bob mcdonnell. there also hear from three gop candidates. rick santorum is scheduled at 10:25 a.m., mitt romney just before 1 , nook bridge just before 4:00. -- newt gingrich just before 4:00 p.m. mortgagen's largest lenders. you hear from president obama and eric holder. in a little more than an hour, and look at proposed television coverage of the supreme court including comments from antonin scalia and steven briar. they approved a bill that would require the supreme court to televise the open proceedings. >> here is that wonderful moment when the senator revealed his nostalgia for the state rights

segregation. take a look. >> when he ran for president, we voted. we are proud of him. josh marshall on the internet and his emergence into the breaking news business. >> the ecosystem is such a different world today. it is hard to believe it was 10 years ago. things like that happen all the time now. i know there are certainly many big stories that tpm has had over the last decade. and now we have an editorial staff. we are breaking stories right and left. the thing is it ihas almost become commonplace. it is not nearly surprising today as it was back then. >> more about tpm end-marshall sunday night at 8:00 p.m.

eastern. -- about josh marshall sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> they have announced a settlement between the five largest mortgage lenders over foreclosure abuses. under the agreement, the lenders will reduce loans for nearly 1 million households and send checks to others who were wrongfully foreclosed upon. president obama spoke about the agreement for 10 minutes. >> all right, good afternoon, everybody. before i start, i just want to introduce the folks on stage here, because the extraordinary work that they did is the reason that a lot of families are going to be helped all across the country.

first of all, our attorney general eric holder, secretary of housing and urban development shaun donovan, associate attorney general -- and former classmate of mine -- tom perrelli. we've got attorney general george jepsen from connecticut, roy cooper, attorney general from north carolina, lisa madigan from my home state of illinois, and former seatmate of mine when we were in the state legislature together, dustin mcdaniel from arkansas, gregory zoeller from indiana, and tom miller from iowa. and i also want to acknowledge bob ryan, who worked with shaun donovan extensively on this issue, as well as tim massad of treasury. and i'm going to acknowledge also gene sperling, who doesn't always get the credit he deserves for doing outstanding work. the housing bubble that burst nearly six years ago triggered, as we all know, the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes. it cost millions of innocent

americans their jobs and their homes. and it remains one of the biggest drags on our economy. last fall, my administration unveiled a series of steps to help responsible homeowners refinance their mortgages to take advantage of historically low rates. and last week, i urged congress to pass a plan that would help millions more americans refinance and stay in their homes. and i indicated that the american people need congress to act on this piece of legislation. but in the meantime, we can't wait to get things done and to provide relief to america's homeowners. we need to keep doing everything we can to help homeowners and our economy. and today, with the help of democratic and republican attorney generals from nearly every state in the country, we are about to take a major step on our own. we have reached a landmark settlement with the nation's largest banks that will speed relief to the hardest-hit homeowners, end some of the most

abusive practices of the mortgage industry, and begin to turn the page on an era of recklessness that has left so much damage in its wake. by now, it's well known that millions of americans who did the right thing and the responsible thing -- shopped for a house, secured a mortgage that they could afford, made their payments on time -- were, nevertheless, hurt badly by the irresponsible actions of others, by lenders who sold loans to people who couldn't afford them, by buyers who knew they couldn't afford them, by speculators who were looking to make a quick buck, by banks that took risky mortgages, packaged them up, and traded them off for large profits. it was wrong. and it cost more than 4 million families their homes to foreclosure. even worse, many companies that handled these foreclosures

didn't give people a fighting chance to hold onto their homes. in many cases, they didn't even verify that these foreclosures were actually legitimate. some of the people they hired to process foreclosures used fake signatures to -- on fake documents to speed up the foreclosure process. some of them didn't read what they were signing at all. we've got to think about that. you work and you save your entire life to buy a home. that's where you raise your family. that's where your kids' memories are formed. that's your stake, your claim on the american dream. and the person signing the document couldn't take enough time to even make sure that the foreclosure was legitimate. these practices were plainly irresponsible. and we refused to let them go unanswered. so about a year ago, our federal law enforcement agencies teamed up with state attorneys general to get to the bottom of these abuses.

the settlement we've reached today, thanks to the work of some of the folks who are on this stage -- this is the largest joint federal-state settlement in our nation's history -- is the result of that extraordinary cooperation. under the terms of this settlement, america's biggest banks -- banks that were rescued by taxpayer dollars -- will be required to right these wrongs. that means more than just paying a fee. these banks will put billions of dollars towards relief for families across the nation.

they'll provide refinancing for borrowers that are stuck in high interest rate mortgages. they'll reduce loans for families who owe more on their homes than they're worth. and they will deliver some measure of justice for families that have already been victims of abusive practices. all told, this isn't just good for those families -- it's good for their neighborhoods, it's good for their communities, and it's good for our economy. this settlement also protects our ability to further investigate the practices that caused this mess. and this is important. the mortgage fraud task force i announced in my state of the union address retains its full authority to aggressively investigate the packaging and selling of risky mortgages that led to this crisis. this investigation is already well underway. and working closely with state attorneys general, we're going to keep at it until we hold those who broke the law fully accountable. now, i want to be clear. no compensation, no amount of money, no measure of justice is enough to make it right for a family who's had their piece of the american dream wrongly taken from them.

and no action, no matter how meaningful, is going to, by itself, entirely heal the housing market. but this settlement is a start. and we're going to make sure that the banks live up to their end of the bargain. if they don't, we've set up an independent inspector, a monitor, that has the power to make sure they pay exactly what they agreed to pay, plus a penalty if they fail to act in accordance with this agreement. so this will be a big help. of course, even with this settlement, there's still millions of responsible homeowners who are out there doing their best. and they need us to do more to help them get back on their feet. we've still got to stoke the fires of our economic recovery. so now is not the time to pull back. to build on this settlement, congress still needs to send me the bill i've proposed that gives every responsible homeowner in america the chance to refinance their mortgage and save about $3,000 a year. it would help millions of homeowners who make their payments on time save hundreds of dollars a month, and it can broaden the impact building off this settlement. that's money that can be put

back into the homes of those folks who are saving money on the refinancing, helping to build their equity back up. they may decide to spend that money on local businesses. either way, it's good for families, and it's good for our economy. but it's only going to happen if congress musters the will to act. and i ask every american to raise your voice and demand that they do. because there really is no excuse for inaction. there's no excuse for doing nothing to help more families avoid foreclosure. that's not who we are. we are americans, and we look out for one another, we get each other's backs. that's not a democratic issue, that's not a republican issue. that's who we are as americans. and the bipartisan nature of this settlement and the outstanding work that these state attorneys general did is a testament to what happens when everybody is pulling in the same direction. and that's what today's settlement is all about -- standing up for the american people, holding those who broke

the law accountable, restoring confidence in our housing market and our financial sector, getting things moving. and we're going to keep on at it until everyone shares in america's comeback. so, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your outstanding efforts. we are very, very proud of you. and we look forward to seeing this settlement lead to some small measure of relief to a lot of families out there that need help. and that's going to strengthen the american economy overall. so thank you very much. >> are there any thought to consider on the contraception policy before you leave? >> eric holder and shaun donovan

led the news conference outlining the mortgage foreclosure settlement. comes from thecall financial crisis. this is one hour. >> good morning. i am pleased to be joined with todd miller, a shaun donovan. david montoya, lisa madigan and roy cooper to announce our latest step forward in writing the wrong on our collapse. the department of justice and

housing and urban development along with 40 other agencies have reached a landmark. $25 billion agreement with the nation's five largest servicers. jpmorgan chase, wells fargo, citibank, and ally financial that was formally gmac. they are recovering losses for victims of reckless and abuse of market practices. in addition to addressing many of the egregious abuses that our investigations have uncovered, this establishes a new homeowner protections. it also provides substantial financial assistance to borrowers. it is the largest joint federal- state civil settlement in the history of this nation. although every american can be

encouraged by the progress that has been achieved, more work must be done. that is why we a taken steps to ensure the claims on not interfere with our current investigations and prosecutions for words. it would advance the work of the financial fraud task force. let me be clear on this. while the agreement resolves certain civil claims based on a mortgage activities, it does not prevent state and federal authorities from pursuing criminal enforcement actions. it preserves extensive claims related to mortgage securitization activities including the claims that will be the focus of the new residential mortgage-backed group. it does not prevent any claims by individual borrowers who wish to bring their own lawsuits. this agreement underscores the point that many of you heard me

make less than two weeks ago when secretary donovan and i announced the first meeting of the financial task force new residential mortgage-backed securities group. i notice that by focusing on collaboration and by bringing the full enforcements to bear, we can improve our ability to identify and prosecute misconduct, to recover losses, prevent fraud, and to hold those to violate the law accountable. mobil federal agencies including doj and the federal housing administration and finance bureau, a federal trade commission and the special inspector general all played key roles in achieving this settlements. we partner with the offices and

banking regulators from across the country who have brought valuable expertise on the ground experience with those directly affected. i want to recognize the outstanding work of the justice department in our united states offices. the program serves as the watchdog of all bankruptcy operations was one of the first federal agencies to investigate abuses of homeowners in financial distress. more thanrepute 37,000 documents filed by major servicers. but they to discovery of more than 175 cases across the country.

subpoenas, reviewed over 2 million documents and interviewed numerous witnesses. they have worked tirelessly to seek justice for taxpayers to foot the bill. the evidence that they compiled and the expertise they provided was essential in reaching this settlement. large-scale reviews were also conducted by hud, fha and others. our investigations revealed disturbing practices. far too often servicers push those into foreclosures even though they were encouraged to try other alternatives furs. is it not just heard borrowers who might have been able to afford mortgages, if yields communities nationwide. they punish american taxpayers who have had to put the bill for

foreclosures that could have been avoided. with this settlement, we are recovering precious tax payer resources. the general will be establishing a fund to take payments to borrowers who lost their homes during the foreclosure crisis. services will also be required to dedicate substantial resources approximately $20 billion to provide assistance to struggling homeowners and neighborhoods. the agreement include specific provisions that will enhance protection and ensure justice for service members and their families. with this settlement, we are not just holding them accountable for wrongs they committed. we're using this opportunity to fix a broken system and to lay the groundwork for a better future. our nation's lending services will be required to file a new set of standards which will be overseen by an independent

monitor. my colleagues will discuss some of the details of today's settlements, more specifically. i encourage anyone seeking information go to a new website ww w.nationalmortgagesettlment.co m. i would like to turn over this to my colleague. >> thank you. i want to thank everyone here on the stage but also the countless folks who are here in the audience that worked so closely including into the wee hours last night to make this day possible. i want to return in a moment to talk about the remarkable work

in particular of our state partners, the attorneys general. i do want to single out in particular, pirelli -- rotom pirelli who was a magnet is a partner in this work. thank you for pushing him on this as a partner. i really do much appreciate all the work you did together with my team. attorney general holder just mentioned this historic settlement. it not only holds institutions families,ged neighborhoods, and contributed to the collapse of the international economy, not just hold them accountable but also provide immediate relief to homeowners. forcing banks to reduce

principal on loans, refinanced loans for underwater borrowers, and pay billions of dollars to states that can be used for direct help to consumers struggling today. it comes not a moment too soon for homeowners. we all know how the housing bubble bursts and how they sell loans to people who could afford them. they package them up to make profits that turned out to be nothing more than a mirage. we know that these actions hurt millions of families who did the right thing but still lost their house or solve their home prices drop through no fault of their own. as the bank has acknowledged, they heard from consumers and every state of this nation. it did not stop there. they continued long after people

got the keys to their new homes. we know this not only because the investigations that attorney general holder just spoke about but because in the summer of 2010 long before the signing scandal erupted into public view, hud initiated a review of the largest servicers. combined with the word you hear about from our inspector general and his remarkable team, between us we devoted more than 15,000 hours to reviewing servicing files for thousands upon thousands of fha insured loans. the scope of this review included not just the signing concept that has been so publicly discussed, but a long list of mortgage servicing issues such as lost paperwork, long delays, missed deadlines or

problematic loan modifications offered to homeowners. as they found, the five largest loan services were also routinely signed foreclosure related documents without really knowing whether the facts they contained were correct. many of the same financial institutions responsible for so much of this crisis or making it worse. harming families, neighborhoods, and our economy. the settlement holds them accountable for their actions. as you have heard in this settlement we are announcing, more than $25 billion in total. that number could grow as we look at additional institutions to the settlement. this is not just about punishing the banks for their irresponsible behavior. it is also about requiring them

to help the people they harmed by funding efforts to help homeowners say in their homes. that is precisely what the settlement delivers, reducing the loan balances for approximately 1 million families who owe more on their mortgages and then they are worth or have suffered in other ways. printable reduction at this scale will not only help these underwater homeowners build equity but their neighbors who have watched their homes dropped by $10,000 in value each time a foreclosure sign goes up in their neighborhood. the settlement will help unemployed homeowners catch up on late mortgage payments, seek housing services to connect at risk families to the help they need, and helps communities struggling with vacant properties that drive down home values. by instituting tough penalties and stringent time lines and forced to buy our respected

monitor joseph smith, banks have a strong incentive to provide this quickly and effectively. it also provides cash payments to homeowners who are victims of deceptive servicing practices. we all recognize the cannot undo the pain of this crisis by writing a check. these payments provide victims with a welcome and needed relief. one of the most important ways it helps homeowners is that in wrongs butongright past it forces banks to clean up fairfax and fix problems uncovered by our investigations going forward. it was announced in the last few weeks. a single straightforward set of common sense rules that families can count on when they are

making the single most important purchase of their lives. the requires them which represents two out of every three mortgage loans serviced in this country to follow a long list of rights for those facing foreclosure. no more lost paperwork. no more excuses. no more runaround. this is just one step in making sure we right the wrongs of this crisis. last month, he and i announced with many state partners as well an investigation in the conduct of financial institutions that broke the law and lead to the crash of the housing market including security and relation cases. while it is not designed to address all the issues, it is a historic agreement. it is a big victory for those who are harmed the most. combined with the broad based

financing plan that president obama announced to help homeowners last month, additional steps we made last month, it provides a path towards stability for our housing market and broader economy. banks and servicers expect that homeowners will meet their obligations under a mortgage. homeowners should have the very same expectation of their financial institution. with this settlement, those institutions will be forced to live up to those expectations. holding these banks accountable is what the settlement is about. and helping the millions of families harmed by this crisis. it is why i am proud to join my partners today and why i am particularly proud to introduce not only attorney general tom miller but to also thank thomas for theirs

leadership. many americans have lost faith in institutions in this country and our ability to cross party lines and put country ahead of politics. this agreement restores my faith and i hope so many other states that we can do big things regardless of party divisions and geographic lines. this would not have impossible without to the early and relentless leadership of tom miller and john suthers. i recognize the remarkable work of their colleagues as well. i need to single them out as a welcome tom miller to say thank you for their remarkable work. many of the things need to do to help homeowners going forward will require congressional action.

i think we have on this stage an example of what can be done when we put the country ahead of party. we also cannot wait for that action. this announcement today shows that we can do big things in this country across partisan lines and restore faith in the ability of our institutions to help families that need it most. tom, thank you. congratulations. john, thank you. >> this settlement is about homeowners. the homeowners in distressed, people in our country that need help as much as anybody else. that is what we have focused on. that is what the settlement does. as outlined by the attorney general and hud secretary, there are a number of things that help homeowners a lot. one aspect is the servicing

stance. comprehensive servicing standards is a strong bill of rights with how they treat homeowners in distress. in the past, it is been a dysfunctional system that they deny get called back. did they put documents in and they get -- system that they get a call back. they documents and and they get lost. this set of guidelines has the potential to change all that, and it is going to be incumbent on all of us to make sure that is realized. and we have the states. we have the federal government. we have a monitor we have never had before in this kind of situation to make sure they do what they promised, and if they do, it is a sea change for

homeowners. this is a great opportunity for them to do the right ain't your your -- to do the right thing. this agreement came about because of strong bipartisan relationships. he led this. a coordinated and work with republicans. the attorney general were a lot with the new republicans.

she contributed a lot on this. cooper was a steady hand as we went forward. lisa contributed so much through her own leadership and her own courage. i do not think we see that much courage, but we saw a lot for lisa as she supported in this agreement under very difficult times. that is good stuff, and we respect and admire you for that. attorney general gustin mcdaniel of arkansas, attorney general greg zeller are also here.

they contributed as well, so we have this great group working together on a bipartisan way we must admit we do not do all the work. we had a remarkable group of work done this for the last six months. ddington wasi the leader. the key butler of florida -- vicki butler of florida, they were the work horses, and

and we have another relationship with state banking regulators. we work with them to deal with and prevent foreclosure. a great relationship now. i keep trying to think of myself as a relatively young man, but i have been attorney general for 30 years, and i have been involved in a lot of states and work with the federal government in a lot of ways, and i have had good relationships and sometimes not good relationships, but in all the time i have never seen such a wonderful, of effective, based on respect relationship as we have had. it has been truly wonderful.

