be well rested. [laughter] >> representative malone. i would like to respectfully speak in opposition to the point of view put forward by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in strong opposition to q.e. 3. the fed it should use whatever tool recovery is to provide support for our fragile economy. we need to insure against any down returns that would hurt housing, an appointment, and all the other areas in our economies. it is important coming up on your june 17 meeting that you act forcefully to help our economy, given the fact that china has cut its benchmark lending rate. already in response to that, the price of gold has gone up.

the dollar has fallen. i would like to hear your comments on china. will china be buying our treasury notes now with the the economic downturn and what appears in their economy combined with the news from the past month that the euro-zone debt and banking crisis seems to have deteriorated? can you comment even further on china specifically and the impact china will have in the overall, our economy? they have been a partner in financial recovery

part of the slowdown is policy induced, intentional. in particular, china took a number of actions to try to avoid what looked to be a building bubble -- and they have in general tried to slow growth both to achieve a more sustainable pace of growth and also as a part of a process for trying to switch from an export- led economy to one that has a greater emphasis on domestic demand. so there has been some slowing there. we watch that very carefully. so far, i do not think the change in chinese prospects on net are enough to be concerning to the united states, particularly since there are some offsetting factors, notably when china slows it brings down all prices and that is actually a positive for the u.s. economy. i think there greater concerns for us right now are still coming from europe, even as the

situation is still being managed. we are seeing, of course, you can see every day the volatility and large movements in stock prices and asset prices and the uncertainty that generates. so that is a concern. >> i would also like to ask a question about the fiscal clip that we confront next year if curtain laws -- current laws governing taxes to maintain in the bush tax cuts expired. also the payroll tax cut expires, the federal unemployment insurance expires and the automatic spending cuts mandated by the budget control act would take effect. cob tells us this will cause the economy to fall into a recession. it also tells us that if we continue all current policies, we can avoid a recession but that our long-term budget situation will continue to

deteriorate. certainly niether oeither of the outcomes are satisfactory. what would happen if we fail to achieve a budget agreement in a lame-duck session and all of fiscal priorities kicked in? >> i agree very much with the cbo's general analysis there. if no action were taken and the fiscal clip were to kick in its full size, i think it would be very likely that the economy would begin to contract or possibly go into recession and unemployment would rise. that is something we want to avoid if at all possible. at the same time, i am not advocating on doing all these measures and simply ignoring the distant future. as i have said before, what we need is a combination of a sensible policies that allow the recovery to continue over the next year or two with a long- term credible plan for putting

our budget on a sustainable path toward >> thank you my time is expired. >> representative burgess. >> welcome to our committee again. i want to pick up where senator demint used the word quagmire. senator coats used the word -- i'm concerned about some of these same things. the vice chair of the fed yesterday at the boston economic club described adverse shocks that could push the economy into territory where a downward spiral would be difficult to arrest. i am not an economist, but that sounds bad. is that right? >> the concern she is expressing is that if growth is not sufficiently strong that it would not take too much to put us back into, either a

recession or a slowdown. >> so i will not admit to having trouble sleeping every night. but what does bother me at night is the been brothers. when i wake up at 3:00 a.m., that is what i worry about -- what bothers me at night is lehman brothers. she sums it up pretty well. this is reported on cnbc this morning. when they played that clip it caught my attention because this is one of the things that has bothered me since september, 2008. i see a lot of parallels as we crews into this summer season. gas prices have moderated. maybe you could take that off the table a little bit. presidential election year coming up. the economy still in tough shape as it recovers -- has not recovered. we see all this stuff happening in europe. you said on page 3 of your testimony at the bottom of the page you said you are prepared

to take the action for lehman. can you outline for us briefly the top three steps? >> sure. first of all, we are already taking some action, important actions, notably that we are working to ensure that banks have adequate capture and -- capital and liquidity. banks are much better capitalized than they were prior to lehman. >> you are talking about our banks, domestic banks? >> yes. >> you cannot control what is happening in banks in europe? >> i cannot. >> we cannot do a stress test. we are asked to help with the situation in europe, what assurance do you have or can you give us or do you tell us that we can give the american people that we are doing that due diligence, or is that help not

