. i am going to close with this thought. one of the things you know here is that someone has to be a leader in this enterprise. maybe it is bob. presume it it is. right here. is it john? it is john. [laughter] john is laughing and saying, it sure is, bob. [laughter] and you need to have someone, a leader -- by the way, being a leader means is not that you make all the decisions that you are always right. being a leader means that you can listen to other people, and you can hear ideas and then get them done. that you know how to build a team of good people that can work together. that is what being a leader means. it is not being a boss, it is being a leader. i have had the unusual

experience of watching a leader as a boy. my dad, i watched him run that car company. i watched him run for governor. i want to as governor. -- i watched him as governor. i used to watch him in his office interacting with members of his administration. i sort of learned by watching him. then i got a chance to run a business and to start a business. and then to go off and run the olympics. and i got a chanceo be a governor of a state. and in that leadership experience, i learned in -- by the way, i learned from successes and failures. not everything i touched turned out well. those experiences, i think are needed in washington. it we need a leader there. we have got a lot of people on the republican stage, any one a better president than we have now. but i also think is helpful to have a leader in washington who knows how to bring people together and who understands in his heart and in his core how to make the economy work for

the american people. that is what i hope you understand i represent. by the way, i am concerned about the poor in this country. i want to make sure we have a fety net to care for the poor. if there holes in that safety net, i want to fix it. i am not terribly concerned about the rich in this country. the region doing just fine. -- the rich are doing just fine. as a word about the whole people i am worried about e whole people -- i am worried about the whole people in the middle, the middle class. that is the group want to see get to work again with good jo. i want a good job for everybody who wants one, with higher income, with the confidence that the future will be bright. i want to be your president as a leader and to work with you to make sure that america remains the shining city on the hill. i love this country with all my heart. i learned that from my mother and father. and what to make sure that america remains as it has always been, the hub of the earth. thank you so much. i want to make sure america remains as it always has been, the hope of the earth.

thank you so much. john, bob, thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] ♪ >> born free i was born free i was born free rn free free like a river raging strong in the wind and chasing dreams and facing father time deep like the grandest canyon wild like an uncaged stallion my heart cannot be blind

you cannot me down and watch me believe -- you can knock me down and watch me believe. that you cannot keep no change on me i was born free i was born free i was born free born free ♪

>> our political coverage continues with candidate michele bachman. this event is part of her bus tour of the state. the iowa republican caucuses are scheduled to take place on january 3, 2012. this is about 30 minutes. [applause] >> how are you? you enjoyed it? i am glad you did. how are you doing? hi, there. how are you?

>> i would like to welcome you all today. thank you for coming out. why don't we give the congresswoman a huge welcome? can i hold that for you? >> thank you so much. thank you for your leadership in sioux county. thank all of you in the bakery. does anybody want to take a guess? m4p? michele for president. i am with you. thank you, everybody. this is wonderful. we're going to break at that and pass it around, and we will watch and god will apply it in front of our eyes. -- god will multiplying it in front of our eyes. i am thrilled to be here. there is nothing like a dutch bakery. isn't that true? it is the best food in the

world, so we're thrilled to be here. as was surprised that my husband is not over here at the counter right now, because he lives and dies by bakeries. so we are glad to be able to be here -- >> i will not go that far. [laughter] >> well, we're thrilled to be able to be here, and this is really your time. i want to open up by saying this i am michele bachmann, and i am running to be the next president of the united states of america. i think it is time to put an iowan in the white house. [applause] orangeave a lot more city and a lot less washington, d.c. why did you think? -- what do you think? i agree, too. i want to just bring up real briefly, in 1980, some of us were around then, but we have got a lot of young people, want to remind you. in 1980, then candidate ronald reagan asked the question -- --

famously asked the question -- some of you may remember. he asked all of america, are you better off today than you were four years ago when jimmy carter took over as president? so i am going to ask you, are we better off today than we were when barack obama took over as president? >> [all] "no." >> those are with you, i agree. today barack obama took over as -- the day barack obama took over as president comedy know how much gasoline was a gallon? $1.79. give this one and a picture of the shetland pony. -- give this bormann a picture of a shetland pony. [laughter] that is right. $1.79. today, it is a little bit more than that, isn't it? if we would legalize american energy production, we will bring down gasoline to the price again. you see, that is the situation that we're dealing with right now. so i ask that question during i think the republicans actually -- and is a more difficult

place and even when ronald reagan asked that question in 1980. so the question is, who will stand in the same legacy of ronald reagan? who will be the person who will act like a margaret thatcher in that legacy of a ronald reagan? what we need to ask is, who is the person who has already stood toe-to-toe with barack obama and taken him on with obamacare in washington? who has already stood and to convert obama on with the jobs -- and taken to barack obama on with the jobs and housing contruction act, known as dodd- frank? who has looked him in the eyes on the issue of taxpayer-funded abortion, on the issue of illegal immigrants in this country, which we have got to build a fence on our southern border? -- on our southern border. who has taken the president on on cap and trade, on issue- after-issue? what i want you to know if i am is fully prepared to stand on the stage and to all barack --

hold barack obama accountable for flapping our economy, decimating our national security, and i will emerge victorious. i will be that president of the united states. [applause] and i have absolutely no interest in running for vain glory or blind ambition. my interest is for all the young people in this room today. all these young people -- yes, that is you. i want to make sure that once again american exceptional isn't -- american exceptionalism the arrives and we do that by setting our country on in the firmest foundation that we have. it is called the united states constitution. and that is how i will lead as the next president and united states, by following the constitution of the united states. and that is with your help. on january 3 here in iowa, and i am thrilled that we start this process in iowa, with the

voice of iowans directly from the heartland. people say they're too conservative in iowa, there to prague-life. -- they are too pro-life. what people do not understand is this part of iowa, here in sioux county, in orange city, this is america. this is america. this is the most representative voice of the united states that we have, and i am thrilled that it is our voice together here in iowa that will determine who the next president of the united states will be. that is how powerful your voice is. now iowa made a decision four years ago, and they chose barack obama. well, now is our chance for redemption, don't you think, iowa? so we had the chance to choose, and i am asking for your vote on january 3. so let's open it up if you have a few questions, and would be happy to answer them. >> i would like to know your thoughts are on the agenda 21?

>> yes, for those who do not know, agenda 21 is essentially something that came out of the real conference. -- rio conference. it is about 20 years ago. anyone know al gore? ok, all right. al gore was there at the real conference, and is really about -- rio global control. it is essentially a one-world government view, where there's one political body and the united states would have to subsume our sovereignty into a global body. more than that, we would have to give away our wealth. the wealth of the u.s. would have to be redistributed to other countries. that is what the durban conference was about in south africa this weekend, also about redistribution of american money. i want you to know very clearly where i stand on this issue. i oppose agenda 21. i oppose putting united states in an international political body where we you lose u.s. sovereignty.

i do not agree with that. i do not agree with a lot of the goals of the u.n., and i do not agree with taking money away from you and redistributing it across the world. because i believe in america and american sovereignty. thank you for asking that question. [applause] >> i will work to get us out of these bad treaties we have been a part of. i oppose the u.n. right to the child and all of those. >> you did a great job on the debate last night. [applause] you got into an exchange about iran with ron paul and his policy that he would have. can you explain why iran such a threat to the united states security? >> thank you for asking that question. this is a big issue that came up last night. president obama has fallen down on this issue.

he has taken his eye off the most significant national security threat there is to the united states and that is in iran and obtaining a nuclear weapon. the reason why it is so important is because not only the religious leaders but also the president of iran has it repeatedly that if they get a -- has stated repeatedly that if they get a nuclear weapon, they will use that nuclear weapon exactly. -- views that nuclear weapon actively. they said it as recently as august and in september of this year. the president of iran came on u.s. soil and said he wants to eradicate israel off the face of the map. he wants to take a nuclear weapon and use it against israel, destroy them. he also wants to use that weapon against us and in the united states. -- here in the united states. if there is anything history has taught us in the last 100 years, it is this -- when a mad man speaks and is taking steps

to make it a reality, we are full if we do not listen to them. -- we are fools if we do not listen to them. that's why i said to ron paul that his words were some of the most dangerous i had ever heard. i stood on the intelligence committee. we deal with the nation's classified secret and national security. i cannot talk to about those things but i can tell you a report was issued in early november that said under no uncertain terms, we can be looking at iran having that weapon inside of a year. the reason why that could happen is because barack obama gave iran the luxury of time. he did absolutely nothing to stop them. that has gotten them that much closer. our options are to your and our -- our options are fewer and our options are worse than the ones

we had before. but i want you to know, as commander in chief, i think that is the number one duty of the president. i will stand up against in iran to make sure they never a nuclear weapon. -- they never obtained a nuclear weapon. i will stand with our ally, israel. [applause] let me get another question. i will be happy to take media questions. >> would you continue funding for cancer research at the current level? >> the question is will i continue funding for cancer research can do what is being -- and what is being done at the national cancer institute? >> this is a worthy cause to take a look at. i want to see more research, not less. but we have to do it within the confines of our priorities. our big problem now is our

national debt. the day i came into congress, four and a half years ago, we were $8.67 trillion in debt. that is a jaw dropping amount of debt. do you know how much we are in debt today? $15 trillion. it took us who hundred 19 years to get into that hold. -- 219 years to get into that hole. now, four and a half years later, we are at $50 trillion. -- $16 trillion. next year it will be at home over $17 trillion. the one thing we cannot do you and the young people right here is take away your future and your help. -- and your hope. i refused to do that. i am not going to be a president who runs deficits. everything will be on the table. i cannot guarantee we will continue funding at the current level. i want to see stores.