they treat us as equals. we get the job done as best as we can. it has been a model for federal state and relationships. just going back one second, the attorney general's offices over the last four and a half years since the mortgage meltdown, we have done more pushing, prodding, threatening to sue than anyone else. in terms of knowledge, us and the state banking regulators unparalleled in what we have done, but to conclude, and what we have done is do something that is very important to

homeowners. we were the only ones that can deal effectively with a principal reduction, and what will happen is this agreement provides for substantial principal reduction, and once it happens, something is going to become apparent. that is all those things they worry about, i guess what? it will not happen, and on the positive side, the re-default rate will be among the lowest, and principal reduction will be a common tool for everyone in this country. to get there, this is the only vehicle to do it. for two years we kept telling

the bank to you need to cut interest rates. you need to cut the payment. they resisted. they started to do principal productions. it worked. now it is commonplace. this is an extraordinary opportunity to help homeowners, and finally, i would reiterate what sean ended with. i believe the public wants us to work across party lines and to do things for ordinary americans, and homeowners in distress are ordinary americans who need help more than others. it is exactly what the public wants us to do, and i believe that is what we have done, work across party lines to help

americans. i am proud to introduce one of my colleagues. he is a terrific guy. he is great to work with. jon sellers -- suthers of colorado. >> there are 25 republicans in attorney general's. gunther how is it of 49 of those came together to agree on this settlement? the answer is simple. the attorney general's unrealized it is very much in the interest not -- now the attorney general's realized it is during much in the interest of their states. good -- it is very much in the interest of those states. states posed some very difficult litigation problems.

number one is a federal pre- emption. there has been some case law about that, but it is still a murky world. no. 2, all of us have disparate consumer protection laws. some of us have relatively small limits on the amount of money that can be recovered for consumer protection violations we have been under, so when they looked at the structure, they realize there is no way that without the federal partnership, could we achieve the results we have achieved. the notion of the states being able to achieve servicing standards on a national bank,

that would not have happened. the notion of being able to use the monitor, that could not have happened without a monitor, so they entered in this agreement because it is in their interest and in the interest of their citizens. i am not quite as old as tom miller, but i have been practicing law for 35 years, and the vast majority of that i have had the privilege of serving as the united states attorney, and now as an attorney general. i have been involved in a lot of joint federal, task forces, investigations, and what ever. i can tell you some horror stories. the conclusion i came to is so many of them are personality

driven. we had the incredible fortune of having this driven by two people in the federal government i have never seen anything like it. they did not do any of that said stuff we see so often -- fed stuff we see so often. frankly i would have given up on us a long time ago. it was brutal. first the republicans were off this way. and the democrats, but they brought this together, and i cannot say enough about the perseverance and dedication they have shown, so on behalf of my colleagues i am proud to be up here announcing what i see as an

incredible example of federal and state cooperation. now it is my pleasure to introduce the hud inspector general to reopen -- inspector general. >> i am pleased to be up here. they have a crucial role in foreclosure and loan underwriting practices. i also commend the efforts between my office and the department of housing and urban development as well as the state's attorney general to bring this to closure. if not for some of the inappropriate behavior, many americans would still be in their homes.

. now this supplement benefits of homeowners. i want to assure all americans my office will remain vigilant in defending their interests. we are committed to pursuing those whose misconduct contributed to the housing crisis and those who continue to do so. >> i would like to introduce the attorney general from the great state of illinois, lisa. >> today we picked up another piece of the wreckage caused by the foreclosure crisis. as we determine previously, the bank services and mortgage servicing and foreclosure process were pervasive and preventable. yet its total state and federal investigations and legal actions to stop these immoral and often in humane practices. the largest banks servicers

deepened the problems for millions of homeowners. in chicago there are whole blocks of neighborhoods haunted by the lost opportunities of those who lived there. know that this is neither the beginning nor the end of our work to hold the reins and other institutions accountable for the destruction they cause in our families, community. this serves as a warning. there are consequences for engaging in practices and jeopardize our communities and the economy. state and federal governments remain committed to continuing and the marketplace. i would like to join my colleagues in taking --

thanking all of them for their hard work but in specific the attorneys general for all they have done during this investigation and negotiation, but not enough can be said about our federal partners. they have been incredible. they have stuck with us, so my big veins 4 avaya hud secretary -- so a big thanks to the hud secretary. let me introduce her hoover. -- hooper. aretate's attorney general on the front lines. here we are today. strong enforcement distinguishes this deal from early efforts in

the crisis. this is a strong agreement backed by a court order and financial penalties. the monitor will make sure the banks follow the rules. the former north carolina commissioner of thanks joe smith will serve as monitors. he and his team will look over the banks shoulders to make sure they meet targets for homeowners. i know he will be tough, throw, and fair. is prohibited foreclosure fees are charged, if homes are for clothes before other options expire, the monitor and the courts can step in and make it right to -- if homes are for clothes -- foreclosed before

they can step in right. this helps our economy. i look texas state and federal partnership as a model for the future. we will continue to work together to level the financial playing field for consumers, and now to wrap this up, the guy you have heard a lot about. his negotiations had to resemble a hand to hand contact, but he did it with perseverance, and i want to introduce the associate attorney general. >> thanks, everybody. i really appreciate the kind words. you hear a lot about bureaucracies and overlapping

missions, about a battle between federal authorities and state sovereignty, but when you lose your home to foreclosure, you do not want to hear excuses. you want a government that solves problems threaten the resolution shows what happens when people focus on what they can do together. it was apparent that an alphabet soup of government agencies have various roles to play, and from state attorneys general to federal agencies and investigative arms that support a lot in the housing market, there are any number of ways we could have addressed this, and we could have pulled in all the wrong directions. instead, we decided to work together. we began talking about all the different ways to solve the problems we face. we all had different tools, different perspectives, and different goals, but public

officials decided not we could do something together that would be a federal law enforcement, better housing policy, and better for the people we serve. you would be hard-pressed to find more successful cooperative effort. on the federal side we had not opened investigations and expertise. we join with states but have long standing experience on the ground, and we found our way. there are so many people one could take. region in -- one could thank, so many who have worked with us over time and i know are going to be issuing orders of their own during the coming days. i think when a chapter of this history is written, one thing they will find is that the

federal trade commission were actually the first to recognize many of those issues, and if you go and look at the countrywide settlement a negotiated some time ago, they were at the forefront, and they have been extraordinary partners. the secretary here has been a tremendous a partner for their deep knowledge as well as understanding how we can effectively help homeowners. a number of the state's attorney ,eneral's talk about the work and i would like to thank and brian from my office, who has worked tirelessly on this, and while some people have said some nice things about me, they should be talking about his work, because he has been the glue to hold this together.

the last thing i would like to say is our work will not be finished as the file this in several court over the next few weeks. the attorney general said we are going to continue to work to make sure that this settlement is fully in force and fulfills its goal. this team you see here and many folks around the country and in the audience is going to continue to try to ensure we have complete redress for all the harm and brought to the american public. with that, we will take some questions. >> not to dismiss how hard this deal was, but when you look at the actual relief on the principal reduction side and on the cash payments to homeowners,

it is a bit low, and those homeowners may i ask now if you settle. >> i will look them in the i can say no. -- look them in the eye and say no. this agreement has done more to help homeowners and anything we have seen before. let me make the point i made before. and i believe this agreement will eventually make widespread principal production -- principal reduction commonplace. there is going to be a significant amount done right away, and particularly if bank of america is going to have a plan where everyone can get principal reduction, and once this demonstration takes place, it will work, and it will work and become commonplace.

this agreement is the only thing that has a chance to get to a place of principal reduction of oregon -- principal production. this is the vehicle. in terms of the other benefits, for the people who are forgotten. they are the people who are under water purity of their mortgages greater -- who are under water. their mortgage is greater than the value of their homes. they meet all the other criteria ago, but they are blocked because their home is under water. that is unfair. this breaks out and furnace. on the borrower's payments, that is a small part of this. the context is if you are

foreclosed upon in the last few years, you can point to anything wrong in the services did, what is your paper, and missed a deadline, then you can get this payment. these will go to people who cannot recover in any other way. if they sue, they cannot recover. if they find out later they could have recovered, they are not giving up legal rights, so that homeowners that could not get $1, they are getting a check for $1,500, they are not going to tell us they sold to cheat. region t -- sold too cheap. one of the great things is for people who are eligible for all home modification, the banks

will not screw up those regulations. there are regulations to make that happen. the homeowner is not going to say it is too little. sometimes there are fees charged. if there is an indication it is widespread, the monitor will get those back. those people are not going to tell us need -- tell us we settled into cheap. this is going to help far more than anyone else in the past and i predict for more than anyone in the future. >> let me add to things. think there are misunderstandings about this.

one is the math there has been some misunderstanding about, and many people are taking $20 billion in expected homeowner and 20 billion in benefits to homeowners, dividing that by 1 million, and saying that is $20,000 per homeowner. that does not seem like much for people who are under water 40, $50,000. the way this will work is we banksbe crediting the thank against their requirements to actually reduce principal, actually deliver benefits, but we will 19 been crediting them dollar for dollar. -- we will not be crediting them dollar for dollar. if the loan is highly

delinquent, and a bank would not be able to collect on that, we are not going to give them $1 of credit for writing off $1 of the loan to regard we are going to give them far less credit, so india and what we are likely to get in terms of action -- in the end, what we are likely to get is in the neighborhood of $35 billion out of the $20 billion in consumer relief, so the masses region -- so the math is actually much more significant. we would be happy to go through the specifics of that. we have available state-by-state what adds to the total. our second thing is, a portion of those for homeowners who have been wrong was always designed

to sit in parallel to a separate process but has been set up by federal regulators as a result of consent judgments, and the idea is that a homeowner can come in, have their claims reviewed at a cost of the thanks, and full compensation is made for the wrong. -- up the cost of the banks, and full compensation is made for the wrong. the idea is there are many small that may have cost a few thousand dollars. the idea is almost not to have to make an every one of those homeowners have to work with a lawyer to prove harm, but to reward restitution as a class. that does not impede their ability to go into this separate process, and if they were wrong by $200,000, they can collect from the process, so the

misinterpretation is this would be all but is available for homeowners. but is not true. -- that is not true. these are designed to get there. the last thing i would say is in the end it was not the service practices that created the bubble nor cause its collapse. it was the origination and securitization of these horrendous products that created it. there is no question the practices further doubt substantially, but even though there were hundreds of billions of dollars of harm done in the crisis, the wrongs we are writing today are a piece of fat, and we have done extensive research to see what we -- are a piece of that, and we have done

extensive research, and we believe this settlement is extremely good in terms of recovery for the claims and we are releasing, and just to be clear, no fannie and freddie loans are at issue here. now they represent 2/3 of the market. none of those are being released, no claims related to civil rights. no criminal claims, no claims related to civil rights of any kind. the origination claims of fha, in addition to the securitization claims, we are retaining those. you have to look to this in the context of what is actually being released today. that is why it is so important, we announced our task force. that makes it very clear point. we are retain those rights and will be aggressive about going after those claims going forward. >> you are saying that the banks may be paying something close to $40 billion? >> i said the benefit -- the

direct benefit to homeowners will be larger -- go ahead. >> from the banking side, some of these banks are still struggling to recover from the financial crisis. do they have the capacity to make these fixes, to pay this money? have they been served already brought some of these payments? are you concerned at all that this could hurt the financial help of some of these tanks? -- these banks? >> there is no question that there are reserves that have been taken. this process obviously has been extensive. we have had lengthy discussions, and reserves have been taken i believe at all of the institutions that are part of this, and even some institutions that we are discussing these claims with but are not part of the announcement today. we believe that is the case.

in the and, one of the critical things about this is, and to repeat tom miller, principal reduction is an important part of steps that we need to take, and they include steps like the refinancing plan that the president announced and the work we have done with fannie and freddie. those are steps that will help all our housing market recover. the benefits not only to homeowners and the broader economy, but to these very institutions themselves are enormous if the value of properties across the country began to rise as a result of these actions. in the end, we believe that this announcement is not just good for homeowners and the, -- and the economy, but ultimately will help the financial institutions project while there may be short term impact to their balance sheets, it is critical for all of us to be

able to get the housing market accelerating in its recovery. >> are fannie and freddie loans exempt, or just future claims? >> fannie and freddie have a separate process of enforcing servicing violations. they are pursuing those claims and they have separate processes, as fha does, for origination violations, etc. specifically on which loans this will apply to, and we see the refinancing portion that is part of this settlement as a perfect complement to the refinancing effort that the president has already talked about and that are moving forward for underwater current homeowners in fannie and freddie loans. we knew as we were designing

the settlement that we had already made steps to ensure that fannie and freddie borrowers who are under water could refinance at record low interest rates today, but we knew that that option is not available to homeowners that had loans that were in the portfolios of the bank. that is what the refinancing component is focused on, so it complements what is available to fannie and freddie borrowers. and modifications, fannie and freddie are already doing extensive payment modifications for those homeowners. that are not doing significant principal reduction. this settlement, because fannie and freddie are not part of it, cannot require that they do print or reduction, but the president announced just a few weeks ago steps that would make, for the first time, fannie and freddie eligible for incentives to do significant printed or reduction. they are violating that as we --

they are evaluating that as we speak, and we look forward to taking additional steps that could make principal reduction available to fannie and freddie homeowners. >> a very important point. we worked very hard to align the servicing standards and to bring fannie and freddie on board. so the servicing standards do apply across the board, not just to private-label securities or portfolio loans for the banks, but also to fannie and freddie loans. a critical point. >> is there a maximum amount of credits that can be earned by a mortgage-backed securities? >> there is not a cap on that. there has been a lot of misunderstanding about this issue so let me just try to clarify. there is a dramatically lower credit, if you will, or

principal reduction for investor-owned loan, also called service or other loans. we expect of the principal reduction and it's done -- and principal reduction on first and second loans that keeps families in their homes is a minimum of 60% of the consumer menu that is available. we expect a relatively small share in the range of 15% of the principal reduction to be done in service for other loans. there is a special kind of effort that bank of america will make as part of this agreement where they have agreed to doody -- to do deeper principal reduction and to solicit every single one of the

old country wide homeowners. about 80 percent of those are private label securities loans, and they have already made a significant, or agreed to make a substantial payment to investors in those loans. our expectation is that the vast majority of private label security loans that are reduced in principle as a result of this would be the old countrywide loans, and investors are being compensated on those loans. let me be very clear, career is -- clear language in this document, in the settlement agreement, that says nothing in it requires any trusty or servicer to reduce principal where it is not allowed to legally buy the underlying documents, nor where it is not a net present value positive, or in the interest of those investors. the misunderstanding somehow that investors will be paying the banks share is just false. this is real penalties for the bank, real cost for the banks,

and the vast majority of loans will be in the portfolio of the banks anyway. >> there is no max. let me try and clear up a little bit of confusion. some have written that when investors' loans are modified by friends for reduction, the -- by principle reduction, the investors will lose money, and that is unfair to them. that reveals -- and not only you, but a very prominent united states senator who i have a lot of respect for wrote a letter saying the same thing. but that misunderstand principal reduction. principal reduction is an effective way for everybody to win good when i say that, i mean this. there are some homeowners that cannot make a full payment, but they can make part of it. apart that they make is more

than the investor would realize under foreclosure. so it is in everybody's interest to do that modification. a homeowner stays in his home. the community is protected, the investor gets more money by the modification, not less money and. -- not less money. that is what principal reduction is all about. that is the fallacy of some of those stories in the letter by the senator. this is something that we in iowa and know very, very well. we had a terrible farm crisis in the 1980's, and our whole farm community was being torn asunder. we came up with this idea of a loan modifications. the head of the bankers' association in iowa went arm in arm to the legislature, the two of us, and got legislation passed so that there was required mediation before there could be a foreclosure. that was the vehicle to get to this win-win situation. and many farmers stay in their

homes. investors realized more. and when we saw this crisis coming for homeowners. we said we have seen this before. that is why patrick madigan and i and others in 2007 and to the bank and made this appeal to do loan modifications, but interest-rate reductions and principal reductions. it is a win-win-win for everybody in the right set of circumstances, and guess what? what is designed in this package is exactly looking at the right circumstances. >> will the banks get credit for prior modification to principal reduction? >> it is soon, but not yet. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> should not your president have the highest moral and ethical standards and be an example to our children and young people in this country? ask yourself that question please. should not his life make him a role model for your future children? should anyone you elect to this office always keep his promises? >> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 14 and ran for the office and lost. good to our website to see video of "the contenders" who had a lasting impact on american politics. arrested in not have the right to protest against a government they feel those not serve their interests? who appointed us to sacrifice the lives of young americans

trying to weigh in on the side of a government that represents perhaps 15% of the people of lebanon and has little or no apparent support from the other 85%? >> c-span.org/thecontenders. >> in a few moments, a look a proposed television coverage of the supreme court, including comments from justice's anton and scalia. and today's senate judiciary committee meeting approved a bill that would require the supreme court to televise its open proceedings. in a little less than an hour, coverage of the conservative political action conference committemeeting in washington. a couple of live events to tell you about tomorrow -- the turkish foreign minister talks about his country's role in the middle east of the center for strategic and international

studies. that is on c-span 3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on c-span 2 at 1:00 p.m. eastern, a brookings institution forum on a new strategic arms reduction treaty. >> when i first started the book, i also thought this must be an american story. this is about a country that worships the religion of self- reliance and individuals appeared this is the legacy of ferro and emerson. but it turns out that we are laggards. it is actually much more common in european nations, especially in scandinavia and much more prominent in japan. >> he looks at the growing tent of american adults choosing to live alone and what that means for the country. also, sunday at 3:00 p.m., the second cousin of former secretary of state condoleezza rice, connie rice, on her route work to reduce gang violence in l.a. and at 8:15 p.m., bonnie morris

on her one-woman play and book of the same name "revenge of the women's studies professor." >> the senate judiciary committee voted 11-7 to approve a bill that would require the supreme court to televise its oral arguments. we will show you that discussion in 10 minutes. first, the justices and on and scalia with their opinions of television the high court -- of anton and sculley with their opinions of television and the high court. >> i was moved by your explanation as to why you think it is so important for the public to understand and appreciate what judging is and what role it plays in our system. i agree with you totally that

not only is there a need, but now the lack of that understanding. not only as one who has argued, but as a former law clerk who learned so much about the system in that process, why not open it to video recordings? why not, in the federal courts, give the public the benefit of see it firsthand in your court and other federal courts and appreciate the quality as well as the diversity and the extraordinarily often excruciating difficulty of what you do? >> i will start. senator, when i first came on the court, i was in favor -- you're just talking about televising the arguments, right? the brazilian supreme court, the televise their conference. >> i would never presume --