available? is that one of the things not on your, within your realm of being able to help? >> i think the u.s. government position has been recently that europe is a rich region and that they have the resources necessary to achieve stability. i think the main problems over there are political rather than economic. there are 17 countries involved, a lot of the idifferent interests. i am not sure there is much the united states can do other than be supportive and try to provide whatever advice and verbal help that we can do. >> we can send them to get well card. >> send them to get well card. what the reserve can do is try to protect our own country, and we are doing that by strengthening our financial system by making sure, or at least by monitoring on a regular basis the exposures that are

furnished institutions have to europe and how they are hedged. we have done the swaps, which was a useful thing we did it, which helped stabilize money markets, the bank funding markets over there. i think the main thing that we have not done yet but could do it if financial conditions got sufficiently severe would be to use our authority through the discount window or through our 13-3 authority to lend to financial institutions against collateral to make sure that liquidity is not the reason they would collapse -- lack of liquidity is not a reason they would collapse. that is the main tool that we have in reserve that we will use the financial conditions call for it could >> are there any u.s. banks whose capital could be seriously jeopardized by what is happening in europe, that then could push a lehman-

type serial to the forefront? >> we have been monitoring direct exposure is. our banks are far less exposed to european sovereign debt then are the european banks, which is why there is such a difficult interaction between the sovereign debt problems and the banking problems in europe. if there is widespread contagion, it is hard to predict operating through financial markets, operating through the potential problems of a large european institution, whatever that might be, then we cannot really foresee or guarantee that there might not be serious stresses on some u.s. financial institutions. in which case, the federal reserve with the experience we had in 2008, is certainly going to do what is necessary to try to mitigate that problem, but i do not mean to be representative

saying there is no problem. there is a risk. all we can do is prepare for it as best we can. >> thanks. i yield back. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. ben bernanke, thank you very much for everything you have done and for all the things you are engaged in and for being with us today to talk about these issues. i think that we have come a long way, considering the financial meltdown that occurred back in 2007, but we still have a long way to go after that. i think there are still some things congress must do to ensure that we do not go down the same path of our european counterparts. i think that is an interesting set of circumstances. the end of the recession, our economy has steadily improved. we are working hard on that. we have created 4 million private sector jobs and unemployment has steadily

decreased to 8.2% now. president obama deserves enormous credit for turning the economy around. if it did not bend his action and those of the democratic majority, i have no doubt our country would fall and into a deeper economic depression. so we obviously have a long way to go, but the president is on the right path. the fed's aggressive action and monetary policy that have stimulated the economy have also been instrumental off to getting our economy back on track. but we have a long way to go. europe, on the other hand, has been a total disaster. europe has clearly proven that austerity was the wrong policy to pursue during a recession if, if you look at the situation you are dealing with the there. greece and spain, 20 and 25% unemployment. britain has shown zero economic growth over the past year. so, naturally, i am surprised

that with such strikingly different recoveryies occurring that some of the united states lawmakers will continue to support the same types of policies that are utilized by europe. what do you think are the key lessons that we should learn from europe's failed monetary policy, particularly austerity? what do think the united states is most at risk in the context of that situation of repeating? >> well, in fairness, you have to agree there are structural differences. you have 17 different countries on a single monetary policy and a fixed exchange rate. there are, in fact, some very serious fiscal situation is. greece probably has no alternative but to try to cut its deficit. so there are some important differences. i think, though, that the main

message i would take is ithe one i have been trying to sell for the last couple of hours which is that fiscal policy is one that takes into account both the short run needs of the economy, not to lose fiscal support sharply and rapidly during a period of fragile recovery, while at the same time combining that with a medium- term plan -- we have to address these fiscal sustainability issues. so i do not think it is inconsistent to do both of those things. and that is where i would differ, with at least a few of the countries in europe. again, the situation is much more complicated. the countries that have capacity to expand their