-- i want to see cures. the best way to see cures -- the venture capital for medicine has left the united states. we are not the place to do business any more to create new drugs and cures. that has to end. i want to slow the economy and -- grow the economy and abolished the tax code. through pro-growth policies in the tax code. i also want to get rid of obamacare. you want to talk about hurting health care, i am the chief opponent of obamacare and i wrote a bill to get rid of it. there is no equality on the candidates when it comes to getting rid of obamacare. there is not. we have candidates in this race that had been for the individual health care mandate for 20 years. that is newt gingrich. right up until may of this year. he has taken $37 million on the

health industry to promote that view. i did not share that view. mitt romney is the only governor in the history of the united states to put in place socialized medicine in his own state. i asked the question -- do we really think that people who have made this their signature issue are going to repeal obamacare? this is going to be tough to do it. i am not kidding you. it will be very tough to repeal obamacare but i am committed to it with everything in my being. i am committed to it. i will tell you why. for their first time in the history of united states, we have a taxpayer funded abortion in obamacare. we will never get rid of it. barack obama said in august that we are going to give the morning after abortion pill and contraceptives for free.

that was on august 1because he said so. that is the spending power in obamacare. that is wrong. i want to take that away. [applause] the president just announced last week his plan, he in his administration was to put in the grocery store aisle next to bubble gum a three day abortion pill for the morning after called the plan b. they knew that would hurt his reelection chances. no parent wants to see and a 11-year old girl be able to buy something like that. even the obama administration had to back off. what this tells youit president obama is reelected, you can take it to the bank. the next day, they will put in the same kind of radical social policy. all of the radical policies will be put in place through obamacare. i am the only candidate in the race who knows exactly what to

do to repeal obamacare and bring back high-quality health care for the greatest number of americans at the lowest possible price. that is what i'm going to do as president. >> what to believe about global warming? >> what i believe is that we should not have a political agenda. so much of the political agenda which i talked about and answered to your question on in twenty-one was this durban conference in south africa. it was about global warming. that was the basis of it. that is being used as a political pretext to have the united states tax us with a national energy tax, take that money into the federal government and build upon and redistribute our wealth across the world.

i disagree with that. i absolutely disagree with that agenda. i did you have to follow the signs. -- you have got to follow the science. what does science say? if you look at the issue of carbon the oxide -- where are the sources of carbon dioxide? is it a human activity? i think you have to look at the science and let it make the decision. that is not what is happening now. now it is politics driving this. >> what with the epa look like under your administration? -- what would the epa look like under your administration? >> there would not be one. the epa would be gone because there is already hit the of them in the united states. -- there are already 50 of them in the united states. there is one here in iowa. it is best if you set your standards for your state. who wants dirty water and who wants dirty air?

i think that is kind of the answer, is it not? i what is full of common sense people. i do not want dirty air or water. that is not what the epa is about. the epa is about killing jobs right now and they have been a disaster for farmers. i will set down the epa and the department of education. i have a few others in mind that will go. if that is not grandstanding, i mean it. you can take that to the bank. yes, ma'am? >> since government is not producing wealth and it used to be that 20 people would support one person in government, now it is almost one-one and they want it bigger. how do they expect to get the money? i do not understand how they are expecting to get this money. >> you are right. pick government has grown exponentially. you talk about federal

employees. the average federal employee makes $123,000 a year. that is in wage and benefit packages. that is more than double what people in the private sector make. if there is no relation. i am talking apples to apples. like a librarian in the federal government versus out locally. -- a librarian out locally. a cook in the federal government and a cook at in the private sector. it is almost double. that is why what i intend to do is shut down entire departments, repealed law and sent the authority, back to the states. -- and send it the authority back to the states. we cannot live the way we are living because i am not willing to let these people young people here pay a tax rate effectively of a 75% of your income. that is what some of the experts say. if you take your state and local and federal taxes and with the current rates, as you can

have a 75% tax rate. are you going to get out of bed and go to work to pay out 75% of what you make in taxes? then you have to pay your rent, your car, buy your food, do itunes downloads. it is not going to happen. am i right? it is not going to happen. i think too much of you. i have five biological kids. my husband and i raised 23 foster children. i am the old woman in the shoe print i raised 28 kids. i love this next generation. you deserve at least what our parents gave us. i was born here in waterloo. i am a seventh generation iowan. our family were early pioneers get out of the ground here. -- that felled the trees and plowed the ground here. i will tell you, i am so grateful for these iowa values

that i learned here. here is one of the best animating principles in the united states -- no one owes you a living. have you ever heard of that? that is what i've learned from my parents. you learn to make it on your own garrett the other thing is an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. they also said your word is your bond. those are good values. those are the same kind of the values we will rise again as a great nation. we will restore our greatness. we do not have to lose our opposition to china. if we start acting like a first world nation, rather than like a banana republic like the barack obama is doing right now. we will be that first world nation again and the shining city on the hill. that is what i came to return. -- that is what the founders meant to us. that is what i aim to return. i need your vote on january 3.

i will stand for life. i will stand for marriage. i will stand for religious liberty. i will stand for a strong united states defense. my father served in the military. i will stand strong for fiscal conservatism. i get it. i am a former federal tax lawyer. i get how taxes work. we started our own successful company in business. i believe in profits. i want more profits for more businesses to grow our economy. i also believe in the values that we are taxed enough already. the government should not spend more money than what it is taking in. we should act within the limits of the constitution. one thing that sets me apart -- i have already been proven. i have already been tested. for five years in the lion's den of washington, d.c. -- i stood up to the task. i did not get caught because i -- i did not get bought because i was not for sale. as president, i will not be for sale either.

there is only one voice -- the people's voice. your voice. that is the voice i am taking to the white house. they're very per se party will have is the iowa party. -- the very first party will -- we will have is the iowa party. can you guys supply all the pastries that day? we are going to have a good party. thank you. god bless you. [applause] i am really glad you came out. that is so nice. thank you support coming out. -- thank you for coming out.

>> they have a disrespect for women in their own culture but when they are dealing with their nation --[inaudible] >> she was old. >> i am too, i am 55. [laughter] thank you for coming. what is your name? reagan? that's a great name. can i hold you?

you know how to smile really pretty. is this your sister? >> why don't we get a variety? but make sure i get this one. [laughter] thank you.

>> thank you. god bless you.

i will be glad to take pi

>> hear what the candidates are saying at the new website for campaign 2012 pierre >> if you cannot live with a nuclear iran, what did do? i think all options are on the table. >> if we took that oath of office seriously, we could eliminate 70% of government. >> who is the proven constitutional conservative in this race, that would be made. >> read the latest comments and linked his seat -- c-span's partners. all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> sometimes i think would be best for government to stay completely out of sports. a lot times when congress gets involved, the hearings are basically television shows, designed to give the congress man or women involved exposure.

>> john feinstein on the intersection of sports and government. >> the flip side is sports is a multi, multi billion dollar business in this country. it has a huge effect on the lives of people, people less fans, people in terms of raising money for universities, for higher education. there's so many different ways that sports affects our lives. building a stadium with government funds. there are often times when i think the federal government should be more involved. >> his new book is "one-on-one." you can watch the rest of the interim a new -- interview sunday night. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to present the final fiscal year 2012 appropriations legislation which includes the conference report -- remaining nine appropriations bills. as well as two other bills we

will consider later that provide funding for disaster recovery and assistance. for the second year in a row, mr. speaker, the appropriations committee, along with the body, has achieved significant reductions in federal government spending to the tune of some $95 billion in reduced spending. never before in recent history has congress cut spending two years back-to-back. the republican majority is truly living up to our commitment to slice federal spending. getting our budgets back into balance. and living within our means. the legislation also includes absolute no earmarks, zero earmarks, abideling by the house rule--abiding by the house rule. this report and the disaster aid

spending package signify the end of the road for the fiscal year 2012 appropriations cycle. helping to avoid a potential government shutdown and supporting vital programs and services the american people rely on. in particular, mr. speaker, this bill provides funding necessary to support our national security , including funding for our military engagements abroad, and our domestic obligations, benefits, and programs for our veterans, active military, and their families, and homeland security efforts to keep our borders and communities fe and sound. in addition, this legislation includes policy provisions targeted at reining in harmful government interference and protecting life, liberty, and the constitution. mr. speaker, after weeks of arduous negotiations on this