>> northwood i. >> i was initially in favor of televising it. but the longer i have been there, the less good idea i think it is pink the justification usually put forward is that you want to educate the american people about what the court is and what it is not. if i thought the american people were to get educated, i would be all for it. if they threat -- if they sat through a day of our proceedings gavel-2-double, they would learn that we are not most of the time looking up at the sky and saying should there be a right to this or that. they are doing real law, the bankruptcy code, and people would never come up to me and ask why do you have to be a lawyer to be a supreme court? the constitution does not say so. of course, it does not. but 99% of what we do is law, something only that lawyers can do.

if people could learn that, it would be a great piece of education. but for every 10 people who sat through our proceedings and gavel-to-gabble, there would be 10,000 who would see nothing but a 30-second take out from one of the proceedings, which i guarantee you would not be representative of what we do. they would in effect would be given a misimpression of the supreme court. i am very sure that that would be the consequence and therefore i am not in favor of televising it. >> but it would, for high school students or even middle school students and for the general public who are interested in an important and pressing case, provide a means for them to see what right now only a very limited audience can do because of the size of the court pierre >> but for those who are interested in it for intellectual reasons, surely the tapes are good enough.

>> the tapes, with all due respect, and i understand your argument, do not convey in the same way with as much interest, the kind of debate, back and forth, the visual sense of the action in court. i know and you know really how dramatic it can be. >> it is not a whole lot of visual motion. it really is not. it is mostly intellectual motion. >> it is certainly gripping if your answering the questions. [laughter] justice briar, do you have a different point of view? " we are conservative and you would be too if you were there.

we are there for a short time. we are trustees. and we do not want to make a decision that would be no reversal and hurt the court. so start there. when we have the term limits case out of arkansas, i wish people could have seen that. it was such a good case. you had jefferson and story on one side and madison and hamilton on the other side. it was the term limits. and what you saw was everything evenly balanced with the precedents. if it could have been seen across the country, they would have seen nine people struggling with a very important and constitutional question. so what is the problem? one problem is that we are a symbol. if it were us in our court, it would probably be in every criminal case in the country and you would get rid of what?

what do we do with the jurors? what do we do with the criminal witnesses? you do not know what happens or would people come up with the misimpression, namely the oral arguments. 3% of the case is done in writing and they do not see that. most importantly, people really to people. when you see them, they are your friends or they are not your friends. but we're making decisions that are there to affect 309 million people who are not there. in our minds, we have to take those 309 million people into account and would that come across? and you can make people look good or you can make them look bacbad depending on what 30 secs to use. we already have a cult of personality. we are speaking for the law, not for ourselves as individuals and

that is a good thing. i would like to know more. i really would. there are places that have it and do not have it. there are courts that have it. canada has it. california does in southersome situations. why not get real information that is not paid for by somebody who has an interest in this. then see what happens to judicial attitudes. what you're getting, i think, and eventually it will be that there's no other way to see things but visually and everybody is doing that and it will seem weird what we do now and it will all change. but before that time, i think that information is what would be easier. until a become easy about it, until we become reasonably convinced that it will not hurt

the institution, you will get a conservative reaction. >> it may be unfair to put this question to you since your such a youngster here. >> that is the best thing that has been said about me for a long time appeared >> you think that the process in the senate has been improved since the proceedings have been televised? >> just as you took a pass earlier -- [laughter] i think there are mixed reviews. in general, i think that openness and transparency improves institutions. and for all the reasons that you have so eloquently talked about, your role in educating the american public, i think that an audio and visual recording of supreme court proceedings would potentially do the same. whatever the results of televising senate proceedings

-- and i was only facetious when i said that i would take a pass -- i do think that it has been a step in the right direction for providing more transparency, disclosure, and understanding on the part of the public. i will let you and the public be the judge of how it views us. but i think in general, americans should understand the challenges as well as the role that their institutions face. since my time has expired, i want to thank you again for being here and i'm not at all dismissive of the point to have made. on the contrast, i have great respect for them. perhaps we can provide you with some more information that would be persuasive and the advantages and the positives in those kinds of greater availability or acceptability.

>> justices scalia and brier testified on capitol hill in october. the senate judiciary committee decided today to send any bill that would require the supreme court to televise all of its open proceedings. lawmakers and media organizations have asked the court to televise the five and a half hours of oral argument on president obama's health care law scheduled for the end of march. this is 40 minutes. >> we have six in the room.

we have a couple of others out in the anteroom. if you have no objection, i think we will get started. >> we should get started. >> usually, once we get started, people show. today, three would fill emergency vacancies in illinois and maryland, but we also have an important transparency measure. senator durbin and senator grassley have asked to proceed on their bi-partisan bill to televise the united states supreme court proceedings. we have the power to use technology to allow greater access to public proceedings of the government. so all americans can witness the quality of justice in this country, not just those of us

who have the opportunity to be physically at one of the hearings. some of us are members of the bar of the supreme court. but that leaves 20 300 million some odd americans. with technology, would the supreme court allow all americans to see the importance of the constitution. this is extremely important at a time when decisions by the supreme court are greatly affecting the daily lives of hard-working americans. next month, the supreme court will begin oral argument and challenges for the affordable care act. this important case will decide whether people's elected officials have the power and under the constitution to enact legislation regulating the

health insurance market to make health insurance more affordable, to hold insurers more accountable, to make the health care more sustainable. so the supreme court decision, whatever they decide, will impact all americans. because of that, there is tremendous public interest in witnessing these historic arguments. it can be said that the supreme court proceedings are open to the public. technically, that is so. but only a few dozen of the general public can take time off from work and stand in line all night long to get in. another small handful be able to see the proceedings. the accord does not even provide

lives dreaming to provide real- time public access. -- provide live streaming to provide real-time accespublic a. despite our public and private average, the supreme court has no indications that those proceedings will be made widely available to the american public on the day of the argument. i believe they should. our democracy works best when everybody has access to their government. we made arrangements to accommodate thousands of individual spectators during that time in that hearing room. in addition, make sure that the hearings are broadcast live,

stream the proceedings on our website. these technologies are brought to the american people in the role that our constitution continues to play in our democracy. the senate has been televising its proceedings for more than 25 years. the other body even longer. state courts, including state supreme courts have been televising their proceedings for years. i know that some of the justices are not hand to televising the proceedings. i and understand they do not want to be made fun of through an unflattering video clip or be taken out of context. but that happens to the rest of us in public service all the time. it is not particularly pleasant, but it is part of our democracy.

we try to counter miss statements and make sure that the record is available. last october, members of this committee, the fed judiciary committee held a hearing to look at the role of judges under the constitution. we were joined by justices scalia and briar. i appreciate their willing participation in that public hearing could i thought that discussion was informative and useful. senator bingaman fall asked them why they did not open the supreme court proceedings to -- blumenthaling fal asked them why they did not open the supreme court proceedings.

so many cell phones are equipped with video cameras you have youtube. ubiquitous of the internet, everything is a available to be viewed. it is time for the supreme court to open itself to the american people, not just those members of the supreme court bar and those reserved for the hearing room. decisionsicials' largely affect the lives of americans. they do book tours where they make money. some even attend fund-raisers. i do not know how anybody who voted in the name of the first amendment can allow unlimited but attack ads by super packs should not be accessible to the american people. four days ago, more than 11

million americans watched the super bowl. no one would have tolerated having that game recorded and broadcast days later. or the place being transcribed and released at the end of the week. -- or plays being transcribed and released at the end of the week. we can all either result or suffer together in real time. alt or sufferlt together in real time. now is the time for the supreme court's public proceedings to be truly available to all americans who are affected by its rules. senator grassley, i know you have taken a strong position on this.

>> i think we're pretty united that we want to hold over the four judges that are on the agenda for today and then take up the bill. unless there is great descent in this committee expressed against the bill, i will first associate myself with your remarks. thank you very much for the thoroughness of them. i will put my remarks in the record. i also thank senator determine for his leadership in this issue of the bill. mr. chairman, you just laid out a very compelling argument for the passage of this legislation and i hope we get it passed. and i thank senator durbin as well. i would like to take some time to speak about another court issued that was just made public yesterday. judge emmet sullivan of federal

district court d.c. district issued no opinion ordering the public release of a 500-page report outlining a series misconduct by the justice department attorneys from the public integrity section during the prosecution of senator stevens. in the opinion, judge sullivan disgustedly tortured history of the stevens prosecution -- discussed the tortured history of the stevens prosecution. a public trial and conviction and a press conference celebrating the guilty verdict of prosecutorial misconduct. he noted that the evidence became clear and hard to refuse did the justice vacate the verdict. however, the justice department also stepped in to protect the prosecutors. the justice department initially sought to prevent any misconduct review by the court,

arguing instead for an internal review that they conduct. to his credit, judge sullivan did not allow this and instead assigned a special investigator. following the completion of this investigation, the special investigator produced a 500-page report that found both the investigation and prosecution of senator stevens were permeated by the systemic consumption of exculpatory evidence that would have corroborated his defense and testimony and seriously damaged the the testimony credibility of government key witnesses. this is an incredible finding and one that, as judged sullivan put it, has led to a continuing

national discourse on prosecutorial misconduct and what steps should be taken to prevent it. i agree with judge sullivan and the public has a right to know that the special investigator -- what the special investigator found and how pervasive the misconduct was inside the public integrity unit of the justice department. the american people need to hear the truth about what happened, not simply trust the justice department's internal review process. in the decision to release the independent report, the justice department should follow up on the final report issued by ipr. in an oversight commission in november, it was called for the release of the report -- "that "s up to the people at opr.

i want to provide as much of that case. despite the attorney general's desire to make disinformation public, his initial, that it is up to the people at opr to make that decision leads me to believe that it is likely we will never see the report that the justice department has frequently blocked reports. the attorney general ultimately overseas opr. if he wanted to be shown to the public, he should order it released. in the case of the steven's case and the notorious situation where the justice department -- it is easy to see why so many elected officials and american

people have lost faith in the leadership of the justice department. these public failures paid a picture of a department where bad decisions for ruunder a republican administration consistently concealed piscatory evidence that would have damaged the testimony of key witnesses. a department where whistleblowers who do not belong are a sure to face retaliation from supervisors and then are forced into bureaucratic limbo to adjudicate their cases. a department where one assistant attorney joe prepares a letter to senator saying that atf does not allow guns across the border while another assists and attorney general in mexico the same day advocating a plan to let down across the border as an investigative strategy which was explicitly forbidden by the

deputy attorney general a month later. something is wrong and it is easy to see where the public is outraged. further, the overreaching by the justice department impacts us here in congress. legislation addressing online infringement hits a roadblock on the floor in part because of the public not trusting your current justice department to do the right thing. instead, i heard from many constituents on this point during my 36 town meetings in january, the american people are worried that the justice department will use power for political censorship in the case of that law, even though all of us probably know there is a need for us to do something to stop stealing a property. that is the kind of impact that this trust has had and it affects alof us all. these are all examples of serious problems that i hope

will be addressed, not to mention the fact that the failed prosecution costs taxpayers threefold -- the cost to investigate and prosecute, the cost of the special investigators, and third, the defense attorneys paid to defend the prosecutors from contempt charges. the defense attorneys cost $10 million alone. the public's confidence in the department is questioned. the best in the department can do is to be transparent and accountable, something that was promised, not only by the president, but also by many confirmation hearings in various people working there, the transparency promised not having yet been realized. >> as you know, i applauded attorney general holder in his decision to drop the prosecution

of senator stevens, which he did. the prosecution, as you pointed out was begun in the last administration. i welcome judge sullivan's report to be made public. i want to get these results so that our whole committee can be brief. i have expressed time and time again my concerns about the prosecutorial misconduct during the stevens trial as stated so publicly. not just because it was another senator who was prosecuted, but i feel that that kind of misconduct can be allowed and if everybody is in jeopardy and we will have -- and we will hear in

the committee about it. we have 10 people here with their request to be part of the -- under the rule, they will be put over. we will hear from them next week. a couple of these judges reflect judicial emergencies. we have asked everybody from the chief justice of the united states on through to do something about this ever growing number of judiciarl emergency vacancies.

the bill to permit the televise supreme court proceedings, i would note my own support of this bill and i will vote for it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i understand that putting over the judicial nominees is poor format -- is per forma. i might note that the nominee john far is the first federal judicial nominee. he and i worked closely together to improve -- to approve both of these nominees on a bipartisan basis. i hope the next time we meet, as soon as next week, we may have our nominees moving forward.

but the matter at hand is the legislation to permit the televising of supreme court proceedings. i am happy to say in that i got the message and conveyed it to senator leighton and now we are here. mr. chairman, supreme court justices are appointed for a lifetime appeared they make decisions that change the lives of all americans. but the so-called public hearings of the supreme court are open only to 250 americans on a real-time basis.

just how important is it in a democracy to bring the proceedings of an important american institution like the supreme court into full view of the american people? people in an open society do not demand in fallibility from their institutions. but it is difficult for them to accept what they are prohibited from observing. those are the words of chief justice berger in 1986. for too long, the american people have been effectively prohibited from observing the proceedings and open sessions of the supreme court. think about our extra effort to make certain that the nominations process and the hearings before this committee on supreme court justices are available to every american on a real-time basis. we believe it is a valuable part of our decision process. i think the same standard should apply to supreme court justices

once approved by the senate when they cross the street. our bill would require televising of all open sessions of the court with one notable exception -- a majority of the justices of the supreme court can determine that the public televising of these proceedings would violate due process rights of one or more of the plan does before the court and make that decision and literally close the cameras. for those who argue that it is in the best interest of justice in some cases not to have the proceedings televised, we provide expressly in this bill the that is exactly what can occur by majority vote among the supreme court justices. supreme court decisions affect everyone's lives and, in a democratic society where transparency and participation is valid, there is no justification for such powerful element to operate outside the view of the american people.

the supreme court considers many important things. soon, there will consider the affordable health care act, a measure that lily touches the lives of every single american, every -- that literally touches the lives of every single american. our hearings on that measure were open to the public. the actual arguments to the supreme court should be open as well. at this point, we have bipartisan agreement. democrats and republicans in both chambers have urged the court to permit live video and audio broadcast of the health care reform arguments. some argue that the supreme court is already sufficiently open and accessible. the court releases audio recordings at the end of the week. it makes written opinions available on the website.

and offers 250 seats to the 300 million people who live in america with some preference to those who happen to be admitted to the supreme court to practice. the striking thing about these efforts of accessibility is the glaring omission of the real- time audio and video broadcast that are the predominant media tools in this modern digital age. there are some who say we should not allow cameras in the supreme court because only bits and pieces of court proceedings would be televised and they may be taken out of context. that reminds me of an editorial comment a few years ago. it's said that keeping cameras out to prevent people from getting a wrong idea is a little like removing opinions from -- removing the paintings from the art museum for fear that the visitors do not have the art history background to appreciate them. for two decades, the legislative sessions and committee meetings of the u.s. senate and house have been broadcast live and the legislative branch is better for it.

the majority of states permit live video coverage in some or all of their courts. it is time that the united states supreme court did the same. >> bear with me. i will put a statement for the record. let me call the roll right now on the bill. >> i will be very brief. >> if we lose the quorum, we will put it on the agenda. certainly, anybody can talk as long as they like. >> chairman can you talk when you finish the vote? >> yes. >> thank you. >> first, call the roll.