budgets, for example, like germany have much less in need and countries like greece, which have very little capacity to spend more or borrower more. so germany is another example. >> but the other things are negative examples and we need to be acting in a very positive way in accordance of what you have been talking about. also, congress and president obama acted in 2009-2010 to turn around our economy. since that happened, the house has basically done nothing significant to revive our economy. as a result, the fed has led the efforts to help get our economy back on track. however, we have nearly exhausted all the fed's tools to nurture our economy back to health. congress needs to step up to the plate. clearly, our actions it back in 2009-2010 turned things around.

but more needs to be done. more needs to be done effectively and strongly. we cannot allow the european austerity model and allow growth to continue to fail on us. the american jobs at is a prime example. unfortunately, a stalled legislation in the house that would inject nearly $450 billion of tax cuts, jobs, business opportunities, all those things into our economy -- very positive and very strong -- if it were put into place. i think it has been a major mistake to sit on this legislation when it could be helping so many people. so do you think congress has carried its fair share of the burden with regard to stimulating economic activity? and do you think legislation such as the american jobs act is important to help the fed to

stimulate job growth and economic activity? >> i certainly agree as i have said before that monetary policy cannot carry this burden by itself. we need good policies over or range of areas from congress. you know i will not endorse a specific program, but i hope that congress can work together to address their problems across the economy in a number of different sectors. and i hope congress will work collectively to try to address some of those problems. >> thank you. >> representative duffy? >> thank you. good morning. i want to talk about too big to fail. we had heard two years ago when dodd-frank passed that this would be our silver bullet to address this issue. i want to make sure the taxpayers won't hold the bag should one of these large institutions fail to make sure that it does not ruin our economy. i guess i would argue that dodd-

frank has not completely addressed the issue of too big to fail. it's still exist. it has, more recently as we look at what has happened in europe. here at home, it is come up with regard to j.p. morgan. they experienced a $2 billion loss that michael up to four or $5 billion. some have argued that the volcker rule, had been implemented and it will come shortly, it would have addressed this massive loss from j.p. morgan. one of my concerns is as you look at the volcker rule and the trades, it becomes difficult to determine what is prop trading and what is macro hedging. as you sit in a classroom, it might be easy to work through the volcker rule. in practice, is it not very difficult to use the rule to stop the -- a j.p. morgan?

>> in this specific case we are still very much investigating. in general, yes, a different trade proprietary trading from hedging activities and market- making activities is inherently very difficult and regulators are looking at 19,000, letters to try to figure out how to do that as best as possible. the one comment i would make which my colleague governor -- made yesterday is that one requirement of the volcker rule is that there be very extensive explanations to the supervisors and advanced for complex hedges as well as auditing and a proper incentives for the executives involved in the activities of the traders. olckera minimum, if the vulcke rule would have been in place, that might have been helpful. >> i am not opposed to it.

i am concerned about the implementation. is it the silver lining that there was no tax pair lost? j.p. morgan has the appropriate capital requirements to cover their loss. this is what you will talk about later on today when you talk about basel iii. isn't the real issue not thousands of new rules and a 2000 page bill, but an increase of the capital requirements of american banks, making sure they have more skin in the game and that the taxpayer will not bear that loss, but investors and those banks are going to be responsible for the losses of bad trades? >> i agree with you entirely. the reason for high capital requirements and we are looking to greatly increase capital requirement is because we will not be able to anticipate everything that could happen. the good news here is that j.p. morgan's losses are a small fraction. there is a very substantial capital base that has been lost to shareholders. the taxpayers are not in danger in any way.