package with our senator counterparts, we struck fair bipartisan compromise. no party got everything they wanted. but we have found a reasonable, responsible balance between reduced spending, wise federal investments, and policy changes that american businesses need to thve. with christmas coming on, it's time we complete this iortant legislation and go homto our families and our friends. we don't have much down time before our work will begin again on fiscal year 2013. and i'm hopeful that with the groundwork we have laid this year, cleaning up past years' messes, clearing the table for next year when we can bring these bills separately and individually to the floor, for

members to debate, amend, and vote on, that's the goal. so i'm hopeful the groupedwork we have laid this year will be able to -- groundwork we have laid this year will be able to work through next year's appropriations in regular order. and most importantly on time so that we don't find ourselves in this situation next december. one last note, mr. speaker, this result today would not have happened without the good will and the good work of the committee's ranking member, mr. dicks. who's been a great partner throughout this process. while things have been difficult and we haven't alwa seen eye to eye, his knowlge of the process and his commitment to a fair and positive outcome have been a huge asset. his leadership has been critical to the bills we passed and

certainly the one before us today. along with mr. dicks i must thank the cardinals and the raing members of the subcommittees where we -- t whom we turned to produce this bill that's before us today. . chairman young, ranking member dicks on defense, chairman frelinghuysen and ranking member viscloskied on ener and water, chairwoman emerson and ranking member serrano, chairman aderholt and ranking member price on homeland security, chairman rehberg, ranking member deuro on labor-hhs. chairman crenshaw, ranking member honda on legislative branch, chairman culberson, ranking member bishop on milcon -- they worked through these

bills with a sharp eye and respect for the taxpayer and the programs that they dealt with. time and again, mr. speaker, throughout this year, we've faced difficult and arduous tasks head on. met every challenge before us. without the leadership of these subcommittee chairmen and ranking members, we would not be here today. they made up the package that's before us today. finally, i want to thank the staff, both sides of the ais, majority and minority, hard work this year beyond anything i've ever seen. it's been a tough year. with h.r. 1 in the spring that took so much time and effort, 500-plus amendments, and then 150 hearings that our subcommittees have conducted, making up this year's propings bills. and then after that, the effort

that took place on the debt ceiling increase and the te and distraction that it took from the rest of the work we were doing and then finally the concoction and the makeup of this bill before us today. it has been a long, tough year. we have appropriated in one year for two years. both for 11 and now for 201 -- and 2012, all in one year, to us back to where we can go on regular order next year. the staff has been arduous and dedicated, week in, week out, day in, day out, night after night, holidays included, they've just been terrific and i want to thank -- i want to thank our staffs on the committee, both sides, for all the hard work that's taken place. billingley, the chief clark on the committee and david, on your side, mr. dicks,hat a

terrific team we have backing us up. we are deeply indebted to these wonderful staff workers for us that have us where we are. finally, i want to say this. today's sort of a special day, mr. speaker, for any number of reasons. i think we're going to wind up with a good bill here that will get the appropriations process over with finally for this year. but it's also a very special day for two members on the floor with us this very minute. one of them is my ranking member, mr. dicks. who is celebrating a birthday, today. and also -- yes. happy birthday. and also, another gentleman is celebrating a birthday today, that's mr. bill young, the chairman of the defense

subcommittee, happy birthday. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the plans. the eaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield myself two minutes. mr. speaker, the conference report before us contains nine separate bills, defense, energy and water, financial services, homeland security, interior, labor, h.h.s., and education, legislative branch, military construction and v.a. and state foreign operation. it is a bipartisan agreement reached after many hours of deliberation and debate. it reflects the fact that neither party can pass this bill on its own in either the house or the senate. the conference report is a remarkable product of the hard work of all members of the appropriations committee and as the chairman mentioned,

especially the ranking members d the cardinals, the chairman of the subcommittees, an i'llest -- and i especially want to congratulate the staff. i was a stafperson myself and as the chairman has said, i have never seen people work harder than the staff on the house appropriations committee and i want to commend bill and david for their work all during this year, their cooperation, which was -- and their leadership of the staff and we have a great staff, i mean, you know, these people have enormous experience, they have great background, and we're proud of all of them. i also want to congratulate bill young, my chairman on the defense subcommittee, former chairman of the full committee, we've been good friends and i want to wish him a happy birthday and it's kind of ironic that here we are on the last day, getting this big bill passed, on our -- on both of

our birthdays. so there's so many smiles on us, maybe it was the other body by slowing things down, but anyway, i want to yield back my time. we're going to have our rnking members present their statements after the chairman on the other side. i yield back my time. i want to thank mr. rogers again for his courtesy and great work. he had to have the patience of job in order to get this thing done but he did it and i commend him for his -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has expired. i assume you're reserving your time. mr. dicks: i want to commend him for his patience and determination. next year we're going to get all 12 bills to the floor. i reserve the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the quelt from kentucky. mr. rogers: i thank the gentleman r his words. i yield the minutes to the chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee,

mr. young of florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. young: mr. speaker, i want to thank the gentleman, the chairman, for yielding the time. it's not ealy adequate to explain this defense bill, the largest part of this omnibus or minibus, call it what you will. thank you, chairman rogers, especially for bringing back regular order in the appropriations process, which we haven't done for a while. you've done a great job in leading this committee to get this job done and my friend mr. dicks, i've already wished him personally a happy birthday, but we appreciate mr. dicks' relationship with the congress owur subcommittee, with the full committee, together they made a great team and have done a good job. as i said, the defense bill is the biggest part of this bill. it is actually $21 billion less

than was requested in the budg. we were given a number, we were instructed to make reductions. the subcommittee, the members and staff worked diligently to make sure that any reductions that we had to make would not affect the readiness of our nation or would not adversely affect any of our troops. we successfully concluded that task, we kept our commitment to maintain readiness and to remain strongly in support of our troops. it makes me feel good that we have an agreement that was agreed upon by the moneys an the democrats in the house. and the plups and the democrats in the senate. we will get a unanimous vote on this package tissue we won't get a unanimous vote on this package but we worked together. people have wondered and i'm sure all of us have been asked

by our constituents, why can't you guys in congress work together and get things done? you know, when congress acts as a congress and avoids a lot of outse political influence, it's amazing what we can do. i want to call attention to the fact that we just concluded the intelligence bill. bipartisan basis. we did the national defense authorization act last week. on a bipartisan basis. this omnibus bill we pass -- that we will pass today on a bipartisan basis. we worked together and got things done when we were able to work as a congress. i'm happy to be supportive of especially the defense part of this bill and i want to congratulate chairman rogers and ranking member dicks for their strong leadership in getting us back to regular order and as mr. dicks said, next year, we'll do all the

appropriations bills one at a time, just like it's supposed to be done. with that, mr. speaker, there is so much more to talk about this bill, so many details, we have written copies of the report on what it does and what it doesn't do. we'll be happy to provide that for any member who asks. other than that, let's vote for this package and let's get our job done. we want to wish you all a very merry christmas and hopefully won't have to wish you happy new year until we come back next year. we'll see how that is. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: mr. speaker, the department of defense appropriations bill is part of this package. this bill includes base funding -- i yield myself as much time as i may need. the speaker pro mpore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dicks: includes base

funding of $518 billion a reduction of $21 billion below the president's budget request. the bill also provides $115 billion for overseas contingency operations. $2.billion below the budget request. the bill balances funding essential for u.s. troops and their families with readiness, weapons acquisition, and technology development. for military personnel and family programs, the bill includes full funding of the military pay accounts including a $1.6 -- a 1 ppt 6% pay raise for our troops. for community suppor programs, the bill includes $40 million above the request for impact aid and $250 million to replace inadequate schools located on d.o.d. bases that are owned and operated by our local educational authorities and the u.s. department of education. for ready n, the bill includes

$163 billion for operations and maintenance with this account, the bill includes $150 million above the request for ship depot maintenance and $40 million to fund the officer training corps program. for other programs, it includes $55 million to prevent the shut down of m-1 tank production. $1 billion for national guard and reserve equipment, $200 million for rapid innovation funding, $230 million to procure equipment to enhance special operations, $130 million for ongoing weapons defense programs with israel and $100 million above the request to ensure technologiers in next generation bomber. for overseas contingencies, it includes $115 billion, $2. billion below the request and $43 billion below the 2011. the decline compared to last

year reflects the withdrawal of u.s. troops from iraq. the bill provides for the withdrawal of u.s. personnel from iraq by the end of this month, operation of u.s. forces in afghanistan, programs to train and equip afghan security forces so they're capable of assuming security responsibility. this bill is esseial to maintain the readiness and cabilities of u. forces. it provides for the need ofur mep and women in uniform and their families, the bill also includes responsible reductions from the budget request regnizes the fiscal realities that our nation faces. this is a must-pass bill which i support, i commend chairman young, again, and the staff of the defense subcommittee for its extraordinary work. this is the largest appropriations bill, it is essential to national security, and with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from kentucky.