>> the those are 11-7. >> thank you for going back. >> i have opposed this in the past. i see no reason to change my point of view. let me give you my opinion. the court does not want this. they do not speak out as a whole, but justices briar, scalia, rehnquist, kennedy, and

alito have opposed this, plus the judicial conference of the united states. i do not believe we should tell the supreme court what to do. we are separate branches of government. and i do not believe that the justice is better because it is televised. i have seen actual situations where, in my view, it is worse where is televised. i understand that there is a move to do this. this bill does have a narrow exception, except that the exception is so narrow that it would be rarely used. i believe it opens the door to television and, in my observations, when this reaches the trial court, you see prosecutors performed. uc defense attorneys perform. and i am sorry to say that you

see judges perform. in the simpson case, it was a big case in point in my view. i have come to the conclusion that, because something is televised, justice is not necessarily better. justice depends on law law and the interpretation and application of that law. i recognize i am in the minority. but i did cast my note vote. thank you very much. >> i appreciate this. i know the senator has mentioned this to me previously. i would also put in the record senator grassley is statement -- senator grassley's statement in the record. >> thank you. i appreciate your work on this, mr. chairman. we had a very good hearing on this.

we had a spirited debate about this at the hearing. many good witnesses and a few things that i use from that hearing held to respond to what senator feinstein said. first of all, the i what chief justice testified that the concerns of some people about televised court proceedings have not materialized in iowa. they have cameras in the courtroom, all of their hearings are televised, have been able to move forward as a court, and they have seen it as a positive thing. and this is true of other courts inland print the other piece about this, and i do have sympathy -- courts in the land. the other piece about this, and i do have sympathy that there have been issues with that and a judge should be able to make that kind of decision. but i think you are in a whole different land when you're talking about the supreme court of our land and that is the u.s.

supreme court. you do not have the issues of witnesses somehow affected by having a camera on board the types of concerns you would have if they would act differently because a camera is on. while some of the justices have taken a position against this, i think it was former justice souter that it would be over his dead body that it would be televised. the new word justices, particularly justice kagan, took the position that she would think it should be televised. under the bill, senator durbin has drafted, even though there are five justices are against it, they would vote to not have it televised so it would immediately not be televised if they chose to do that. however, times will change. i think you will see justice is coming on and they will have different views as you can see by justice kagan's

testimony. the release routinely and audio of the proceedings a few days later. you do night did it the same day, but a few days later. sometimes they do it the same day. this is something that justice roberts implemented. it was an improvement on what used to happen. now they do it routinely. it is a huge step from the audiotape to videotape and real time does not seem to be a major step. this is simply making it more available to people so they can see their court in action. this is the supreme court of the land pretty do not have the concern that you have on the trial level. i would hope that eventually we would be able to watch our court on tv and it would not simply be a few people who are able to get into that courtroom, which is a public proceeding. a couple of hundred people who are somehow with the wherewithal to get in the door and get a seat. it is not just those people who

get to watch it, but the nation should get to watch it, not just those who can afford plane fare to go to washington, d.c. >> thank you. i want to add my voice on the judgeship confirmation issue. i asked the chairman to speak on the need to hasten the confirmation process, not to avoid careful scrutiny, but simply to fill the judgeships that are open and to ease the vacancy crisis that we have right now. my hope is that we can do so better than we have already. second, on the measure before us, if this bill is successful, i want to state my own views that the supreme court could come argument-by argument, a

case-by case, exercise judgment as to whether or not the balance should be struck in favor of closing the courtroom in an exceptional case. but it should be only in an exceptional case where the dangers of theatrics or histrionics out with the public interest in having a larger audience available and accessible. that is really the goal here, to educate and inform and come in fact, to meet the present interest -- and, in fact, to meet the present interest that causes to form lines around the block and to inform the public about what the supreme court is doing. i am not sure that everyone in the country would agree that the level of interest in every supreme court case is the same as the super bowl. but i think there are cases, and the health care cases one, where

it should be on a par and there should be interest and accessibility. the danger of excesses is real. and it is real in every case. i can say, as one who has tried cases in state and federal courts and one who has argued several cases in the united states supreme court, the advocate always has to make a judgment about whether the judge will react and the jury will react in one way or another. and the control of the courtroom is ultimately in the hands of the judge. when we heard from justices scalia and briar, the danger of any one of those justices impliedly sanctioning an advocate who is before the court will cause great caution and ultimately will result in the kind of self discipline, i

think, that will avoid the kinds of dangers we have been discussing. if i could just take senator durbin's analogy, i want to associate myself with his remarks as well as the germans and the ranking members, all of them very -- as well as the chairman and ranking members, all of them very important. the artt closing galleries or the museums because the audience may not understand the art, but there is danger posed to the art itself. why else do people do paintings are sculptures? the same is true, in many respects, of our democracy. the fear that public access will somehow harm the process runs exactly counter to the purpose of the process itself. thank you for giving us this opportunity to vote and for

moving it. >> senator, you were attorney general of your state. like many others, you have had a he is still in the meeting room. he made a comment to this. it became a media circus. how he became critical of a judge. i would note there is a huge difference between a trial in the arguments. you have a very structured saying. i think it to be hard to find

one that once a grandstand. i have argued a lot of cases. you have a very limited period of time. it is a boat to close on a specific thing. i have wrestled this over the years.

there's so much distortion that what goes on by some of the media and logs. you have as much openness as possible to as many people as possible. i am constantly surprised by the number of people that travel around my state and talk about some hearing they saw on c-span. i thought why would anyone be interested. at a time when people feel more alienated from their government, i agree that they should open the government up more. open it up. but people see what is going on.

-- let people see what is going on. i was here when the debate was here. senator dorgan suggested it was telegraphed. their only put it as an equivalent. the senate did not collapse. there are many who did not like the idea. there was some grandstanding that went off in. the country is better for its. when we had major debates, ready to go to war are not, people say

you ought to know that. they need more openness. if anyone has anything else today we will stand resource. i take you all. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> should the u.s. supreme court proceedings be televised? we wanted to join the conversation at facebook.com/cspan. >> our coverage of the political action conference continues in a few moments with mitch mcconnell. in a little less than a half- hour, a forum.

>> when president lincoln was shot on april 14, 1865, he was wearing a black raincoat made for his second inaugural. it is cared for by the national park service and periodically displayed at the theater museum lobby. the place the original on display for the public. they learned that it is displayed for piu -- future generations. it is this sunday morning at 8:00. >> the american conservative union annual conference is under way in washington. speakers included mitch mcconnell. he talked about the economy, deficit, and other issues for 25

minutes. >> thank you very much. it is great to see all of you. good morning. i want to thank the acu war, staff, and volunteers. thanks for the opportunity to gather as a movement to share of our ideas and our talents in the great calls of liberty. every year at cpac, past meets present. both gain new energy, enthusiasm, and allies for the fight. we have a chance to honor and to learn from the conservative giants of the past and to size up new ones. we get to hear from those who are leading the cause of state houses across the country and here in washington. for those of you who have not noticed, our ranks are growing. one of the great developments in congress of the past few years is the emergence of so many strong, principled, conservative leaders. you just had a chance to hear from mike lee and ron johnson and you heard from marco rubio, i think we would all agree on one of the most inspiring young conservatives in america.

[applause] our numbers in congress are expanding, and i can tell you this, i am very happy to have the right -- the reinforcements. we needed them after 2009 and a 2010. now the trick is to stick together and keep our focus where it belongs. i always love coming to cpac. [applause] and you probably know why. conservatives are just simply more fun than liberals. there is a reason for that, by the way. it is because we are always right.

[laughter] the reason liberals are always wringing their hands all the time is they know we have better arguments than they do. so they spend half their time thinking how to convince people that what is wrong is right, and the other half looking for conservatives to tear down, or cpac conferences to disrupt. you all know the liberal playbook. here is how it works. pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and then polarize it. rarely have we seen those tactics imposed with the kind of zeal we see today. the white house and its lieutenants have made an art form out of the orchestrated attack. they have shown they will go after anybody or any organization they think is standing in their way. we saw just last week when one of the top democrats in the senate announced a plan to all law abiding citizens before a congressional panel just because they don't happen to agree with causes that he supports. you know the drill. expose the folks to public view, released the liberal foes on them, and then hope the

public pressure or unwanted attentions of projects scare's them from supporting similar causes down the road. for president who's been so much time talking about fairness, there is a serious shortage of it in the white house and among many of his closest allies. again and again, this administration and its allies have used the resources of the government itself to intimidate or silence those who question or oppose it. and reward their friends and punish their enemies. this is why an administration that claims to support private sector job creation ended up killing a pipeline project that promised to create tens of thousands of private sector jobs. this is why a president who claims to value diversity is telling the men and women who run religious schools and hospitals and charities in this country that they now face a choice that no one in the united states should ever have to make. violate your conscience, pay a

penalty, or close your doors. we saw during the health-care debate when the department of health and human services issued a gag order on a private insurance company for the supposed offense -- listen to this -- of telling seniors what the president's health care bill would mean for them. as americans continue to struggle as a result of this president's economic policies, we see it in the personal attacks on private citizens or industries that the administration wants to make a convenient foil. these things that mean the office of president. they corrode our democracy, and they need to stop. [applause] look, if our democratic friends cannot convince people of the wisdom of their policies, they should change those policies.

but attacking private citizens or groups for the supposed crime of turning a profit, or expressing an opinion that the administration does not happen to share, is not in the president's job description. [applause] no look, the president's job is to unite the country, not divide it. his job is to bridge differences, not aggravate them. to encourage success, not condemned it. and to honor the free exercise of religion, and right there in the first amendment, not to suppress it. he was elected to lead all americans, not to occupy wall street fan club. [applause] i don't know about your, but i think that the leader of the free world and his advisers have better things to do than dig through other people's tax returns, at a time when nearly 13 million americans are looking for jobs and cannot find one. i think the president of the

united states has higher priorities than picking on fox news. [applause] at a moment when the national debt makes us look more like a third world country than the last best hope on earth, i think our highest elected official should be looking for solutions instead of steak -- of scapegoats. but unfortunately, that is what passes for leadership in the white house these days. here is a president who spent two years reconfiguring the u.s. economy, who put the government in charge of banks, the auto industry, the insurance industry, the student loan business, and held garrett kern. now we are seeing the results, -- and health care. he acts like he had nothing to do with it. we know new president's face challenges when they come to office.

ronald reagan certainly did. but once the of the office has been taken, americans expect their president to forge ahead and take responsibility for the policies that put in place. [applause] not this president. he wants to change the subject. here is my message to cpac. we are not going to let him get away with it, are we? [applause] look, we are going to push hard to reform the tax code. we will keep up the fight against a regulatory regime that is suffocating free enterprise. we'll keep pushing the white house to allow americans to use american energy, and we will not let a single day pass from now until november without reminding the american people of what this president has done.

[applause] we are going to remind folks that we are not in this mess because of a tsunami in japan or a debt crisis in europe. we are in it because the president got nearly everything he wanted for two long years. i assure you that when november rolls around, americans will know who is in charge when the stimulus was passed, when obamacare became law, it was in charge when america's credit rating was downgraded for the first time ever. they will know this president's record. [applause] after that he will have enough

time to play golf as he wants to. let's face it, the only reason we are getting any positive economic news at all, more than three years after this presidency began, is because the american people put a restraining order on him and pelosi in november 2010. last week's jobs report happen in spite of the president's policies, not because of them. it is the obama economy now, and we are not going to let people forget it. we will start with his promises. it is long list, so i will just mention a couple. three years ago, the president signed a trillion dollars stimulus bill that we were told would keep unemployment below half a percent sign and -- below eight%. how did that work out? unemployment has now stood above 8% for 36 months, three straight years. if you lose a job in the obama

economy, you can now expect to spend four weeks looking for a new one. fewer people have jobs today than when the stimulus was signed. more than three years into his presidency, there are still 5.6 million fewer jobs in this country than when the great recession began. among african-americans, unemployment is nearly 14%. among hispanics, 10.5%. among recent college graduates, and more than 13%. for those who need help the most, this president's economic policies have done the least. so if i were president obama, i would keep the champagne on ice. this is not an economy to be proud of.

shortly after they stimulus bill was signed, president obama and another promise. he said he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. how did that work out? last week had the congressional budget office said that the federal deficit for the coming year would be over a trillion dollars for the fourth consecutive year garrett kern he has not even come close, not even close -- for the fourth consecutive year. republicans have had to fight tooth and nail for every dime in savings we have secured. president obama has ignored the advice of his own deficit- reduction commission. he has ignored the dire warnings that come to us every single day from across the atlantic, and he has failed the american people who entrusted him with the stewardship of this country. more spending, more debt, fewer jobs. that is the sad legacy of this

administration chose the policies. -- of this administration's policies. that is held they will remember this president's three-year experiment in big government as a colossal failure that manage to bring about one good thing. one good thing came out of all this -- a resurgence of common- sense conservatism. [applause] thanks to the liberal overreach of the obama administration, countless americans have rediscovered the constitutional principles that bind us. they have a new appreciation for the fact that in this country, the government serves the people, and not the other way around. that is why when the american people read that the compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled over the last 10 years, and that the benefit for federal workers are about 60% higher than taxpayers who pay for them, they have every reason to demand a federal pay freeze. [applause]

now listen to this. right now, there are 2.2 million people on the federal workforce. yet at a time when the federal government in washington is routinely spending upwards of a trillion dollars a year more than it is taking in, layoffs of federal workers have dropped to fewer than 300 a year. according to one analysis i read, that means federal workers are 13 times more likely to die of natural causes than to be laid off. and this president, by the way, has added 150,000 jobs to the federal government during his term. washington is a boom town. now you tell me, what about the performance of the federal government over the past few

years makes you believe that everyone who works for it is absolutely necessary? the government is doing too much already. it is time to stop hiring people to fill jobs in washington that don't need to be done. [applause] it is time to impose some balance between the public and the private sector. under this president, government spending has gone up more than 20%. the federal debt has gone up 43%. this is one of the reasons i never tire of telling people the problem is not that government taxes too little, but that it spends too much.

i don't know about you, but the way i see it, until washington proves it can spend money more wisely than it does right now, the taxpayers have no reason to hand over another single dime in higher taxes. [applause] look, until washington puts a higher priority on using the money it gets on things we need, instead of blowing it on solar panel companies, the american people should tell congress it does not need another sent cent. that leads to another thing the american people are reminded of the past few years. people should be rewarded for what they know, rather than who they know. you remember throughout the debate over health care, americans saw the white house cut deals with special interest and lawmakers that we later learned foreign-exchange for their vote that favored obamacare. then they watched as they granted waivers to the very groups that lobbied for the bill.

they lobbied for the bill, but they don't want it to apply to them. most americans don't think that one group of americans should be entitled to special treatment just because of their political sympathies. that is just one of the reasons they will keep fighting to repeal this bill. [applause] i can tell you this, senate republicans want everybody in america to get a waiver from obamacare, everybody. not just the politically collected project not just the politically connected few. that is why republicans in congress have joined together to fight the individual mandate in the courts and why we will continue to do so until this unconstitutional burden is overturned. then we are going to replace it with the common-sense reforms that lower costs, and that is what americans really want. let me tell you what all these things have in common.

they all have one thing in common. every special favor or preference we have seen from this white house. here's the same thing. that is a lack of faith in the ability of americans to figure things out on their own. the roots of liberalism have always been the same. but liberals cannot accept is the idea of free people and institutions pursuing institutions as they see fit. with a deep respect for the differences of others. without government trying to direct their lives and destinies. the recent assault on the liberties is a vivid and troubling example of this. what this white house is saying is that they will impose a fine of catholic institutions for no

other reason than the religious police of them run counter. it is more than a violation of a conscience. this means that a place like the university of notre dame won now costs about $10 million a year. for catholic charities, the cost of religious freedom can now be as high as $100 million. this is not an administration that welcomes diversity. it is an administration that fears diversity. the call this a dangerous line. we will fight this attack until the courts overturn it and so we

have a president too well reverse it. picking winners and losers from friends and punishing enemies and silencing critics, these things do not strike in the heart of conservatism. they strike at the heart of what america's all about. these are the things that drive the obama and economy and an agenda that we have seen again and again. they have little regard for those who dissent or for those constitution's government to protect them. let me leave you with this. keep up the fight.