mr. dicks -- mr. rogers: i yield three minutes to the chairman of the energy and water subcommittee on the committee, mr. frelinghuysen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three mins. mr. frelinghuysen: i thank the chairman for his support as we work through the appropriations process. this morning, i am pleased to support this appropriations bill that keep ours government open for business but also substantially reduces central spending in almost every department. special thanks to my ranking member and good friend vote visclosky for his hard work, his knowledge of our nrnl an water bill and his passionate support for so many priorities. our portion of the bill has an important national security component so we increase funding for the safety and reliability of our nuclear deterrent as well as for new generation of naval reactors. while dunding -- funding for the department of o-- departmentf energy is below the president's request we continue to ensure our nation has a diversity of energy sfly

and knew leer energy will be a critical part of that future and that important research and development will continue at a remark -- at our remarkable national laboratories. additionally, it provides funds for the army corps of engineer to provide for public safety, keep america open for business an meet emergencies. i'm pleased toupport a bill that ensure ours national security, our safety, our economic security, with less taxpayers' dollars and i yield back. mr. dicks: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from indiana, mr. visclosky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized f two minutes. mr. visclosky: i thank the gentleman for yielding and will have remarks for the record. there is great substance in this bill but reallyant to address the process. and to begin my remarks by saying how very proud i am of the appropriations committee of

the house of representatives and the united states senate of this congress. the appropriations committee is composed of serious and intelligent people. our members and our terrific staff -- i was also on the staff at one time -- wo hard to invest in our country and to improvthe lives of the people we represent. as chairman rogers indicated, our members do disagree, but they thoughtfully consider the facts, they consider each other's perspectives and positions and reach reasonable compromises that improve the government of the united states of america. this is how this entire body should conduct itself. and i especially want to thank chairman rogers and mr. dicks and their staffs for leading the way. i also want to express my gratitude to chairman frelinghuysen who is also my friend and a consummate gentleman, and our subcommittee

meers and our exceptional staff for their hard work in crafting a wonderful piece of legislation. the energy on water provides $9.3 billion, $30 million above last year's level ensuring the ability to counter the most serious threat confronting the threat of nuclear terrorism is adequate funded. the griment provides for renewable energy programs at level funding from last year, and the science council, critical to the competitive of our nation is $46 million above last year. arpa e drives innovation to support our scientific competitiveness. the army corps of engineers is funded at $5 billion ensuring that some programs will not be terminated. we must invest in our infrastructure. while this increases funding

for corps we are not adequately investing in infrastructure but i do support the legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: mr. chairman, i yield three minutes to the chairman othe homeland security subcommittee, mr. aderholt from alabama. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. aderholt: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and i ask for unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of the conference report, and i want to thank chairman rogers as ll as ranking member norman dicks for their leadership and their commitment as we went back to regular order, as we produce this agreement. we had a challenging negotiations with our lleagues from the other body, but i believe we aforged a disciplined agreement that puts the priority on limited spending and on true priorities like border security, immigration enforcement, disaster relief, while at the same time instilling robust

fiscal discipline and oversight. this conference report provides a total of $39.6 billion in discretionary spendi for the department of homeland security. that is $4 billion below the president's request. 9.1%. it's $3 billion below the f.y. 2010, and it is $ billion belo last year. -- $2 billion below last year. these are genuine reductions, not just budget gimmicks. while this contracted funding frontline operations are made a priority as well, including funding and direction to i.c.e. to maintain a daily detention bed capacity of 34,000 beds. that is the highest capaty in history. also, funding for the highest ever level of staffings for border patrol agts, c.d.p. officers and i.c.e. agents.

it has two departments at the office of homeland security. it has unprecedented oversight at fema, and it includes a statutory requirement for the secretary ofomeland security to enforce the immigration laws that are on the books. finally, this conference agreement and the disaster bill that we are considering today fully funds fema disaster relief requirements for 2012. that means that all the devastated areas across the country will get what they need to get back on their feet, and this funding can be offset through reductions that will also be considered later this afternoon, which i support. let me close agn by thanking all those volved in this process on the appropriations committee. i'd like to thank ben nicholson with the majority and the staff from the majority staff as well as stephanie guptka with the minority and her staff and also to thank senator landrieu and

senator coates and ranking member price, of course, who was my process in this -- colleague in this pros. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance omy time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from north carolina, the ranking member for the homeland security subcommittee, mr. price. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. price: mr. speaker, i'm plead that we're finally nsidering an omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal 2012 to fund critical federal agencies including the department of homeland security. after a year of lurching from one manufactured crisis to another, these stabilizing the american economy and sending congress' approval ratings to record lows. it's high time we restore some measure of regular order to this critical legislative function and i applaud chairman rogers, ranking member dicks, my subcommittee chairman aleder holt for their commit -- aleder

holt for their commitment of having bipartisan cooperation that distinguishes our committee, even in today's hyperpartisan environment. i want to thank our talented staff for drafting and negotiating for what was a ve difficult package to put together. with respect to d.h.s., overall funding will drop for a second year in a row. but this drop is compensated for by the separate disaster relief bill we will be considering shortly. when these two measures are combined, fema will receive a total of $7.1 billion for disaster relief, ensuring that families and businesses affected by recent disasters will recve assistance vital to their recovery and rebuilding. beyond disaster assistance, the reduced allocation meant we had to make some tough decisions. i'm pleased the sufficient funding is provided in this bill forur frontline d.h.s. employees to conduct critical operations along our borders, protect our nation's airports,

sea ports, and thwarts cybersecurity attacks on our federal government. other accounts radcally underfunded in the house -- radically underfunded in this house bill has been nhere near adequate levels. research and development funds hab been cut since 2010. targeted specifically at homeland security threats. and state and local grants have been reduced by more than 50% from the 2010 level, requiring our states and communities to delay or abandon vital preparedness efforts. mr. chairman, may i have an additional 10 seconds? the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from washington sh to yield additional time? mr. dicks: 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. price: these grant cuts will require states and communities to delay or abandon vital preparedness efforts. we simply have to do better next year. while this is an imperfect bill, under the circumstances we know it could have been much worse.

's the product of bicammeral and bipartisan process. with that in mind i urge colleagues to support this omnibus bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the very distinguished chairman of the financial services subcommittee on appropriations, the gentlelady from missouri, mrs. emerson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from missouri is recognized for three minutes. mrs. emerson: mr. speaker, i thank the chairman for yielding. i know he hasn't enjoyed an easy task, but he has done a tremendous job in bringing us to this point today so thank you very much, mr. chairman. i also want to express my appreciation to ranking member serrano and laura on their staff. they have been terrific to work with. even though we didn't agree on something we still had dialogue. they were terrific. our own staff on the subcommittee, very ablely led by john martin and winnie

kelly, ariana and karen have done a tremendous job. there are a lot of reasons to be happy about this bill and to vote for it. from the perspective of the financial services subcommittee , the bill reduces this portion of the president's budget request by $4.2 billion. compared to 2010, discretionary funding in this bill is reduced by 11%. we're heeding the american people's call for a more limited, more responsible government. the bill prohibits funds for certain white house czars, rescinds $25 million from a mandatory slush fund at the securities and exchange commission, and dead indicates much-needed resources for the counterterrorism activities at the -- and dead indicates much-needed resources for the counterterrorism activities at the department of defense. our small businesses are critical to our economy, and this program extend accsible

and affordable credit to help them grow. as fortunate as i feel thave reached agreement with my colleagues in so many areas, i'm still startled and a bit dismayed by the white house's refusal to submit the consumer financial protection bureau, an agency whose mission is to promote accountability and trsparency in the financial industry to the usual and customary transparency measures accorded to congress and the american people. provisions in the house's bill would have limited the budget at the bureau and submit it and subject the cftb to congressional review. i am hard pressed to understand why a $200 million limit is not enough for a bureau without a director and why the centerpiece of the dodd-frank act cannot withstand meaningful regular review by the congress which established it in t first place.

the checks and balances envisioned by our founders apply to every other consumer-oriented agency in the executive branch of government. the cfpb ought to be treated no different than the federal trade commission, the securities and exchange commission, the commodities futures trading commission, the food and drug administration and others in this important regard. i can promise that the cfpb will be revisited again and again by congress. leaving that subject, though, for another day, i do urge my colleagues to support the bill and the savings it contains on behalf of the american people and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield two minutes to the distinguish gentleman from new york, the ranking member of the financial services subcommittee, mr. serrano. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. serrano: mr. speaker, i would like to thank congressman dicks for yielding me time so i can comment on the fincial services and general government section of this bill.

i'd also like to thank both him and chairman rogers for their hard work in bringing this bill to the floor. please, let me also express my appreciation to chairwoman emerson who worked so well with me and her staff throughout this process. unfortunately, because of the budget agreement and the allocation that was given to the subcommittee, there are significant cuts to many important agencies. however, this is a much better bill than what emerged from our committee markup, and we worked hard to prode sufficient funding in order to avoid layoffs of hardworking federal employees. i'm especially pleased that the health care repeal prosions and the many anti-dodd-frank provisions that were a part of the committee passed -- committee-passed bill have not been included in this final conference agreement. i am, however, distressed that this agreement once again interferes in the local affairs

of the district of columbia. although d.c. will be able to continue to use its own local funds for syringe exchange programs, this conference report prohibits them from using their own local funds for abortion services, a restriction that no other american city has dictated to it by the federal government. finally, i am pleased that the provision reinstating the harsh bush-era restrictions on cuban american travel to cuba and limitations on remittances was dropped from the conference report. had this provision stayed the bill, there would have been an immediate shutdown of family travel to cuba which would have been particularly difficult just days before the holiday season. before i conclude, i would like to take this opportunity to thank the majority and minority subcommittee staff for all of their hard work and to acknowledge the efforts of my own personal staff. mr. speaker, within the stric budgetary limitations that were

given the committee and this section, an improved version, i am in favor of the bill and i would ask my colleagues to vote for it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i yield three minutes, mr. speaker, to the distinguished chairman of the state foreign ops chair subcommittee, chair of the subcommittee, the gentlelady from texas, ms. granger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for three minutes. ms. granger: mr. speaker, i rise in support of the state foreign operations part ofhis conference which contains $42.1 billion in discretionary budget authority. this means that since january, spending in this bill will decrease by $6.6 billion or more than 13%. the agreement includes overseas contingency spending to implement in frontline states and conflict areas. these costs are temporary and extraordinary and will be reduced over time.

this bill has been written to address our foreign assistance and state department funding through the lens of what is most important to our national security interests and the security of our allies and our neighbor, mexico. the bill provides security assistance for critical allies including full funding for the u.s.-israel memorandum of understanding. the bill also carries new language on the palestinian authority, cutting off their economic aid and stopping their ability to have a u.s. office if they attain member status at the united nations. adecisionally, it addresses concerns about assistance to egypt and pakistan. new restrictions are also placed on the up and other international organizations, for example, funds are withhold from thesing ornyations until they publicly display their audit and financial reports. -- reports. i want to thank members of the state foreign operations subcommittee and in particular my ranking member, mrs. lowey,

who has been extremely helpful in developping -- developing this compromise. i want to thank my colleagues across the capitol who worked in good faith for the best possible outcomes. i believe we were successful in protecting our national security while providing appropriate oversight of taxpayer dollars. i want to sincerely thank the staff, from ms. lowey's staff, steve, aaron and talia and on my staff, ann mari celia, alice, susan, craig, jamie, johnny, and matt. they all worked appreciable hours and with great dedication. with that, mr. speaker, i yield the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield twowoman to the distinguisd gentlewoman from new yk, the ranking member of th state foreign operations subcommittee, mrs. lowey. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. mrs. lowey: as rank member of the subcommittee, i want to congratulate chairwoman granger, chairman rogers, ranking member dicks and the outstanding majority and minority staff. thank you all for working together with me on a bill that will help maintain our global leadership, proct national security, and promote economic growth. our wise investments in better health and education systems, economic opportunity in the developing world, humanitarian assistance, international financial institutions, development assistance, economic support funds, and international family planning will help to save lives, develop the next geration of u.s. trading partners, boost job growth domestically, confront the conditions that foster radicalal -- radicalism

and instability that threaten the long-term security of the united states this bill also fully funds our agreements with vital allies including israel, jordan, and egypt an supports governance and development activities in egypt to aid the transition to democracy. however, we do not write blank checks and stringent conditions on continued assistance for egypt, the palestinian authority, pakistan and afanistan will help ensure accountability and responsible use of taxpayer dollars. this bill is aimedt advancing our economic and strategic interests around the world through effective and efficient diplomacy and development and i urge my colleagues to support it and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise mr. dicks: i rise to go out of order here for one second to

yield as much time -- two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the democratic whip, mr. hoyer, my good friend and a former member of the appropriations committee who has a -- who has worked very strongly with us all year to move these bills forward. the speaker pro tempore: the jell is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his comments and thank him for yielding and i rise in support of this legislation. but this ought to be a lesson for us in some humility. i was the majority leader, had i as majority leader brought that bill that sits on that floor, 712 pages, within the last 24 hours to the floor, i think the response from that side of the aisle would have been harsh, accusatory, and not helpful. now why do i say that? because it happened. it ought a portion of humility

for all of us to understand the legislative process is difficult. we bring difrent view, rewept -- we represent different constituencies, we have different priorities. i rise in strong support of this bill. and i urge my colleagues to support this piece of legislation. none of them have read it. not one of us has read every page in this bil i see the chairman raising his hand and i take him at his word. that means 434 of us have to rely on his advice and i'm sure mr. dicks has read it as well my point is not -- we work by committees as president wilson said, and we worked haron this bill through the year. my republican colleagues during the course of the last election said we're going to bring bills one at a me to the floor and consider them. the labor-health bill included in a substantial portion of those pages has not only not

been brought to the floor, it dn't pass the subcommittee, nor the full commtee, nor this floor. but this bill has been worked on carefully and i want to congratute mr. rogers and mr. dicks and all the subcommittee chairs for working out the differences that we had so we could do what the american people expect us to do. come to agreement on a bill that none of us perceives as perft, but perceive as a positive step for our country. and -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is yielded an additional minute. mr. hoyer: i urge my colleagues to support this bill. yes, it will keep government open, which is essential. but it will also do the most fundamental job this congress has to do every year and that is to fund appropriately the priorities that this congress puts before the country. so again, in closing, mr. speaker, let congratulate my friend hal rogers from kentucky, with whom i served on

the appropriations subcommittee for over two decades. and mr. dicks work whom i've served every day of my congressional caer. both are decent, hardworking, conscientious representatives. they and their subcommittee chairs and ranking members have come together to presenthis product. it is time to act, it is time to act positively, and i will -- when the roll is called, i wi be supporting this piece of legislation. and i yield back me balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields pack. the gentleman from -- yields back. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i thank the gentleman for those comments. i yield now, mr. speaker, three minutes to the chairman of the interior subcommittee, the gentleman from idaho, mr. simpson. the speaker pro tempore: mr. simpson is recognized for three seconds. three minutes. the gentleman is recognized for three minutes,aybe.

mr. simpson: thank you, mr. chairman. let me thank chairman rogers and ranking member dicks. as i have told many members if this is your first term or second term or thirderm here in this bdy, this is actually the first time you've seen an appropriations bill come to the floor under an open rule. and i know that's something we both want. i know it's very -- the majority party want that, i know the minority party wants that also and while mr. hoyer was correct, we need to get them all done, we are moving in the right direction and we will get there, where every bill comes under an open rule so members have input into that legislation. first, let me thank my partner in this effort, mr. moran of virginia. he's been a great asset in work ought this bill. we don't always agree on every issue. i'm from idaho, he's from virginia, we sometimes have differences of opinion. but we're able to sit down and work together to solve the differences and work out a bill that i think is in the best interest of the america

public. the superior bill conference agreement -- agreement is $21 ppt 75 billion, below the f.y. 2011 enacted level. it funds the e.p.a.t $2.45 billion, $524 billion below the president's request. it includes a yen provision that amends the clean air act to transfer air quality permitting authority as of the date of this enactment from the environmental protection agency to department of interior this will provide parity for the planning areas with the western and central gull of of mexi planning areas. it funds the bureau of ocean energy management with $60 million to help expedite the review of offshore expeditions. it fully funds the newly created of safety and environmental enforcement ars $76 million including $54

million for oil spill research. it provides authority for the collection of $62 million in inspection fee bus it dedicates funding for approving permits, expe dieting exploration plans and hiring much-needed inspectors an engineers. it fully funds wild fire suppression at a 10-year average, cuts n.e.a. and n.e.h. funding from the 2011 appropriation, it provides $4.3 billion tohe indian health service. this has been a bipartisan effort with mr. dicks, when he was chairman of this committee, mr. moran when he was chairman of the committee and now with me that we fully fund the indian health services. this is a $5.8% -- this is a 5.8% increase to fund health facilities and contractual obligations to tribes. it provides $10le knoll

sithsonian for the museum of history and churl, it does several thing for westerners in public land states for grazing. it provides protection for trailing of livestock. this overall is a good bill. i think it's one we can all be proud of. i want to thank mr. moran for his dedication an work on this. i want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle who work -- if you're not on this committee, if you don't work with this committee, you don't know how muctime they put in. they do an incredible job for congress, for the american people and i thank you and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from virginia, the raking member of the interior subcommittee, mr. moran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. moran: i want to join the chorus in commending chairman rogers and chairman simpson and our ranking member norm dicks

and the phenomenal work of the appropriations staff on both sides. ritchie and shalonda have been working on this bi for the last several months, sometimes through the night but all the pros on the staff, led by dave, leslie, bill, they are pro, they all deserve special recognition. mr. speaker, this is a vast improvement over the interior d environment bill considered by the house in july. the agreement provides $1.7 billion measure the initial house allocation, $8.4 billion is provided for e.p.a., it's $1.3 billion over the house bill, it maintains level funding for the national parks service and restores funding for the science programs in usgs, land and water conservation fund programs are increasededly 22 million over last year's level and it's important to note we have restored funding for endangered