some news the power of the office to curtail their freedoms. we need to use the power free citizens to restore them. before i became a republican leader of the senate, i was sentenced for a campaign of laws. they were a serious blow to the right of free speech. it was not easy. this included some friends and my own party. the low point was when i watched a republican president signed into law a bill that i have been fighting for a decade. i did not give up. i sued the government. i'm still fighting it to this day. i bring this up not to pat myself on the back, i bring it

up to make a point. i will continue to fight it through channels that are my of mine.ht as a sentenc everyone has this power. we have the ability to fight back against the infringement of our freedoms. no president is more powerful than the constitution of the united states. your job is to share that with others. to share that with others. is aheme of this year' question that answer itself. do still hold these truths? rally in my lifetime or yours have we had such an opportunity or obligation to prove that we do.

i want to thank you for your devotion to the constitution into the principles that inform its. i want to thank you for the determination in the energy in canada is that show our views. issues your commitment to the cause of liberty. liberty is actually preserved. in one have been any other way. freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. we did not pass it to our children in the bloodstream. it must be fought for, protected, and handed on to them to do the same. you are doing that necessary work. the rest of us are so very

grateful. thank you so much. >> also heard from elections. this is half an hour. >> part of my job is to tell you things you do not like to hear. we're going to have some of that discussion as to talk about the

2012 landscape. i want to begin a question with you first. i want you to be honest. many of you have made fun of the president's call for open change? raise your hands? with all due respect, and that is really stupid. the reason for that is simple. voters have voted against the party in power. they are unhappy with both sides. voters have changed as much today as they were in 2008. they do realize that there is no hope if they count on politicians. they are looking for that help. he ought to be encouraging people you support to offer that positive step forward. we talked about the electorate landscape. i'm happy to have on the panel

today erik erikson from redstate.com. we also got paulo from "the washington journal." as we talk about these issues, i want you to realize this election is being held at a special time. the last time that government spending went down in america was two years before i was born. it is not the clinton era or even the jimmy carter era. the good news is voters are ready to change that.

we're not sure if the politicians have caught up. i want to ask ralph to start as off. right now as a look at the presidential election, we see the republican electorate that is not excited about their front runner but 75% of republican voters think that mitt romney will be the nominee. have you see this playing out. >> the landscape is littered thanimprobable s far later it usually is. i hate to say this. none of the signs that i see are particularly good. intensity has gone that the

intensity is now with the democrats. i regard that is a very bad time. the enthusiasm among republican voters for any of the candidates is dangerously low. no matter who you have, you have to be partisan to believe they have the money to get the job done. that is for the nomination. none of these folks about how it generates a pared the republican

party -- generates. the republican party put up a candidate who is not conservative, it has lost the election. if i am wrong on that, i would like some data. >> this has been notable in your satisfaction. how did we get to this point? >> they blame george bush for a lot of things he is not blamed for. follow along. every president generally has this. george bush had dick cheney who did not want to run. they have a referendum by either

choosing this are someone else. we went all the way back to 2000 and started over again. we're now in the situation where it is a bit of a victim from the void that was left. i think a republican has yet to reset itself for them to be able to move forward. >> has the obama as a mission help the republican party in general? there is this recent issue about the contraceptive mandate. >> whoever becomes the republican nominee, and i would guess i take issue with ralph. i worked on every presidential campaign since 1980.

i was 4 years old. this is the most wide open, most topsy-turvy. think about this. there have been eight contests so far. the front-runner has won three of them. you have three different winners. i realize that later california and the states in the northeast will be winner take all. i would say the day of the convention decided it nomination was over and was settled, i think that will be the case in 2012. whoever emerges whether it is romney are someone else is going to be a better, more disciplined, tougher candidates when they have to stand on a

stage with barack obama. four years ago when barack obama had to go 12 rounds with hillary clinton and what was true in 1992 with bill said, you buy one and you get to. that is true. that was 2008 to the obama as well. he took on hillary, bill and the entire clinton machine. he could have never won the generals by the margin needed without first beating them. the first issue is the religious liberty issue. this administration hated that every catholic -- one in every six patients in the united states is in a catholic hospital. 90% of all the homeless shelters are operated by the church and synagogue. one out of every 10 americans below the poverty level, which is about 57 million americans

is a client of catholic charity. that is thought to include the other done nominations. for them to be told that they have to choose between violating their conscience of providing health care to their employers, shows not just this but and outright hostility by this president to religion into the religious values. >> beyond that, the president of united states has done something that jesus himself could not do. he has united muslims, jews and other baptists all together in opposition. he really is the nightmare. in 2008, barack obama 154% of

the catholic vote. this morning he gets a 39% 1. he is down 15 points. >> is that your dad said? that is your data. add to that the research data. it shows that in 2008, 49% of catholics said they or democrats. today it is 39% republicans and 15 point swing. those voters are going to be the swing votes. it is just about every battleground state. there has been a shift. what about the intensity tax

what about feeling that they have the votes oral something ?ad happens tha >> begins the light that he has no deeply held moral beliefs of religious america. it also gives the lie to the abortion one. it is not going to be enough to be anti obama, whether it is romney or santorum or whoever. we have to have a forward leaning agenda that will excite and energize. >> we're talking about some of the issues. they showed the economy is the top issues driving a elections. before lehman brothers collapse,

43% said there finances were in good shape. when president obama took office, it had already fallen 35%. last summer it was down to 27%. right now 35% say their finances are in good shape. if that number keeps moving up, people feel better about the economy. >> is a lot harder. i do not think that will be the case. he still have almost a billion more people out of work. historically, no one has been reelected as president in the year in which real personal income declined. right now that number is down. it is whether or not people feel like they have money in their

park it. >> you think it is more than the economy? >> i think it should mean more than the economy. i think republicans have decided that they're going with electability instead of issues. if electability is your case and it is based on i can fix the economy, then why do we want that the obamacare payments and millions of dollars. we need to have more of an agenda. they always thought that they could use the economy. there is a story to be told about barack obama. he is the man if you want to succeed in his america, we have to be on board his campaign. it resonates with people in the country. i think the republicans are dropping.

it seems like we're setting ourselves up to lose if the economy improves. we should be able to beat a man. >> all of these figures are interesting. we will go back and forth. we do not know which ones will be the ones that make a difference. this much i believe is true. unless the nominee has a message, a simple message that they need to get out, i do not think we have a chance. i do not know that every conservative thinks of himself as a republican. did you think of the republican party, the only available repository of your beliefs, the problem is you do not have any

candidates. they demonstrate the ability to get a message. why are any of these candidates right? what is it they're going to do to change america? the agenda of the leading candidates, the presumed nominee -- this is not how you do it. the problem is unless you have a core belief, you recall that conservatism. it is hard to come up with to our theme -- two or three things the way reagan did. i think the playing field right now belongs to obama. he will have more money. he will have the incumbency.

>> let's go beyond the white house. what about the house and the senate now could 2012. is that looking as bleak? >> i do not want to belabor the point. i think the gallup poll last week or the week before, the top 12 battlegrounds, romney was beating obama by a point. that is before the nomination has been resolved. keep in mind romney is acting as is sarah gets. no democrat has been elected president -- acting as a surrogate. no democrat has elected president in the history of the united states without carrying at least three southern states.

obamacare in virginia, north carolina and florida. i do not think we will carry one of the states. in terms of the house and senate, no incumbent president has game more than 15 states in a reelection since world war ii with one exception. that was lyndon johnson in 1964. it doesn't really count. it was not johnson treelike. usually you're going to have -- it was not johnson's re-elect. use a year going to have it. even reagan -- you are usually going to have it. even reagan only picked up 15 house seats in 1984. he turned to the senate, i think the picture is better. nine months out, a lot of things can change.

this seat is gone. now you are at 48, assuming north dakota good republican. it should. at that point we get to 51. you have to win to. then scott brown has to be elected in massachusetts. i like our chances. i have said the scary as possible outcome would be for the republicans to win the white house and not bring about any significant change. is that the scenario? >> i am afraid there may be an

inability to affect change. forget registered voters. look at people who are likely to vote. people who are likely to vote are expecting real change. congress has an 11% approval rating. do you know why they have a bad approval rate among republicans tax is because the tea party sees them re the -- republicans? it is because the tea party sees them raise the debt ceiling. it is fitting 2010 in perspective. he had to go back to the 1800's to find an election of that scale. you take state, county and municipal races. there are cities in north carolina and south carolina and

georgia were they used to be all democrats. you cannot find them anymore. the of became a republican. -- they all became a republican. suddenly the top of the ticket moves its. you have them running away from the ticket. we cannot just focus on the white house. we have to focus on the house and senate governors. we would be nowhere else with the obamacare without conservative efforts by the attorneys general. >> are there super pacs that addressed the funding? what would a bad turn out mean for them? >> i think a bad turnout would

actually hurt us. this is the first redistricting that they have ever controlled. the republicans have controlled the department of justice for every sentence redistricting. it is the first time the democrats have ever done it. they tried to pull back possible republican gains in the legislative races. they tried to put republicans in tighter districts. >> is a possible for the republican presidential nominee to not be the leader of the conservative movement? >> of course. >> what happens if that happens? >> nobody knows the future. it means suicide for the republican president as long as i have been on the planet. >> it is not the best scenario.

i guess what i would say is, speaking as someone who has been involved in the conservative movement, we have spent most of the time on this panel doing what a lot of this did during breaks. the sort of sit around and saying john boehner ought to do this. i also want to put the monkey on our back. i like what newt says when he says i'm not asking you to be for me, i am asking you to be with me. when you look at what we're going to face, and those flying

around and the meanest, toughest political team we've ever faced. when you look at what that is going to look light, it is on our back. it is our responsibility. how many people in this room have attended a tea party events in the last few years tax what republican politician make that happen -- few years? what republican politician made that happen? we made it from the bottom up.

let's not think of them being the one that has to take the case. let's go out there and turn of the biggest conservative vote in a presidential election in modern political history. n/a usend barack obama haul back to chicago where he belongs. -- in a u haul back to chicago where he belongs. [applause] >> other than the desire to beat barack obama and the message about the economy, what is the key for conservatives and republicans? >> i think whoever the nominee is, i buy for santorum pose a message.

if you get any job and you get married any stay married and did not have children until you are married, you have internet chance of being in poverty. our chance for a resurgent america is not just americans back at work. that is important. it is not just in america with a balanced budget. it is an america with charitable institutions and strong marriages and families. >> why is that different from mitt romney or from ron paul's message? >> i think romney starting to get there. i think he has that. it is in his wheel house. i think i was glad to see him in

colorado last week start to talk about his religious liberty issue. he needs to do more of it. >> the very first republican presidential campaign was not abraham lincoln. it was 1856. lincoln said the tone for that one. he said the nation was 8 years old. we were the enemy of the world. lincoln said he had thought about it and the reason we were the envy of the world is because every man can make himself on like any other country in the world. and barack obama pose a america, that is no longer true. we did in -- in barack obama's america, that is no longer true. >> i think the one thing we need to keep in mind is every bit of polling data and policy data

suggests that america's best days are still to come. things may get worse before they get better. the policy discussions may not go the way you want. in the elections mean that go every time the way you want. this nation still has an incredibly bright future because the american people still believe, 81%, that we have a creator was certain inalienable rights. >> i would like to thank them. >> rick perry told the conference that the federal government is too close to wall street. he did not mention the other presidential candidates but warned of the audience about using a lukewarm replacement for president obama. this is a little over 20

minutes. >> many people in this room helped me unseat a 20 year incumbent budget chairmen to be the first republican since 1880 to represent my district in south carolina. during that campaign, i had the opportunity to get to know every single republican candidates to president of united states. i came to like and admire each and every one of them. i told them i regard. there is one candidate who stood out. in my mind he passed the most important test that a politician can make appear to have a proven track record of backing conservative words with conservative actions. that is one that is all too lacking in politics today. it is easy to talk about being conservative. it is much harder to act, to

vote, and to lead as conservatives. it is important to me be its individual freedom, every single one the man that i'm getting ready to introduce has proven himself to me. the country is going to wake up and realize that we need conservative leadership. we will realize that what we have been doing for generations is leading us down the wrong path. we will realize that if we do not go back to the things that served as so well for centuries, that we may well be doomed to failure. when that happens, when we finally realized that, what it means to be a conservative, we will be called into

question. what it means may not be the same thing. there is a small group of us in the house of representatives and senate and a large group of you in the room here today who have been working and will continue to work to preserve the definition of conservatism. the message will not be lost. will not be lost. there will be a gentleman in texas during the same thing and that man will be rick perry. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> thank you. a big thank you to make small

laney, an absolute true conservative. i am grateful for his support and strong words this afternoon. i am honored to be here. i am honored to be here with men and women your foot soldiers in the revolution sparked several years ago by the election of a president whose birth we celebrated this week. of course, i am talking about ronald reagan. absolutely. president reagan, he must be staring down from heaven and thinking that reincarnation may indeed be possible. [laughter] when jimmy carter's failed presidency could reappear in the form of barack obama, he must be thinking that. as many of you know, i have certain ideas about putting an end to this president's failed administration until the people of iowa and new hampshire had a

different idea. back at texas a&m, my alma maters, we had a very unique way of addressing defeat. aggies never lose. we just run out of time. [laughter] so you can say that my presidential campaign just ran out of time. but i have not run out on the ideas or my belief in our shared conservative ideas. a candid but i am no more, but a committed 10th amendment to be.econservative i will [applause] uc, this election is not about nearly ending economic misery, record debts, runaway spending, failed washington policies represented in the form of the

obama administration. the question has never been whether obama must go, but what kind of leadership is needed to replace him to get this country back on track. we do the american people know great service if we replace the current the embodiment of government with a lukewarm version of the same. we need to stop attending -- [applause] we need to stop pretending that the main goal of the republican government is to do the same thing as democrats but not spend as much money. quit believing that. quit doing that. we did not lose the house in 2006 because of an unpopular war, but because the republican party had traded in its calling card of fiscal conservatism on the road to those corrupting earmarks, excessive spending, and bigger government. that is why we lost. [applause]

us is to012 offers offer a starkly different vision for america. we cannot tinker the way to victory. we have to be bold. we have to be clear. we must embrace constitutional conservatism. the argument is not just about how much we spend on various programs. we can never outspend or outpander, for that matter, the liberal democrats. the argument must be about whether we continue to centralize power in washington or we return it to the people and the states. we do not need washington meddling in our local schools. we do not need washington -- [applause] and their epa discarding the epa

rules established by the state. we do not need the justice department decided whether states have the right to have a voter i.d. to vote. we do not need that. [applause] we do not need a washington that requires governors to come into washington, d.c. and grovel for health care waivers so they can take care of their poorest citizens in a cost-effective manner. i have been fighting this type of washington over reach for 10 + years. last year, i proudly cited budget that ended all state funding for planned parenthood in my state. [applause] since then, there has been about a dozen of those clinics that have shut down in my state.

but you see, because left wing pro-abortion radicals do not like what we did, president obama has invalidated a waiver that provides health care for more than 100,000 women in my home state. they literally set aside funding for preventative health care because we refused to subsidize abortions. but why are we even subject to this decision to begin with? nowhere in the constitution doesn't say that health care should be run by the federal -- does it say that health care should be run by the federal government. [applause] washington has no right to dictate how and from whom receive health care, what your children learn in school, or how you clean your air or protecting our environment. that is not their role. if we elect leaders from the republican party who preserve

the current state of the bureaucracy, that command and control policy from washington, d.c., we get the government we deserve. [applause] we ought to either be true 10th amendment patriots or strip it out of the constitution. one of the two. [applause] the separation of power is -- the separation of powers doctrine is not just about checks and balances between congress, the executive branch, and the federal judiciary. it is also about divided sovereignty between federal government and the states. our founding fathers, from madison to washington, knew that, if we centralized power in an all-encompassing federal bureaucracy, one day the central government could become as intrusive and as powerful as

that distant crown for which they fought for liberty. [applause] our founders also protected and defended religious freedoms in our constitution and our young nation. today, even our religious freedoms are under attack from the obama administration in washington. this justice department tried to insert themselves in the hiring decisions of religious organizations by challenging the ministerial exception. fortunately, they failed. even the left wing justices of the supreme court thought that was too far a step. now though, this administration is assaulting the catholic church and people of faith across our nation by forcing their pro-abortion agenda on religious hospitals, charities, and employees. the obama administration's war

on faith must be defeated. we must win this war. [applause] we must protect this basic tenet of american freedoms, protect catholic hospitals and people of faith regardless of their domination, to stop president obama's policies in its tracks. we know that freedom does not come from government. it is not even granted by the constitution. it is a gift of a loving god. and it is the government's role to protect it. [applause] that is government's role. the federal role in safeguarding freedom is preeminently about defending our nation from foreign powers by securing the border and building a strong military. [applause]

if washington would simply provide for the common defense, secure our borders, and deliver our mail on time, preferably on saturdays -- [laughter] i would be happy. i guess one out of three is not too bad. but they are too busy regulating. they are too busy regulating our freedoms and to fulfil their basic responsibilities and obligations. they are spending our country into a sea of debt their children may never be able to come up for air. let me say something else. if it is that time in america, i am fearful about the final score will be if we let this president start the second half as the quarterback. [applause]

much has been said lately about who supports free enterprise and who does not. it makes something abundantly clear. we have the greatest catalyst system in the world. but it will not continue to be if we use government to remove risk. success on wall street should not come at the expense of main street. wall street and washington, that, all must be broken up. you take the housing crisis as a great example. the washington politicians pressured fannie, freddie, and the banks to provide easy lending to put more americans in homes that they could not afford. the federal reserve pushed

interest rates artificially low. the subprime market exploded with these risky loans. some americans thought, if you could get the house for 0% down and they could figure out how to pay the balloon payment later been nobody was watching the ratings agencies that were giving aaa ratings to complex securities that were filled with high risk loans. when the market crashed, those on wall street who saw it coming, they made millions. and those who did not see it coming, they got bailed out. now we learned that that $700 billion tarp payment was catapulted compared to the secret loan guarantee of $7.70 trillion. you ought to be outraged.