species and critical habitat listings. subcommittee chairman mike simpson spearheaded a bipartisan effort in support of funding for native american programs. and as a result, the indian health service has increased i by 6%, important increases in education, public safety and tribal government this agreement doesn't abandon our commitment to e arts, in fact, n.e.a. and n.e.h. reach $11 million, it's equal to the president's request. just as important, though, as what is included in this agreement is what isn't. the conferees dropped more than two dozen unacceptable environmental riders thatere part of the house bill, gone are greenhouse gas, grand canyon uranium mining, mountaintop mining to name a few. this is not to say it's destroyed of environmental restrictions but this is a compromise. i can say in nearly every instance what's been included is significantly been approved

over what is -- what was proposed. can i have an additional 10 seconds? mr. dicks: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. moran: this is the way things were meant to be done in this body. politics was meant to be the art of compromise with people acting in good faith for the betterment of their country. that's what this omnibus appropriations bill is all about. so it deserves to be passed unanimously of the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i yield two minutes to the chairman of the legislative branch subcommittee on aropriations, the gentleman from florida, mr. crenshaw. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. crenshaw: i thank the gentleman for yielding the time and i thank him for his leadership. i urgell my colleagues to support this conference report because i think it takes another step to change this culture of spending that we've had in this time to a culture of savings and we actlly spent less money this year than

we did last year. and if you look at the legislative branch subcommittee, which i chair, you will fd that we reduce spending this year by 7.5%. in fact, the money we spend on the legislative branch is less than we spent last yoor. it's less than we spent in 2010 and it's less money than we spent in 2009. and when you look specifically at the house of representatives , which we are all a part of, the last two cycles we have reduced spending on the house of representatives by over 10%. when we ask other agencies of the federal government to do more with less, to rein in spending, to tighten their belt, be more effective and be more efficient, we have not exempted ourselves from that and we have led by example. every member's office account in this body has been reduced by 10% these last two years.

the leadership offices have had their funding reduced by 10%. and the committees as well, even the appropriations committee's been reduced by more than 10%. i think this is another step forward to fund our prioties but exercise spending discipline and i certainly want to thank my ranking member, mr. honda, for his cooperation and hard work, thank all our staff members for their dedication and commitment and urge my colleagues to support this very good bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, the ranking member of the legislative branch subcommittee, mr. honda. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is regnized for two minutes. mr. honda: thank you. mr. speaker, today congress is considering a bill to keep the government running for the remainder of the fiscal year. that is our basic responsibility as members congress. i am pleased we are operating under regular order and considering the conference report. the american people want us to work together. this package is the reflection

of what we can accomplish through hard work and compromise. the legislative branch appropriation bill will provide the congress and its agencies with $4.3 billion to work with which is a reduction in the previous year. i had hoped for more fund for the congressional budget office and the government accountability office who have experienced increased demands during tse budget focused times. however, i am glad we restored funding for agencies that were the targets of the most extreme cuts proposed in the original house bill. this conference report restores $18 million to the government printing office, $12 million to the library of office, avoiding layoffs the original house bill woulhave caused. capitol police remains at last year's funding. it is the only legislative branch agency that was not cut from last year's level. this conference report includes

language reqring the chief administrave officer and sergeant at arms to take on more of a leadership roles in setting policies regarding district office security, including helping members renegotiate new terms on security requirements. this bill provides the bas level of funding for the leslative branch of the government and should be sufficient to keep current services in place. that's why i support this bill and ask my colleagues to do the same. i want to thank chairman crenshaw and his staff for the working relationship throughout this process. the majority clerk and the subcommittee and michael from his personal staff. i want to thank sholanda young and makumoto from my staff. while not perfect, this bill is the result of a lot of hard work and comomise. i thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and yield

back. mr. dicks: mr. speaker, can you tell us what the time is on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington has nine minutes remaining. the gentleman from kentucky controls 3 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from kentuky. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from oklahoma, a very hardworking member of the appropriations committee, mr. cole. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for three minutes. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, first of al, i want to congratulate chairman rogers and ranking member dicks for an exceptionally hard job which yielded frankly a very good product. this bill spends less, $70 billion less than the president requested, $6 billion less than we spent last yea the second year in a row we have actually cut discretionary funding. it cuts 5% for e.p.a. regulatory spending. it eliminates 23 programs

totaling $240 million. and while this bill cuts wasteful spending, it actually focuses additional funds on things that count, defending our country, helping some of our most vulnerable and challenged citizens and providing funds to educate some of our most disadvantaged young people. the bill provides a 1.6% pay increase as requested by the president and funds the defense health and military family programs at there are 1.1 billion above f.y. 2011 and $283 million above the president's request. along with supporting our armed forces, this bill exceeds the f.y. 2011 levels for our veterans. $58 billion in discretionary spending, this bill fully funds, is $2.1 billion above last year's level for those who have served our country. in addition, the indian health service is funded at $4.3

billion,. i want to thank chairman simpson and ranking member moran for their hard efforts. the orming hse bill was actually -- the original house bill was actually higher. the house really d a great job in this area. finay, i want to notetoryo funding was increased in the difficult environment by $15 million. mr. speaker, this is a good bill. it reprioritizes our spending away from wasteful programs that don't work toward things that are truly important for the american people. i urge its passage. i thank myriends. mr. dicks: will the gentleman yield? mr. cole: i certainly yield to my friend. mr. dicks: i certainly commend the gentleman for hiwork in support of indian country, both the indian health service, the b.i.a. you have been a tiless advocate. our subcommittee on interior has had bipartisan work on this issue, and i coend you for your strong leadership on that. mr. cole: i thank the chairman, the gentleman, very much and appreciate that and with that i yield back urging passage of

the bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield 3 1/2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from connecticut, the ranng member of the labor , health and human services subcommitteecongresswoman rosa delauro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for 3 1/2 minutes. thraur delauro thank you to my colleague -- msdelauro: thank you to my colleague, chairman dicks, chairman rogers, the staff, both majority and minority, for their tireless work in this effort, including david, steven, david rshe, lisa and liddy. susan as well. they did unbelievable work in this effort. i rise in support of this budget for 012. it funds the government at a -- buet for 2012. funds the governme without many of the damaging and extreenyuss ideological riders that marked earlier efforts. make no mistake, there are real

cuts here, including hard cuts to vital programs like the liheap program, the low income energy assistance program. still, i believe this legislation has been improved. in terms ofabor and health and human services and education, the agreement restores $2.9 billion in cuts made in the chairman's draft. these restorations are key investments in job creation, education and the health and the well-being of families that will lead us to recovery. we know especially as over 13 million of our fellow americans look for work, that investments in human capital, like job training and re-employment services are part of the core essential role for government. they help responsible people succeed, and i am pleased that this agreement restores the 74% cut to job training programs that was proposed in the original chairman's bill which was never considered before the committee. health care is no longer

shortchanged. with an aging population and a nursin shortage before us, we need to ke wise investments in our health work force. the programs that help to train primary care doctors, nurses and other health care providers cut is only 6%. mental health services, once cut by 17% are now only cut by 3%. and it has key investments in the affordable carect implement and in title 10. i'm glad to see the national institutes of health receive a funding increase of $299 million and a new national center for transformational science. n.i.h. can now keep funding life-saving research and pushing the frontiers of medical knowledge. perhaps no other investments we make are as important as the ones we make in our children. this agreement includes a $60 million increase for the

childcare and development block grant, providing desperately needed aid to working parents for safe and reliable childcare. it provides a $424 million increase for head start, allowing our kids to continue a th to academic success. $60 million increase to title 1, supporting schools serving low-income children and $100 million increase to idea, supporting students with special needs. one of the hardest issues for this conference has been pell grants. the agreement maintains the maximum grant amount of $5,550. too many students i have met, even $100 cut would have derailed their prospects for higher education. at the same time we have made some targeted cost-saving changes to the program that should eliminate the funding shortfall for this year and perhaps next year as well. i am pleased to see that the virtual elimination of the corporation for national and community service proposed in the majority's draft had been rolled back. instead of ending americorps it

ll continue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. delauro: i encourage my colleagues to support this conference agreement and would encourage all to do so. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky. reserves. e gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, the ranking member of the military construction and veterans' affairs subcommittee, mr. bishop. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. bishop: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in support of this conference agreement, the milcon-v.a. section of the conference agreement excludes $71.7 billion, a decrease of $1.4 billion below last year's level and decrease of $2.1 billion below the president's request. military construction provides $13.1 billion for mitary construction projects and reductions to the budg

request of possible -- is possible because of savgs on projects that were appropriated in previous years. however, even with these reductions, the agreement funds family housi construction at $1.7 billion with a tot of 48 new family housing units, 80 replacement units and improvements to 216 family housing units. for veterans' affairs, the conference agreement provides a total of $122.2 billion for the f.y. 2012 programs for the department of veterans affairs off which $5 kp 8 billion is discretionary funding. it contains advanced funding for the v.a., the identical level that was requested by the president for our v.a. medical accounts. mr. speaker, i'm also pleased that the cference agreement provides $45.8 million for arlington national cemetery, which is $700,000 over last year's level.