you ought to be incensed. those paying the price are not the large banks who were over leveraged, not the insurance companies who took on too much risk, not even the executives to continue to read these large bonuses even after the walls came tumbling down. no, it was people like you and me. it was those of you in this audience and the rest of the country who are paying the price, average americans, main street businesses, our children who stand to inherit the worst financial mess that this country has ever seen. and it is wrong. it is unfair. and it is weakening america. we need to clean up the corruption from k street to wall street so they cannot gamble with their children's future ever again. [applause] america remains the most noble

experiment in governing ever offered in the history of mankind. for the first time ever, the founders of a nation recognized our rights are endowed by our creator. and after winning our freedom, they did not centralized power amongst themselves. they gave it back to the people. this election is about a smaller, humbler federal government. it is about restoring power to the american people. if we're to have a nation that lived up to constitutional ideals, then it is not merely about spending less on washington programs, but about returning that power to the people and the state's. you do not have to settle.

you do not have to settle this election. you do not have to resign yourself to the faith that this country will be less in the future than it was in the past. you have an opportunity. i say you have an obligation. you have the power and more importantly you have the constitution on your side to make conservative change. go forth. build a better nation based on those founding principles. take this country back and let the grand experiment of freedom the world has ever seen go forward. go forward powerfully pyrrhic it is in your hands and through your hands. god will bless you and you in turn will -- and he in turn will continue to bless this great country of america. god bless you and thank you. [applause]

>> the conservative political action conference also heard from herman cain. he spoke for about 20 minutes. >> we will take back the senate in november. speaking of beating obama, our next speaker is someone who knows a little bit about putting together a winning message for conservatives. less than four months ago, he was beating barack obama head- to-head in the polls and leading the presidential candidates. to say that herman cain needs no introduction is an understatement. it is sort of like saying our nation has a debt problem or joe biden should not be allowedne i. [laughter] i doubt there's anybody in this room who was not aware of his dynamic and unflinching leadership on behalf of conservatism or his economic proposal that does more to promote the no. 9 than pseudo cresudoku.

he is a reminder that america is the one place that can offer the flight path to ambitions. herman cain learn from his parents that their family may have not had much money, but they were rich because of their spirit and optimism. he earned degrees in mathematics and computer science. his talents led to careers working in the u.s. navy and for pills barry. we know that he has had incredible success in the business world. he was responsible for reviving godfather's pizza and boosting burger king. his path to success was one paved with use of hard work. he led a branch of the federal reserve and was ceo of the national restaurant association where he effectively confronted

bill clinton. he has been fighting in the trenches of conservatism for years, promoting and upholding the principles of our constitution far and wide from the border into the inner city and everywhere in between. he was one of the founding fathers of the tea party movement. and last year, herman cain also understands what it is to fight and to win tough battles with long odds. five years ago, he was diagnosed with advancing cancer. for a man who built his success on being able to do the math, the 30% odds the doctors gave him was just another number. thankfully, he is here with us today cancer free. herman is a man who truly understands what matters most in life. with his trademark smile, optimism, hard work, family,

industry, consistency -- although he is no longer running for president, herman cain is far from steny on the sidelines. his solutions revolution -- far from standing on the sidelines. without further ado, it is my pleasure to introduce you to a man who remains a shining light for our movement, our nation, and teleprompter-free for many years, herman cain. [applause] ♪ >> thank you.

thank you very much. just so that there is new confusion, these teleprompter are not for me. s.do not do teleprompter i in 1773, the colonists were fed up with old king george and the abuse and the arrogance imposed upon citizens and patriots who all they wanted to do was to create a free nation. in 1785, two years later, the american revolution started.

eight years after that, we won. -- we won the american revolution. [applause] our nation today has become a nation of crises. we have an economic crisis. we have an energy crisis. we have an illegal immigration crisis. we have a foggy foreign policy crisis. we have a moral crisis. and the biggest crisis we have is a severe deficiency of leadership crisis. [applause] and here is what this administration and what many of people of washington, d.c. do not understand. the american people are fed up

again with the abuse and the arrogance. we need another revolution in this country! [applause] it will not be bombs and bullets. not this time. it will be brains and balance at the ballot box. we must outsmart the liberals. we must outsmart the stupid people that are trying to ruin america! [applause] we outnumber the stupid people! trust me! i counted them! [laughter] my good friend was a radio talk- show host out of atlanta.

many of you know neil. i was a guest on his show wednesday. he said, herrmann, i beg to differ with you. i said, what is that, neal. he said, there is a difference between people being stupid and ignorant. i said, yes, you are right. you say stupid people are running america, but they do not have the ability to learn. ignorant people have the ability to learn that they will not learn. they do not know any better. i said, neil, you are technically correct. [laughter] but what you're saying, neil, is stupid people and ignorant people are ruining america, both of them i do not -- both of them. i do not care what the technical distinction is, they're both ruining america. i challenge each of you last year at this very conference to do three things. i challenged you to stay

informed, stay involved, and to stay inspired. and those three strategies are still applicable today because, since we met here a year ago, those three strategies have become even more important. and i know that many of you were big supporters of mine when i was a candidate for president. [applause] thank you. thank you. i want you to know that that is not something that i do not appreciate. just so i will say to you directly because of your support and enthusiasm, there were two reasons i dropped out of the race. gutter politics and, number

two, i chose to put family first. [applause] and in making that decision, i knew that we, together, could change washington, d.c. from the outside and from the bottom up even if your david did not make it to the white house. [applause] so what i decided to do is create an army of david's and yu will be a part of that army. stay informed. this administration is deceiving the american people. they say that we are in the recovery. but how can 1.7% growth to gdp

be a recovery? it is not. this is the only president where gdp has not gotten above 4% in the three years that he has been there and it is not anticipated that it will happen in this year and he says on tv "i deserve another term." for what? [applause] 1.7% gdp growth is not a recovery. the other thing that this administration is deceiving the american people on -- unemployment rates. some of you on the recall that i was a mathematics major in college. i can count. [laughter] and i also know when they have manipulated the numbers to present whatever result they

want. it is called -- if you change the assumptions, you can get a different result. that is what they did. they stopped counting the people that dropped out of the workforce. they stopped counting the people there or underemployed. that is how they came up with 8.3%. but if you add those people back in, the real unemployment rate exceeds 15%. that is the real number. stay informed. know the facts. and i am not the only one who uncovered their little scammed. former labor secretary elaine chao did her analysis and came up with the same results. stay informed, folks. because, unfortunately, the mainstream lapdog media, they cannot do those calculations.

so most of the american people will be buffalo'ed by false facts. stay informed. know the facts. go to my website, caine connections.com. stay involved. i know that you are all involved in different organizations. that is great. you are here because you are involved and you want to learn. but stay involved. one of the ways that you can stay more involved is to adopt the most bold economic growth and jobs plan on the planet. 9-9-9, adopt it. [applause] make it yours! make it your plan.

here is have the adoption plan works. go to your representatives or your senatorial candidate before they get elected and ask them to 9-9-9.9/ and if they say they do not know anything about it, that is a cop out. if you go to caine connections.com, we have 9-9-9 the movie. they will understand what it is. get your representative to adopt nine-9-9 before they get elected. because the nine-9-9 adoption plan is leading this revolution. we will get congress and the

president to basically embrace this solution that the american people want. we are tired of kicking the can down the road. the american people will not -- the american people what stuff fixed. let's fix something for a change. [applause] we have already gotten many representatives running for congress, many senators running for congress who have legislatiy drafted, we will ask them to do something that many of them normally do not do. read it. after they read it, we will ask for a firm commitment. but i need your help to get them to adopt the nine-nine-nine plan. one of the people that is

running for the united states congress in the state of ohio, in a very challenging district, has adopted 9-9-9 and i am endorsing his candidacy. that is mine friend joe the plumber. stand up, joe. [applause] you see, some of us choose to get off of the sidelines and i admire joe for doing that. yes, he will get attacked. yes, they will try to do the same things to him that they did to me. but, folks, more of us have to take that challenge. i do not regret making the move that i made because that is more than one way to skin a cat.

stay informed. stay involved. and thirdly, state inspired. you see, the liberals want you to believe that we cannot do this. they want you to believe that obama's billion dollars, if he gets that much campaign money, will make it issue in. no, it is not. that is what they want you to believe. state inspired. remember those founding fathers that i talked about? when they started the american revolution, there were a lot of people that told them they could not win the american revolution. but they did. because they believed that they could. a lot of people thought that comes after the character assassination that was launched against me, that herrmann would shut up and sit down and go away.

happen.nna [applause] well, let me tell you what inspires me. my inspiration -- everybody is inspired by different things and by different reasons -- i have a long list of things that inspired me to run for president, that inspired me to be a voice for the conservative movement, that inspired me to change the direction of this country because we are on the wrong track and we have to take back and we have more than one way to take it back. let me tell you what has inspired me. you heard me talk about my granddaughter. when i first saw that little face, she was born in 1999. and when i looked in her little face, the first thought that occurred to me was what do i do to make this a better nation and a better world?

she was born long before i ever thought about getting involved and changing the direction of this country. in the year 1999, that is 1-9- 9-9. [applause] you see, i think god was in it that you then, but i did not see it then. she was born one-9-9-9. and on january 1, 2012, this year, my fourth grandchild was born on new year's day! [applause] #4. and before the doctor spanked his little but and made him cry,

he already owed $48,000 and he had not done anything yet! [applause] we cannot leave that to our children and our grandchildren. there is a real clear message, folks. you and i are sending it to , d.c. ton d.c we, the people, are coming. we want our power back. we, the people, are coming and we want our power back. [applause] it was the irish philosopher edmund burke who once wrote that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men

and women to do nothing. i will not die doing nothing. and i do not believe you will die doing nothing to give our children and our grandchildren the kind of nation that we were able to enjoy. because the preamble to the constitution says "we, the people, of the united states, in order to form and more perfect union." the union is in trouble and it is up to you and me to get it back on track. we hold these truths to be self- evident. we still hold these truths to be self-evident.

and we, the people, are still in charge of this nation! let's take our country back. [applause] ♪ >> our coverage of the annual conservative political action conference continues tomorrow morning from washington with virginia governor and chairman of the republican governors association bob macdonald shortly after 10:00 a.m. eastern. we will also hear from three gop presidential candidates. rick santorum is the that 10:25 a.m. eastern. mitt romney is just before 1:00 p.m. and newt gingrich will be there just after 4:00 p.m. >> in fewer than 60 days, effective april 1, 2012, japan will lower its combined corporate rates to 38%. that will leave the united states with the highest corporate tax rate in the entire industrialized world. this dubious distinction will make it more challenging to attract businesses at home where

we need jobs. >> thscene tax law made is like seeing sausage made. you just do not want to see it. >> it is time to work collectively to support a more coherent and equitable tax policy and corporate taxation structure. >> this week, the house ways and means took up corporate tax policy and how to encourage investment and job growth by lowering tax rates and eliminating special tax breaks. follow the does caution online at the video library at c- span.org/videolibrary. >> in a few moments, today's justice department announcement of a settlement between the federal and state governments and the nation's largest mortgage lenders over foreclosure abuses. you'll hear from president obama and attorney general eric holder.

and in a little more than an hour, a look at the television coverage of the supreme court, including comments from justices and 10 and scully and briar. and a bill that televises open proceedings. >> a couple of live events to tell you about tomorrow. the turkish foreign minister talks about his country's role in the middle east at the center for strategic and international studies. that is on c-span 3. on c-span 2 at 1:00 p.m. eastern, a brookings institute for on a arms reduction treaty. >> should not your president have the highest moral and ethical standards and be an example to our children and young people in this country? ask yourself that question

please. should not his life make him a role model for future children. should anyone you like to this office always keep his promises. >> as candidates campaigned for president this year, we look back at 14 men who ran for the office and lost. go to our website to see video of the contenders who had a lasting impact on american politics. >> do they not have the right to protest and rebel against a government that they feel does not serve their interest? who appointed us to sacrifice the lives of young americans trying to weigh in on the side of a government that represents perhaps 15% of the people of lebanon and has little or no apparent support from the other 85%? >> c-span.org/thecontenders.

>> under a new agreement, lenders will reduce loans to nearly 100 households and send checks to thousands of others who were wrongfully foreclosed upon. president obama spoke about the agreement for 10 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. before i start, i want to introduce to is on stage here. the extraordinary work they did is the reason that a lot of families will be held across the country. first of all, our attorney general eric colder, secretary of housing and -- sean donovan, tom parolee. we have attorney general george

jensen from connecticut. we have lisa madigan from my home state of illinois. and dustin mcdaniel from arkansas. gregory is a lawyer from indiana. and tom miller from iowa. i also want to acknowledge bob ryan who worked with sean donovan on this issue. and i will also acknowledge gene sperling who does not get the credit he deserves for doing such outstanding work. the housing bubble that burst three years ago triggered the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes. the cost millions of innocent americans their jobs and their homes. it remains the biggest drag on our economy.

last week, i urge congress to pass a plan that would help millions more americans to refinance and stay in their homes. and i indicated that the american people need congress to act on this piece of legislation. but in the meantime, we can't wait to get things done and to provide relief to america's homeowners. we need to keep doing everything we can to help homeowners and our economy. and today, with the help of democratic and republican attorney generals from nearly every state in the country, we are about to take a major step on our own. we have reached a landmark settlement with the nation's largest banks that will speed relief to the hardest-hit homeowners, end some of the most abusive practices of the mortgage industry, and begin to turn the page on an era of recklessness that has left so

much damage in its wake. by now, it's well known that millions of americans who did the right thing and the responsible thing -- shopped for a house, secured a mortgage that they could afford, made their payments on time -- were, nevertheless, hurt badly by the irresponsible actions of others -- by lenders who sold loans to people who couldn't afford them, by buyers who knew they couldn't afford them, by speculators who were looking to make a quick buck, by banks that took risky mortgages, packaged them up, and traded them off for large profits. it was wrong. and it cost more than 4 million families their homes to foreclosure. even worse, many companies that handled these foreclosures didn't give people a fighting chance to hold onto their homes. in many cases, they didn't even verify that these foreclosures were actually legitimate.

some of the people they hired to process foreclosures used fake signatures to -- on fake documents to speed up the foreclosure process. some of them didn't read what they were signing at all. we've got to think about that. you work and you save your entire life to buy a home. that's where you raise your family. that's where your kids' memories are formed. that's your stake, your claim on the american dream. and the person signing the document couldn't take enough time to even make sure that the foreclosure was legitimate. these practices were plainly irresponsible. and we refused to let them go unanswered. so about a year ago, our federal law enforcement agencies teamed up with state attorneys general to get to the bottom of these abuses. the settlement we've reached today, thanks to the work of

some of the folks who are on this stage -- this is the largest joint federal-state settlement in our nation's history -- is the result of that extraordinary cooperation. under the terms of this settlement, america's biggest banks -- banks that were rescued by taxpayer dollars -- will be required to right these wrongs. that means more than just paying a fee. these banks will put billions of dollars towards relief for families across the nation. they'll provide refinancing for borrowers that are stuck in high interest rate mortgages. they'll reduce loans for families who owe more on their homes than they're worth. and they will deliver some measure of justice for families that have already been victims of abusive practices. all told, this isn't just good for those families -- it's good for their neighborhoods, it's good for their communities, and it's good for our economy. this settlement also protects

our ability to further investigate the practices that caused this mess. and this is important. the mortgage fraud task force i announced in my state of the union address retains its full authority to aggressively investigate the packaging and selling of risky mortgages that led to this crisis. this investigation is already well underway. and working closely with state attorneys general, we're going to keep at it until we hold those who broke the law fully accountable. now, i want to be clear. no compensation, no amount of money, no measure of justice is enough to make it right for a family who's had their piece of the american dream wrongly taken from them. and no action, no matter how meaningful, is going to, by itself, entirely heal the housing market. but this settlement is a start. and we're going to make sure that the banks live up to their end of the bargain. if they don't, we've set up an independent inspector, a

monitor, that has the power to make sure they pay exactly what they agreed to pay, plus a penalty if they fail to act in accordance with this agreement. so this will be a big help. of course, even with this settlement, there's still millions of responsible homeowners who are out there doing their best. and they need us to do more to help them get back on their feet. we've still got to stoke the fires of our economic recovery. so now is not the time to pull back. to build on this settlement, congress still needs to send me the bill i've proposed that gives every responsible homeowner in america the chance to refinance their mortgage and save about $3,000 a year. it would help millions of homeowners who make their payments on time save hundreds of dollars a month, and it can broaden the impact building off this settlement. that's money that can be put back into the homes of those folks who are saving money on the refinancing, helping to build their equity back up. they may decide to spend that money on local businesses.