finally, mr. speaker, the conference agreement fully funds the armed forces retirement hom request and has $14.4 million for the armed forces retirement home to facilitate the repairs at the d.c. campus to repair damages sustained by the eahquake in aust. mr. speaker, let me just thank the committee and the subcommittee staff for all of their hard work in putting the bill together in a cooperative way, taking leadership from our chairman and our ranking member who have worked firelessly to get this appropriations process back to regular order. i urge the adoption of the conference report and i urge all my colleagues to support it. it's a good bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky still reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. dicks: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the distinguished jo from ohio, ms. kaptur, who is the -- distinguished gentlewoman from ohio, ms.

kaptur. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from ohio is recognized for a minute and a half. ms. kaptur: i thank my dear colleague and friend, mr. dicks, to rise and support this conference report. this bill is welcomed news and helps restore confidence that america can govern. . it is essential to economic grothe and job creation in our country and the bill cuts overall discretionary spending by $7 billion over last year, and also $98 billion less than the president's f.y. 2012 budget proposal. this bill demonstrates the appropriations committee is still one of the few that properly functions in this institution, and i can't thank enough chairman hal rogers and ranking member norm dicks for their bipartisan leadership and hard work along with their staff to bring this house to regular order. this legislation includes vital funding for the defense of our nation and our domestic imperative. the bill includes support for

our great lakes ports as in cleveland, low rain, sandusky, and invest in their infrastructure necessary to modernize those facilities to increase exports and increase jobs. it also includes environmental restoration funding needed for the great lakes to allow economic revitalization as we create more maritime jobs and nature tourism. the bill keeps our commitment to establish america's energy independence with robust investments in renewable energy, in solar, wind, and biomass, the investments in technology for those represents not just jobs for today but for tomorrow. as we grow our economy forward, budget certainty matters for fiscal year 2012. i urge my colleagues to support this so we can govern our nation in the nation's interest. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky yield. the gentleman from washiton. miss darbg: i --

mr. dicks: i yield one minute to congresswoman barbara lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. ms. lee: let me thank the gentleman for yielding and the chairman and ranking member and subcommittee chairs for bringing together a bipartisan bill to the floor. but i cannot support this bill because once again poor and low-income communities are taking the brunt of the terrible cuts while there are good provisions in this bill, what we have, however, is aill loaded with special interest tea party republican riders at the expense of low-income people, especially women of color right here in washington, d.c. cutting off low-income women of color in wasngton, d.c., from access to the same health and reproductive services available throughout the country is really not critical to preventing a shutdown. forcing the continuation of abstinence only sex education that fails to meet the needs of young people, that's not crital to preventing the government shutdown. increasing the spread of h.i.v. and hepatitis c through dirty needles is not critical to preventing a government

shutdown. finally, let me just say this bill continues to fund over $2 billion a week, mind you, $2 billion a week on a war without end in afghanistan. we must allow the afghan people to control their own destiny and immediately begin to pull our brave young men and women in uniform out of harm's way. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. dicks: mr. speaker, how much time do i have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: both sides have one minute remaining. mr. dicks: would the chairman yield me a minute? to do a colloquy. mr. rogers: i'll be happy to yield. the speaker pro tempore: who is yielding what time here? mr. dicks: i yield to the gentlelady from guam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington yields a minute to the gentlelady from guam. ms. bordallo: the recently passed f.y. 2012 defense authorization bill restricts transfer of funding from the

department of defense to support civilian infrastructure requirements on guam. except funding specifically authorized in law. does the language of section 8110 of division a this bill require any further authorization? mr. dicks: i thank the gentlelady from guam for raising this question. it is our intent that section 81 10 of division a of this bill has the required authorization and should be executed by the department of defense as specified in division a of this bill to support civilian infrastructure requirements on guam. ms. bordallo: i thank the gentleman for the clarification. mr. dicks: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. urge an aye vote on the me

they are not released a full- time cyber only dedicated member prosecutor. how does the fbi account for that? do you account for your cyber people if a cyber case comes opt while they are not -- comes up if they are in between cases? >> no one is between a cyber case now. there is work to go around. they are 90% cyber.

they have other duties. they have swat duties and those kinds of king's creek as far as their caseload, they would have a cyber caseload. the desolate not certain what statistics you are looking at. we have -- i am not certain what statistics you are looking at. >> 5000 dea agents, 500 atf agents, 3200 secret service agents, over 1400 postal inspectors, and over 400 agents doing great work. when we propose number side-by- side and match against the cyber problem, there is a disconnect. >> we have a separate cyber career paths. we recruit and bring in agents for the cyber program into new

agents class. they get the foundational instruction on how to be an agent, how to conduct interviews, the way at the military would bring somebody in. your secondary will be artillery or tanks or something. with us, and we bring you in and you be an agent first. if you were a software programmer before, i do not want you to do narcotics cases. you are here to be in the cyber program. we put them in a smaller office for a time. within -- for a time within the cyber arena. then they graduate to a larger office. we have a number of cases, a number of capabilities now where we have persons with special expertise may be living in cleveland, cbo, or portland, oregon who we will bring in on a virtual case, coordinated by

headquarters, but where the expertise is around the country and the bad guys can be anywhere. for us to be effected down the road, we will have to make use of those specialties regardless of where the individual reside. crime is most often not a local crime. not a state crime, but a crime launched overseas. we need to bring the expertise to developing that and allow that group of persons wherever they are in the united states to bring the case to a successful close. what's the first of all, let me make clear that i am very much applaud the direction that you have been going in. i think that within the resources and the structure you have provided, i am very happy with the professionalism and the

additional resources. you have had the terrorism responsibilities at the same time. i do not want to in any way have any think i said to be taken as criticism of you or at the fbi management. it is congress' job to make sure you have the resources to accomplish your mission. that is a discussion we need to have in the congress. let me ask you one more question about these cyberspace's and where in the arrest -- cyber cases and where they rank in their resources and their agent intent cydnus -- intensiveness. between the commuter -- computer familiarity that is required and

the ability to pick apart the actual traffic and understand it and be able to bring it out of the code and make it real for prosecutors for us to make the case, dealing with the fact that the vast majority of this crime as an overseas component to it if not being primarily directed from overseas, which means you get to deal with intelligence services and foreign treaties. it is probably a racketeering pipe case to begin with. you add it all up and it strikes me that this is the sort of thing i looked at and think, oh my god. i want to put a law -- put an awful lot of people on this to get it done right. is that take -- is that your take on this as well? >> it depends on the case. what should not be locked in this is that often human sources are as important as -- lost in this is that often human sources are as important as other sources.

-- other sources. often in these cases it is a combination of cyber and also sources. we cannot forget that. it really depends on the spread of the case, how far it takes you, whether or not you are operating in turkey, moscow, romania, france, england, sweden -- something like that. our people spend a fair amount of time coordinating with their counterparts overseas. that does not just mean at europe, also the far east, quite obviously. you take down something like [unintelligible] with the innovative ways of addressing that, it was a relatively small group of people in new haven, some across the country, and some veteran naturally who were able to undertake that. as a prosecutor, you develop a

template for doing these times -- these types of cases. >> i see senator kuhn's as return from the vote going on right now on the senate floor. i recognize him. >> thank you, senator white house. the senate is not voting on an amendment to the united states constitution. please forgive the -- >>. director miller, a queue for your service and your testimony here today. -- thank you for your service in your testimony here today. one of the challenges we face in this difficult budgetary environment for state and local law enforcement around the country is the steady downward pressure on local law enforcement budgets. in my role as county executive before becoming center, which relied on an effective partnership with the fbi. the fbi worse very well with state and local law enforcement

through a task force structure. there is a lot of information strong project information sharing. tell me how the fbi and be in j. are partnering with local law enforcement to the national data it staged and others and what impact you have stayed on the reach and effectiveness of your multi-agency task force given what may deviate a decreasing and availability of a local law- enforcement. >> but let me start by saying at my belief is we are most effective when we are working with a joint investigations. that brings together expertise from a variety of different places and enhances your capability. i worked in the u.s. attorney's office. they had a squad with fbi agents working with homicide detectives. the homicide detectives or some of the best investigators i have ever seen.

the fbi brought capabilities that state and local did not have. it worked well. i in my mind, that has been a model. there are over 150 state and local task force is related to violent crime and drugs, gangs in particular. we had parted for best 35 joint terrorist task forces in 2001. we are now are around 100. we have a safe trails task forces in indian country. we have started cyber task forces around the country. we have regional forensics labs which relate to the handling of cyber material and the forensics aspect of it. we have developed of these over a substantial time.

when it comes to cyber in particular, we are at the threshold of a development of an approach to cyber crime across the country. i say that because in the past, state and local law enforcement has not been able to develop the capability in this arena as fast as we have and look to the secret service and others to handle much of the important work. the impact of the cyber a arena is such that in the future federal authorities will not be able to do it all. we will continue to develop the task force structure and help state and local law enforcement develop the capability to address cyber in the same way state and local has developed it in the past. when we have an exchange about what is happening around the country, one question we ask is

have you seen state and local law enforcement officers leading task forces because of the budget restraints? very rarely is that happening. i believe the state and local law enforcement appreciate the opportunity to put dissipate in that level and find that participating in these task forces leverage is the capabilities and it is not just having a person on the task force. they cannot be more effective as a state and local law enforcement without having a person on the task force. >> that is a testament to the value in party ahead -- partnering with the fbi because of your superior intelligence and specialized unit capabilities. you refer to cyber crime. edison and we are both very concerned about real there have been of reports suggesting that cyber crime has exploded in the last decade. it is growing at a dramatic pace. it has consequences, not just

for individuals, but a broader harm to our economy. the executive assistant director to the fbi described it as an existential threat to the united states. i know you detach an exchange about this. are you resources effectively in terms of the number of agents you are training? i know you have a difficult choices to make. if i understand right, there are about one to thousand cyber- trained fbi agents, but nearly five times that many dedicated to the war on drugs. some studies have suggested that at the state and local level we do not have a in a professional law enforcement officers training to the right level how are we doing at staffing and training at the fbi to meet the level of threat? what can we in congress be doing to support that effort? >> prior to september 11, we had two prior -- we have to prioritize.

i move 2000 eighth to national- security. . approximately 1500 were in the drug program. we have to prioritize. we had double the number of agents that are doing cyber work at this juncture. we have a number of specialists in addition to agents who do the forensics and work on it. we do our drug cases in the joint task force arena. we rarely at this time do any individual drug cases such as we did before hand. do we need additional resources? yes. has promised given us more agents?

yes. is it enough? probably not. part of it is also our prioritization and reorganization so we can address these cases more efficiently. it goes to what i was saying to center whitehouse. a around the country, we will have this area of expertise. we can have it localized on local cases. that expertise has to be utilized to address cyber cases where every day happen. you do not know where the home is. consequently, we have to adapt as well as getting additional resources >> how does the fbi at differentiate between a criminal cyber threat and one that allocates the national security and implicates more military oriented assets in the cyber field? >> we established our the joint

task force. it might be worthwhile for you to visit it if you have not. it has ourselves and other relevant agencies in this arena. intelligence agencies as well as law-enforcement agencies. andonjunction with n ssa others, once a substantial intrusion is identified, it will be looked at. the beginning work frantically will be done by a number of contributing agencies. without putting it into a particular cubbyhole, you do not know if a person is a foreign state or an organized crime group operating at the behest of a state or a high-school student in a bedroom down the block. we treat them each the same at the outset with the same

approach to dissect it. once you get an identification, you can make the decision. this is domestic, this will be a criminal case, it is a national security threat that ought to be handled by our military in some way, shape, or form -- the tag it with, how are you going to solve this? how are you going to disrupt this? >> that exact process is of great interest and concern to me given your exchange with senator sessions and senator feinstein previously. in the national defense authorization act, a number of us have concerns about the possibility of uncertainty. you have real concerns about the possibility in the short run and the long run that the military and law-enforcement will begin having an unresolved and i clear

joint role in investigations, apprehensions in the early stage of trying to encourage cooperation. with the lack of a resolution, there is a threat to civil liberties and a possibility of missing vital opportunities to events our national security. in the national security context, in the counter- terrorism context, -- i pick that is true both in cyber and the development of potential counter-terrorism cases within the united states. speak if you would about how you would encourage us to resolve some of these -- a term issues. there was no specific hearing -- longer-term issues. there was no specific hearing. a member of owes -- of us voted to pull those provisions out, to have a brief time where we would have focused hearings.

a concern to us that leaders in our law enforcement and national security committees opposed the language in that bill without having the benefit of a hearing or full development of this intersection between security and liberty, i was concerned about us moving forward with this language. how would you advise us to deal with this in a way that does not deprive law enforcement with the critical tools 25 cyber crime and terrorism? >> what i try to do is express the concerns i have with the mine was that has been presented. again, it focuses on a part of it has been resolved in terms of more on. a parties, which i amatm grateful. the other concern relates to write the uncertainty of what will happen at the time of arrest and investigations down the road.

the statute is still unclear in terms of allocating that. i know the argument on the other side will be cleared up by procedures. that will be developed by the president. the president has to waver a party. given the statute now, it does not give a clear path of certainty to what is going to happen in a particular case. the possibility looms that we will lose opportunities to obtain cooperation and from the persons that in the past we have been fairly successful in gaining. >> it is time for me to conclude my questions. i want to congratulate you and the agency for being a successful partner in the war on terror and the effort to isolate, identify, and prosecute people who are engaged in domestic terrorism. i thank you for your attempt to

battle cyber crime. i share senator frank and's concerns about some of the unknown privately implications of the software on our cell phones. thank you for your testimony. >> senator blumenauer vall. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, director, for your public service, not only in your present role, but throughout your career as a prosecutor and a member of the military. thank you for being so forthright in your answers today. they are difficult areas of questioning. i want to come back to cyber, but in a different context. i am very concerned about cyber attacks on this country which general take -- general petraeus said would be our next 9/11. you have graphically describe what you view as the threat.

the threat to women and children of the internet, i think, is equally troubling. i proposed a bill called the internet abuse act which would be a companion to the reauthorization of the violence against women act, which focuses on stalking, intimidation, harassment which can lead to physical violence when it occurs on the air internet -- lead to physical violence in the real world. i would like to get from you some sense of what you view as the perils and the dangers on the internet to children, women, and what the fbi is doing to combat them? >> we have a number of programs to adjust that. one program we have had for years is "innocent images." you are probably familiar with it as your time be -- -- in your

time as attorney general of connecticut. we operate under cover on the internet to identify stalkers, particularly if it is related to children. the threat that you articulate, women and children of the internet, is growing daily. the ubiquitous nature of the attack that means it is difficult to address and educate persons because a number of people -- many people are baffled by the privacy protocols and uncertain as to how to utilize them. but our programs are directed at identifying those persons who are luring children into a sexual -- sexual liaison on the internet. obviously, beyond that, there have been prosecutions, most

recently in california, for persons who were stalking in some sense on the internet, but also others, particularly in schools, driving other children to suicide and the like. the variety of harm decagon from abuse on the internet is substantial. -- of harm that can come from abuse on the internet is substantial. u.s. attorneys offices, fbi, as well as state and locals addressed this together. there is so much out there and you have to prioritize. again, i absolutely agree it is going to be a huge issue in the future. anything that can be done legislatively to enhance the penalties, and hence the

certitude of conviction appropriately -- enhanced the certitude of kong -- of conviction appropriately, would be welcome. >> that is exactly the goal of the measure that i proposed -- to enhance the certitude and make penalties more severe so that criminals who are aiding, abetting, enticing, laurie, or harassing of the internet can be held more accountable i am glad to hear you support that kind of measure. i also want to ask you, if i may, about human trafficking by federal contractors and abroad. you may be familiar with this problem -- when a contractor on our bases abroad take advantage of individuals or recruited from third world countries -- more than 100,000 foreign nationals

working on our bases abroad are sometimes exploited by our contractors. i worked with the chairman. i thank senator leahy is for his support to try to target and criminalize the human trafficking of persons working for a contractor abroad under conditions and terms that would not be tolerated in this country. i would like to ask you what the fbi is doing on the enforcement side with respect to this problem. >> this is an issue i am not familiar with. i will go back and see what we are doing it on that arena. our presence is usually in embassies, not military bases. that falls to the various law enforcement entities in the military generally. i will go back and see what if the thing we are doing.

if there is any issue with our jurisdiction to investigate or prosecute, we will get back to you on that. >> i appreciate that. finally, because my time is almost up, you mention the idea in at your responses to one of the questions, perhaps from chairman leahy, making a cyber crime a predicate under the racketeering act. i wonder if you could expand on that thought? >> haleh to say i think it is a good idea. it should be a predicate in my mind. the sentences for racketeering are substantial and would send a message. too often in the past we have looked at individuals who were involved in cyber crimes. they were relatively young individuals. there may be a perception among some bat q may get caught, you may get convicted, but you will

walk out relatively soon and the crime may be worth the time you spent. the message that should be sent is if you engage in cyber crime, you will go to jail for a substantial time. >> i think your support for that kind of measure illustrates the kind of caps that maybe are arising from the internet abuse act i proposed. using a cyber act is a promising avenue we should export. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you, also, director for being willing to states to our vote and everything else and for your good work. you have serve the fbi admirably. president obama asked you to

stand for another -- stay for another two years. excellent work. i wanted to ask about something that has been on my mind. this committee passed the synthetic drug bills. the one i have has to deal with 2ce. the house passed similar versions of these bills this past week. in minnesota, this young man died. the problem is a nationwide. it is been a credible talking to some of our police chiefs, especially in the world areas where they have seen increases in cases. it is difficult if you are in a city like more had to get experts to prove what the substance was. in the first half of 2011, there were roughly 6600 calls to poison control centers around the country. 10 times the amount in 2010.