either way, it's good for families, and it's good for our economy. but it's only going to happen if congress musters the will to act. and i ask every american to raise your voice and demand that they do. because there really is no excuse for inaction. there's no excuse for doing nothing to help more families avoid foreclosure. that's not who we are. we are americans, and we look out for one another, we get each other's backs. that's not a democratic issue, that's not a republican issue. that's who we are as americans. and the bipartisan nature of this settlement and the outstanding work that these state attorneys general did is a testament to what happens when everybody is pulling in the same direction. and that's what today's settlement is all about -- standing up for the american people, holding those who broke the law accountable, restoring confidence in our housing market and our financial sector, getting things moving. and we're going to keep on at it

until everyone shares in america's comeback. so, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your outstanding efforts. we are very, very proud of you. and we look forward to seeing this settlement lead to some small measure of relief to a lot of families out there that need help. and that's going to strengthen the american economy overall. so thank you very much. >> are there any thoughts, mr. president, you can share on the contraception policy before you leave? >> attorney general eric holder and sean donovan led the

conference. this is one hour. >> good morning. i am pleased to join with secretary sean donovan, the attorney general of the state of bio, so sit attorney-general parolee, richard scored ray, inspector david montoya, an attorney general for the state of colorado, lisa madigan, and roy cooper to announce our latest step forward in righting the wrongs that led to our nation's housing market collapse and economic crisis. today, the departments of justice and housing and urban development, along with 40 other states attorneys general and other federal agencies have

reached a landmark $25 billion settlement agreement. this agreement reflects our agreement at federal and state level to ensure justice and to cover losses for victims of reckless and abusive mortgage purchases. this agreement establishes significant new homeowner protections to help prevent future misconduct. it also provides substantial financial assistance to victims of borrowers -- to victim borrowers. it is the largest in a joint civil settlement in the history of this nation. although every american can be encouraged by the summit and the promise it a cheese, i realize that more work must be done. that is why we have taken steps

to ensure that this will not interfere with their ability with current investigations and to advance the work of the financial fraud enforcement task force. let me be very clear on this. civil claims based on mortgage loan services activities, this does not prevent state and federal authorities from pursuing criminal action and preserves extensive claims related to mortgage securitization activities, including the claims it will be the focus of the new residential mortgage-backed securities. it will not hinder claims by individual borrowers who want to bring their own individual lawsuits.

i noted that, by focusing on core operations and bringing our government's full resources to bear, we can improve our financial markets to prevent fraud and to hold those who violate the law accountable. today's settlement proves this and it is a remarkable example of corporate law enforcement. multiple federal agencies, including doj, the office of the inspector general, the federal housing administration, the federal finance bureau, the board of governors of the board system and the general inspector general all played key roles in achieving this settlement. and we partnered with state the journal's -- state attorneys general offices across the country who want valuable expertise and unique on the

ground experience with those directly affected by the foreclosure crisis to this resolution. in particular, i want you to acknowledge the outstanding work by the justice department. the u.s. trustee's program, which serves as the blastoff of all bankruptcy court operations was one of the first agencies to examine servicer abuse. as part of the investigation, trustees reviewed 37,000 documents by mortgage servicers in federal bankruptcy court and to the schedule in more than 175 cases across the country. these efforts were advanced by several united states attorneys, including attorney lynch from the district of new york was with us today. during the three-year investigation, profits issued multiple subpoenas, reviewed over 2 million documents, and interviewed numerous witnesses. they have worked tirelessly to

seek justice for homeowners who were treated unfairly and for taxpayers to foot the bill. the expertise that they provided was essential in reaching this historic settlement. similar large-scale reviews were also conducted by hud, the fha, and others. our investigation revealed disturbing practices. we saw that, far too often, servicers push borrowers into foreclosure, even though federal regulations required those servicers to try other alternatives first. these failures did not just hurt borrowers who may have been able to afford modified mortgages. they fueled the downward spiral of our economy and communities. the ruined faith in our financial system and punish american taxpayers who have had to foot the bill for foreclosures that could have been avoided. with this settlement, we are recovering precious taxpayer

resources and the states' attorneys general will be establishing a fund to facilitate payment to borrowers who, as a result of these lending practices, lost their homes during the financial crisis. mortgage servicers will be required to retain additional funds to help the neighborhoods. the agreement includes specific protections and justice for u.s. service members and their families. i also want to note that, with this settlement, we're not just holding mortgage services accountable. we're using it to fix a broken system and to lay the groundwork for a better future. they will be required to follow a new set of standards that will be overseen by an independent monitor and will be enforceable in federal court. my colleagues will discuss some of the details of today's

settlement in more details. anyone seeking more information is encouraged to look up www. nationalmortgagesettlement.com. i would like to turn this over to one of the leaders of this important work, sean donovan. >> thank you. i want to thank everyone here on the stage, but also the countless folks who are here in the audience who worked so closely for long hours, including into the wee hours last night, to make this day possible. i want to return in a moment to talk about the remarkable work in particular of our state partners at the state attorneys

general. but i would like to single out in particular tom pirelli who was a relentless magnificent partner in this work. tom, thank you. eric, thank you for picking tom and putting him on this as a partner. i really do want to appreciate the work that you did together with my team. as attorney general holder just mentioned, this historic settlement will not only hold institutions that wrong families, neighborhoods, and contributed to the collapse of not just the american economy, but the international economy, not just hold them accountable, but it will also provide immediate relief to homeowners. forcing banks to reduce principal on loans, refinance loans for underwater borrowers, and pay billions of dollars to

states that can be used for direct help to consumers struggling today. it comes not a moment too soon for homeowners, for our housing market, and for our economy. we all know how the housing bubble burst, how lenders sold loans to people who could not afford them, and how the package mortgages up to make profits that turned out to be nothing more than a mirage. and millions of families who did the right thing but still lost their house or solve their home prices drop through no fault of their own. as the bank has acknowledged, they heard from consumers and every state of this nation. it did not stop there. they continued long after people got the keys to their new homes. we know this not only because the investigations that attorney general holder just spoke about but because in the

summer of 2010 long before the signing scandal erupted into public view, hud initiated a review of the largest servicers. combined with the word you hear about from our inspector general and his remarkable team, between us we devoted more than 15,000 hours to reviewing servicing files for thousands upon thousands of fha insured loans. the scope of this review included not just the signing concept that has been so publicly discussed, but a long list of mortgage servicing issues such as lost paperwork, long delays, missed deadlines or problematic loan modifications offered to homeowners. as they found, the five largest

loan services were also routinely signed foreclosure related documents without really knowing whether the facts they contained were correct. many of the same financial institutions responsible for so much of this crisis or making it worse. harming families, neighborhoods, and our economy. the settlement holds them accountable for their actions. as you have heard in this settlement we are announcing, more than $25 billion in total. that number could grow as we look at additional institutions to the settlement. this is not just about punishing the banks for their irresponsible behavior. it is also about requiring them to help the people they harmed by funding efforts to help homeowners say in their homes. that is precisely what the settlement delivers, reducing

the loan balances for approximately 1 million families who owe more on their mortgages and then they are worth or have suffered in other ways. printable reduction at this scale will not only help these underwater homeowners build equity but their neighbors who have watched their homes dropped by $10,000 in value each time a foreclosure sign goes up in their neighborhood. the settlement will help unemployed homeowners catch up on late mortgage payments, seek housing services to connect at risk families to the help they need, and helps communities struggling with vacant properties that drive down home values. by instituting tough penalties and stringent time lines and forced to buy our respected monitor joseph smith, banks have a strong incentive to provide this quickly and effectively. it also provides cash payments

to homeowners who are victims of deceptive servicing practices. we all recognize the cannot undo the pain of this crisis by writing a check. these payments provide victims with a welcome and needed relief. one of the most important ways it helps homeowners is that in not only right past wrongs but it forces banks to clean up fairfax and fix problems uncovered by our investigations going forward. it was announced in the last few weeks. a single straightforward set of common sense rules that families can count on when they are making the single most important purchase of their lives. the requires them which

represents two out of every three mortgage loans serviced in this country to follow a long list of rights for those facing foreclosure. no more lost paperwork. no more excuses. no more runaround. this is just one step in making sure we right the wrongs of this crisis. last month, he and i announced with many state partners as well an investigation in the conduct of financial institutions that broke the law and lead to the crash of the housing market including security and relation cases. while it is not designed to address all the issues, it is a historic agreement. it is a big victory for those who are harmed the most. combined with the broad based financing plan that president obama announced to help homeowners last month, additional steps we made last month, it provides a path

towards stability for our housing market and broader economy. banks and servicers expect that homeowners will meet their obligations under a mortgage. homeowners should have the very same expectation of their financial institution. with this settlement, those institutions will be forced to live up to those expectations. holding these banks accountable is what the settlement is about. and helping the millions of families harmed by this crisis. it is why i am proud to join my partners today and why i am particularly proud to introduce not only attorney general tom miller but to also thank thomas suthers for their leadership. many americans have lost faith in institutions in this country and our ability to cross party

lines and put country ahead of politics. this agreement restores my faith and i hope so many other states that we can do big things regardless of party divisions and geographic lines. this would not have impossible without to the early and relentless leadership of tom miller and john suthers. i recognize the remarkable work of their colleagues as well. i need to single them out as a welcome tom miller to say thank you for their remarkable work. many of the things need to do to help homeowners going forward will require congressional action. i think we have on this stage an example of what can be done when we put the country ahead of party. we also cannot wait for that

action. this announcement today shows that we can do big things in this country across partisan lines and restore faith in the ability of our institutions to help families that need it most. tom, thank you. congratulations. john, thank you. >> this settlement is about homeowners. the homeowners in distressed, people in our country that need help as much as anybody else. that is what we have focused on. that is what the settlement does. as outlined by the attorney general and hud secretary, there are a number of things that help homeowners a lot. one aspect is the servicing stance. comprehensive servicing standards is a strong bill of rights with how they treat homeowners in distress. in the past, it is been a

dysfunctional system that they deny get called back. did they put documents in and they get -- system that they get a call back. they documents and and they get lost. it is a dysfunctional system. this set of guidelines has the potential to change all that, and it is going to be incumbent on all of us to make sure that is realized. and we have the states. we have the federal government. we have a monitor we have never had before in this kind of situation to make sure they do what they promised, and if they do, it is a sea change for homeowners. this is a great opportunity for

them to do the right thing. this agreement came about because of strong bipartisan relationships. he led this. a coordinated and work with republicans. the attorney general were a lot with the new republicans. she contributed a lot on this. cooper was a steady hand as we went forward.

lisa contributed so much through her own leadership and her own courage. i do not think we see that much courage, but we saw a lot for lisa as she supported in this agreement under very difficult times. that is good stuff, and we respect and admire you for that. attorney general gustin mcdaniel of arkansas, attorney general greg zeller are also here. they contributed as well, so we have this great group working

together on a bipartisan way we must admit we do not do all the work. we had a remarkable group of work done this for the last six months. patrick maddington was the leader. the key butler of florida -- vicki butler of florida, they were the work horses, and and we have another relationship with state banking regulators.

we work with them to deal with and prevent foreclosure. a great relationship now. i keep trying to think of myself as a relatively young man, but i have been attorney general for 30 years, and i have been involved in a lot of states and work with the federal government in a lot of ways, and i have had good relationships and sometimes not good relationships, but in all the time i have never seen such a wonderful, of effective, based on respect relationship as we have had. it has been truly wonderful. they treat us as equals. we get the job done as best as we can. it has been a model for federal state and relationships.

just going back one second, the attorney general's offices over the last four and a half years since the mortgage meltdown, we have done more pushing, prodding, threatening to sue than anyone else. in terms of knowledge, us and the state banking regulators are unparalleled in what we have done, but to conclude, and what we have done is do something that is very important to homeowners. we were the only ones that can deal effectively with a

principal reduction, and what will happen is this agreement provides for substantial principal reduction, and once it happens, something is going to become apparent. that is all those things they worry about, i guess what? it will not happen, and on the positive side, the re-default rate will be among the lowest, and principal reduction will be a common tool for everyone in this country. to get there, this is the only vehicle to do it. for two years we kept telling the bank to you need to cut interest rates. you need to cut the payment. they resisted. they started to do principal

productions. it worked. now it is commonplace. this is an extraordinary opportunity to help homeowners, and finally, i would reiterate what sean ended with. i believe the public wants us to work across party lines and to do things for ordinary americans, and homeowners in distress are ordinary americans who need help more than others. it is exactly what the public wants us to do, and i believe that is what we have done, work across party lines to help americans. i am proud to introduce one of my colleagues. he is a terrific guy. he is great to work with. jon sellers -- suthers of

colorado. >> there are 25 republicans in attorney general's. gunther how is it of 49 of those came together to agree on this settlement? the answer is simple. the attorney general's unrealized it is very much in the interest not -- now the attorney general's realized it is during much in the interest of their states. good -- it is very much in the interest of those states. states posed some very difficult litigation problems. number one is a federal pre- emption. there has been some case law about that, but it is still a murky world.

no. 2, all of us have disparate consumer protection laws. some of us have relatively small limits on the amount of money that can be recovered for consumer protection violations we have been under, so when they looked at the structure, they realize there is no way that without the federal partnership, could we achieve the results we have achieved. the notion of the states being able to achieve servicing standards on a national bank, that would not have happened. the notion of being able to use the monitor, that could not have happened without a monitor, so they entered in this

agreement because it is in their interest and in the interest of their citizens. i am not quite as old as tom miller, but i have been practicing law for 35 years, and the vast majority of that i have had the privilege of serving as the united states attorney, and now as an attorney general. i have been involved in a lot of joint federal, task forces, investigations, and what ever. i can tell you some horror stories. the conclusion i came to is so many of them are personality driven. we had the incredible fortune of having this driven by two people in the federal government

i have never seen anything like it. they did not do any of that said stuff we see so often -- fed stuff we see so often. frankly i would have given up on us a long time ago. it was brutal. first the republicans were off this way. and the democrats, but they brought this together, and i cannot say enough about the perseverance and dedication they have shown, so on behalf of my colleagues i am proud to be up here announcing what i see as an incredible example of federal and state cooperation. now it is my pleasure to introduce the hud inspector general to reopen -- inspector

general. >> i am pleased to be up here. they have a crucial role in foreclosure and loan underwriting practices. i also commend the efforts between my office and the department of housing and urban development as well as the state's attorney general to bring this to closure. if not for some of the inappropriate behavior, many americans would still be in their homes. . now this supplement benefits of homeowners. i want to assure all americans my office will remain vigilant

in defending their interests. we are committed to pursuing those whose misconduct contributed to the housing crisis and those who continue to do so. >> i would like to introduce the attorney general from the great state of illinois, lisa. >> today we picked up another piece of the wreckage caused by the foreclosure crisis. as we determine previously, the bank services and mortgage servicing and foreclosure process were pervasive and preventable. yet its total state and federal investigations and legal actions to stop these immoral and often in humane practices. the largest banks servicers deepened the problems for millions of homeowners. in chicago there are whole

blocks of neighborhoods haunted by the lost opportunities of those who lived there. know that this is neither the beginning nor the end of our work to hold the reins and other institutions accountable for the destruction they cause in our families, community. this serves as a warning. there are consequences for engaging in practices and jeopardize our communities and the economy. state and federal governments remain committed to continuing and the marketplace. i would like to join my colleagues in taking -- thanking all of them for their hard work but in specific the attorneys general for all they have done during this

investigation and negotiation, but not enough can be said about our federal partners. they have been incredible. they have stuck with us, so my big veins 4 avaya hud secretary -- so a big thanks to the hud secretary. let me introduce her hoover. -- hooper. >> state's attorney general are on the front lines. here we are today. strong enforcement distinguishes this deal from early efforts in the crisis. this is a strong agreement backed by a court order and financial penalties.

the monitor will make sure the banks follow the rules. the former north carolina commissioner of thanks joe smith will serve as monitors. he and his team will look over the banks shoulders to make sure they meet targets for homeowners. i know he will be tough, throw, and fair. is prohibited foreclosure fees are charged, if homes are for clothes before other options expire, the monitor and the courts can step in and make it right to -- if homes are for clothes -- foreclosed before they can step in right. this helps our economy. i look texas state and federal

partnership as a model for the future. we will continue to work together to level the financial playing field for consumers, and now to wrap this up, the guy you have heard a lot about. his negotiations had to resemble a hand to hand contact, but he did it with perseverance, and i want to introduce the associate attorney general. >> thanks, everybody. i really appreciate the kind words. you hear a lot about bureaucracies and overlapping missions, about a battle between federal authorities and state sovereignty, but when you lose your home to foreclosure, you do not want to hear excuses.

you want a government that solves problems threaten the resolution shows what happens when people focus on what they can do together. it was apparent that an alphabet soup of government agencies have various roles to play, and from state attorneys general to federal agencies and investigative arms that support a lot in the housing market, there are any number of ways we could have addressed this, and we could have pulled in all the wrong directions. instead, we decided to work together. we began talking about all the different ways to solve the problems we face. we all had different tools, different perspectives, and different goals, but public officials decided not we could do something together that would be a federal law enforcement, better housing policy, and better for the people we serve.

you would be hard-pressed to find more successful cooperative effort. on the federal side we had not opened investigations and expertise. we join with states but have long standing experience on the ground, and we found our way. there are so many people one could take. region in -- one could thank, so many who have worked with us over time and i know are going to be issuing orders of their own during the coming days. i think when a chapter of this history is written, one thing they will find is that the federal trade commission were actually the first to recognize

many of those issues, and if you go and look at the countrywide settlement a negotiated some time ago, they were at the forefront, and they have been extraordinary partners. the secretary here has been a tremendous a partner for their deep knowledge as well as understanding how we can effectively help homeowners. a number of the state's attorney general's talk about the work, and i would like to thank and brian from my office, who has worked tirelessly on this, and while some people have said some nice things about me, they should be talking about his work, because he has been the glue to hold this together. the last thing i would like to say is our work will not be finished as the file this in several court over the next few weeks.

the attorney general said we are going to continue to work to make sure that this settlement is fully in force and fulfills its goal. this team you see here and many folks around the country and in the audience is going to continue to try to ensure we have complete redress for all the harm and brought to the american public. with that, we will take some questions. >> not to dismiss how hard this deal was, but when you look at the actual relief on the principal reduction side and on the cash payments to homeowners, it is a bit low, and those homeowners may i ask now if you settle. >> i will look them in the i can say no. -- look them in the eye and say no.

this agreement has done more to help homeowners and anything we have seen before. let me make the point i made before. and i believe this agreement will eventually make widespread principal production -- principal reduction commonplace. there is going to be a significant amount done right away, and particularly if bank of america is going to have a plan where everyone can get principal reduction, and once this demonstration takes place, it will work, and it will work and become commonplace. this agreement is the only thing that has a chance to get to a place of principal reduction of oregon -- principal production. this is the vehicle.

in terms of the other benefits, for the people who are forgotten. they are the people who are under water purity of their mortgages greater -- who are under water. their mortgage is greater than the value of their homes. they meet all the other criteria ago, but they are blocked because their home is under water. that is unfair. this breaks out and furnace. on the borrower's payments, that is a small part of this. the context is if you are foreclosed upon in the last few years, you can point to anything wrong in the services did, what is your paper, and missed a deadline, then you can

get this payment. these will go to people who cannot recover in any other way. if they sue, they cannot recover. if they find out later they could have recovered, they are not giving up legal rights, so that homeowners that could not get $1, they are getting a check for $1,500, they are not going to tell us they sold to cheat. region t -- sold too cheap. one of the great things is for people who are eligible for all home modification, the banks will not screw up those regulations. there are regulations to make that happen. the homeowner is not going to say it is too little.

sometimes there are fees charged. if there is an indication it is widespread, the monitor will get those back. those people are not going to tell us need -- tell us we settled into cheap. this is going to help far more than anyone else in the past and i predict for more than anyone in the future. >> let me add to things. i think there are misunderstandings about this. one is the math there has been some misunderstanding about, and

many people are taking $20 billion in expected homeowner and 20 billion in benefits to homeowners, dividing that by 1 million, and saying that is $20,000 per homeowner. that does not seem like much for people who are under water 40, $50,000. the way this will work is we will be crediting the banks against their requirements to actually reduce principal, actually deliver benefits, but we will 19 been crediting them dollar for dollar. -- we will not be crediting them dollar for dollar. if the loan is highly delinquent, and a bank would not be able to collect on that, we are not going to give them $1 of credit for writing off $1 of the loan to regard we are going

to give them far less credit, so india and what we are likely to get in terms of action -- in the end, what we are likely to get is in the neighborhood of $35 billion out of the $20 billion in consumer relief, so the masses region -- so the math is actually much more significant. we would be happy to go through the specifics of that. we have available state-by-state what adds to the total. our second thing is, a portion of those for homeowners who have been wrong was always designed to sit in parallel to a separate process but has been set up by federal regulators as a result of consent judgments, and the idea is that a homeowner

can come in, have their claims reviewed at a cost of the thanks, and full compensation is made for the wrong. -- up the cost of the banks, and full compensation is made for the wrong. the idea is there are many small wrongs that may have cost a few thousand dollars. the idea is almost not to have to make an every one of those homeowners have to work with a lawyer to prove harm, but to reward restitution as a class. that does not impede their ability to go into this separate process, and if they were wrong by $200,000, they can collect from the process, so the misinterpretation is this would be all but is available for homeowners. but is not true. -- that is not true.

these are designed to get there. the last thing i would say is in the end it was not the service practices that created the bubble nor cause its collapse. it was the origination and securitization of these horrendous products that created it. there is no question the servimg practices further doubt substantially, but even though there were hundreds of billions of dollars of harm done in the crisis, the wrongs we are writing today are a piece of fat, and we have done extensive research to see what we -- are a piece of that, and we have done extensive research, and we believe this settlement is extremely good in terms of recovery for the claims and we are releasing, and just to be clear, no fannie and freddie

loans are at issue here. now they represent 2/3 of the market. none of those are being released, no claims related to civil rights. the origination claims of fha, in addition to securitization claims. you have to look to this in the context of what is actually being released today. that is why it is so important,

we announced our task force. that makes it very clear point. we are retain those rights and will be aggressive about going after those claims going forward. >> you are saying that the banks may be paying something close to $40 billion? >> i said the benefit -- the direct benefit to homeowners will be larger -- go ahead. >> from the banking side, some of these banks are still struggling to recover from the financial crisis. do they have the capacity to make these fixes, to pay this money? have they been served already brought some of these payments? are you concerned at all that this could hurt the financial help of some of these tanks? >> there is no question that there are reserves that have been taken. this process obviously has been extensive. we have had lengthy discussions, and reserves have been taken i believe at all of the institutions that are part of this, and even some institutions that we are discussing these claims with but are not part of the announcement today. we believe that is the case. in the and, one of the critical

things about this is, and to repeat tom miller, principal reduction is an important part of steps that we need to take, and they include steps like the refinancing plan that the president announced and the work we have done with fannie and freddie. those are steps that will help all our housing market recover. the benefits not only to homeowners and the broader economy, but to these very institutions themselves are enormous if the value of properties across the country began to rise as a result of these actions. in the end, we believe that this announcement is not just good for homeowners and the, -- and the economy, but ultimately will help the financial institutions project while there may be short term impact to their balance sheets, it is critical for all of us to be able to get the housing market accelerating in its recovery.

>> are fannie and freddie loans exempt, or just future claims? >> fannie and freddie have a separate process of enforcing servicing violations. they are pursuing those claims and they have separate processes, as fha does, for origination violations, etc. specifically on which loans this will apply to, and we see the refinancing portion that is part of this settlement as a perfect complement to the refinancing effort that the president has already talked about and that are moving forward for underwater current homeowners in fannie and freddie loans. we knew as we were designing the settlement that we had already made steps to ensure that fannie and freddie borrowers who are under water could refinance at record low interest rates

today, but we knew that that option is not available to homeowners that had loans that were in the portfolios of the bank. that is what the refinancing component is focused on, so it complements what is available to fannie and freddie borrowers. and modifications, fannie and freddie are already doing extensive payment modifications for those homeowners. that are not doing significant principal reduction. this settlement, because fannie and freddie are not part of it, cannot require that they do print or reduction, but the president announced just a few weeks ago steps that would make, for the first time, fannie and freddie eligible for incentives to do significant printed or reduction. they are violating that as we speak, and we look forward to taking additional steps that could make principal reduction available to fannie and freddie homeowners. >> a very important point. we worked very hard to align

the servicing standards and to bring fannie and freddie on board. so the servicing standards do apply across the board, not just to private-label securities or portfolio loans for the banks, but also to fannie and freddie loans. a critical point. >> is there a maximum amount of credits that can be earned by a mortgage-backed securities? >> there is not a cap on that. there has been a lot of misunderstanding about this issue so let me just try to clarify. there is a dramatically lower credit, if you will, or principal reduction for investor-owned loan, also called service or other loans.

we expect of the principal reduction and it's done -- and principal reduction on first and second loans that keeps families in their homes is a minimum of 60% of the consumer menu that is available. we expect a relatively small share in the range of 15% of the principal reduction to be done in service for other loans. there is a special kind of effort that bank of america will make as part of this agreement where they have agreed to doody principal reduction and to solicit every single one of the old country wide homeowners. about 80 percent of those are private label securities loans, and they have already made a significant, or agreed to make a substantial payment to investors in those loans.

our expectation is that the vast majority of private label security loans that are reduced in principle as a result of this would be the old countrywide loans, and investors are being compensated on those loans. let me be very clear, career is clear language in this document, in the settlement agreement, that says nothing in it requires any trusty or servicer to reduce principal where it is not allowed to legally buy the underlying documents, nor where it is not a net present value positive, or in the interest of those investors. the misunderstanding somehow that investors will be paying the banks share is just false. this is real penalties for the bank, real cost for the banks, and the vast majority of loans will be in the portfolio of the banks anyway.

>> there is no max. let me try and clear up a little bit of confusion. some have written that when investors' loans are modified by friends for reduction, the investors will lose money, and that is unfair to them. that reveals -- and not only you, but a very prominent united states senator who i have a lot of respect for wrote a letter saying the same thing. but that misunderstand principal reduction. principal reduction is an effective way for everybody to win good when i say that, i mean this. there are some homeowners that cannot make a full payment, but they can make part of it. apart that they make is more than the investor would realize under foreclosure. so it is in everybody's interest to do that modification.

a homeowner stays in his home. the community is protected, the investor gets more money by the modification, not less money and. that is what principal reduction is all about. that is the fallacy of some of those stories in the letter by the senator. this is something that we in iowa and know very, very well. we had a terrible farm crisis in the 1980's, and our whole farm community was being torn asunder. we came up with this idea of a loan modifications. the head of the bankers' association in iowa went arm in arm to the legislature, the two of us, and got legislation passed so that there was required mediation before there could be a foreclosure. that was the vehicle to get to this win-win situation. and many farmers stay in their homes. investors realized more. and when we saw this crisis

coming for homeowners. we said we have seen this before. that is why patrick madigan and i and others in 2007 and to the bank and made this appeal to do loan modifications, but interest-rate reductions and principal reductions. it is a win-win-win for everybody in the right set of circumstances, and guess what? what is designed in this package is exactly looking at the right circumstances. >> will the banks get credit for prior modification to principal reduction? >> it is soon, but not yet. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

x in a few moments, a look at proposed television coverage of the supreme court, including comments from justices antonin scalia and stephen brier. thursday's senate judiciary committee meeting that approved a bill that would require the supreme court to televise its open proceedings. in less than an hour, coverage of the conservative political action conference meeting in washington. thursday speakers included texas governor rick perry and herman cain. tomorrow morning, a conversation with james lewis, former director of the president's commission on cybersecurity. we will talk with senator john grasso of wyoming. he is a member of the conference committee trying to work out an

agreement on extending the payroll tax cut for the rest of the year. and a look at how the federal government measures price increases and inflation affects entitlement programs such as social security. our guests are michael horrigan and barry bosworth. >> just the way i remember it, here is that wonderful moment when the senator revealed his nostalgia for the state's rights segregation of the self. >> when strom thurmond and for president, we voted for him. we are proud of him. >> josh margolin the internet and his website and the breaking news business. >> the media is such a different world today that it was 10 years

ago. i think things like that happen all the time now. and know there are certainly many big stories of the last decade. now we have an editorial staff of 20 people, so we are breaking stories right and left. the thing is, it has almost become commonplace. it is not nearly as surprising today as it was back then. >> more about tpm and josh marshall, the night at 8 eastern and pacific on "q&a". the senate judiciary committee has voted 11-7 to approve a bill that would require the supreme court to televise its oral arguments. we will show you that discussion in 10 minutes. first, justices antonin scalia and steven briar with their opinions of televising the high court. the testified last october about

the federal courts in general and asked about camera coverage by connecticut senator richard bloom and ball. >> i was moved by your explanation as to why you think it is so important for the public to understand and appreciate what judging is and what role it plays in our system. i agree with you totally that not only is there a need, but now the lack of that understanding. not only as one who has argued, but as a former law clerk who learned so much about the system in that process, why not open it to video recordings? why not, in the federal courts, give the public the benefit of see it firsthand in your court and other federal courts and appreciate the quality as well

as the diversity and the extraordinarily often excruciating difficulty of what you do? >> i will start. senator, when i first came on the court, i was in favor -- you're just talking about televising the arguments, right? the brazilian supreme court, the televise their conference. >> i would never presume -- >> nor would i. >> i was initially in favor of televising it. but the longer i have been there, the less good idea i think it is pink the justification usually put forward is that you want to educate the american people about what the court is and what it is not. if i thought the american people were to get educated, i would be all for it. if they threat -- if they sat through a day of our proceedings gavel-2-double, they would learn that we are not most of the time looking up at the sky

and saying should there be a right to this or that. they are doing real law, the bankruptcy code, and people would never come up to me and ask why do you have to be a lawyer to be a supreme court? the constitution does not say so. of course, it does not. but 99% of what we do is law, something only that lawyers can do. if people could learn that, it would be a great piece of education. but for every 10 people who sat through our proceedings and gavel-to-gabble, there would be 10,000 who would see nothing but a 30-second take out from one of the proceedings, which i guarantee you would not be representative of what we do. they would in effect would be given a misimpression of the supreme court. i am very sure that that would be the consequence and therefore i am not in favor of televising it. >> but it would, for high

school students or even middle school students and for the general public who are interested in an important and pressing case, provide a means for them to see what right now only a very limited audience can do because of the size of the court pierre >> but for those who are interested in it for intellectual reasons, surely the tapes are good enough. >> the tapes, with all due respect, and i understand your argument, do not convey in the same way with as much interest, the kind of debate, back and forth, the visual sense of the action in court. i know and you know really how dramatic it can be. >> it is not a whole lot of visual motion. it really is not.

it is mostly intellectual motion. >> it is certainly gripping if your answering the questions. [laughter] justice briar, do you have a different point of view? " we are conservative and you would be too if you were there. we are there for a short time. we are trustees. and we do not want to make a decision that would be no reversal and hurt the court. so start there. when we have the term limits case out of arkansas, i wish people could have seen that. it was such a good case. you had jefferson and story on one side and madison and hamilton on the other side. it was the term limits. and what you saw was everything evenly balanced with the precedents.

if it could have been seen across the country, they would have seen nine people struggling with a very important and constitutional question. so what is the problem? one problem is that we are a symbol. if it were us in our court, it would probably be in every criminal case in the country and you would get rid of what? what do we do with the jurors? what do we do with the criminal witnesses? you do not know what happens or would people come up with the misimpression, namely the oral arguments. 3% of the case is done in writing and they do not see that. most importantly, people really to people. when you see them, they are your friends or they are not your friends. but we're making decisions that are there to affect 309 million people who are not there.

in our minds, we have to take those 309 million people into account and would that come across? and you can make people look good or you can make them look bad depending on what 30 seconds to use. we already have a cult of personality. we are speaking for the law, not for ourselves as individuals and that is a good thing. i would like to know more. i really would. there are places that have it and do not have it. there are courts that have it. canada has it. california does in some situations. why not get real information that is not paid for by somebody who has an interest in this. then see what happens to judicial attitudes. what you're getting, i