so, yes, capital is extremely important and i agree we do 100%. >> in essence, we increase those ratios. i imagine -- i do not have much time -- but you agree with the surcharge making sure there are larger banks required to hold more capital? >> yes, yes. >> sometimes, and i know you have to do this, but when you talk to us what you say can be open to interpretation. i do a nice job of that. but as you are talking about the clip, as we are talking about taxes, are you telling us if we allow nothing to happen and you see all of these taxes increase, the bush, obama tax cuts go away, there will be a direct impact on economic growth and job creation? >> i am looking not just at the taxes but also of the sequestered and the end of the petrol tax and everything else, yes.

of course, economic forecasting is not a science. but everything we understand about fiscal policy, yes there would be a short-term fiscal and packard impact. >> are you telling us extend them? >> i am telling you to try to avoid a situation in which you have a massive cut in spending and increase in taxes hitting at one moment as opposed to trying to spread out over time in some way that will give -- create less short-term drag on the u.s. economy. >> i appreciate your testimony. i yield back 3 >> thank you. senator lee? >> thank you for joining us today. what are some of the risks that accompany -quantitative easing? can you walk us through those? >> well, i think the preliminary thing to say is that since we

have less experience with quantitative easing, our estimates are understanding of its -- and exactly how much is needed and so on are less than the traditional monetary policy. in terms of potential side effects, a number have been identified but the two we pay most attention to first, there are some who believe that greatly expanding our balance sheet would make the exit strategy more difficult and therefore inflation is more likely and that might be deflation expectations to go up. i want to be clear that we are very confident that we can exit in a timely way from our balance sheet strategy. and there is in fact no justification. >> go ahead to your second

point. >> the second one has to do with financial stability. the question is -- does the process -- the prospect of lower interest rates for a long time does it create problems for life insurance companies or pension funds? does it on to success of risk- taking? does it lead to a facts that could be counterproductive in the longer term? there we do extensive monitoring, extensive analysis to try to identify any such problems but it is possible we might miss something. >> and it sounds like you are not discounting, you are not refuting the possibility that it can happen -- have inflationary effects. you are saying that you can time it in such a way that it is less likely to? >> there are two situations. one is our timing. in any monetary policy easing

episode, there is a question of getting it exactly right. too soon or too late and it is always the case that if the fed waits too long you can get an inflationary effect. what i am talking about here is the question of whether it is technically possible to undo the balance sheet. we are confident that we will have the technical stools to bring the banking system down to a more normal level when we decide it is time to tighten monetary policy. on the technical side, we are comfortable. it is always the case, under most normal traditional monetary policy, that the timing of this stimulation is difficult. it is always possible that you could undershoot or overshoot, and that is unavoidable. >> with treasury yield rates being at all-time historic lows, i think it becomes

difficult to dispute that at some point in the next few years, we will start to see a normalization and yield rates return to their historic averages, perhaps above. do you have a sense and can you offer us any insight into when we might expect to see that happen? >> um, well, we've indicated that we expect to keep short- term rates low until late 2014 at least. but even then, longer-term rates might be rising if, in fact, we are removing short-term rates, reductions epoch point, since long rates include expectations of short rates be on that window, you could be seeing some movement by then. we do expect, of course, rates to normalize overtime. the exact timing is difficult

to judge. we see the economy moving at a moderate pace and the right direction. at the point of which we are comfortable that it is time to withdraw monetary stimulus is obviously quite uncertain. >> is there are risks of a sharper rebound along -- the rates low? -- the longer you keep the rates low? >> i don't think so. it is true that the quantitative easing measures have pushed down so-called term premia on longer-term rates. if those were to normal as quickly, that would make the increase in rates a little faster than might otherwise be the case. but we have stress tested both our economic models and our financial portfolio -- the financial portfolios of financial institutions, and we do not see at this point any

serious risk to economic recovery or to financial stability of that return of interest rates to more normal levels. but it is obviously something we need to pay close attention to. >> thank you, chairman bernanke. >> chairman bernanke, thank you for your testimony. for the members. the record will remain open for five business days to submit additional questions or a statement. adjourned.djourned -- [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> about the house and senate in c-span'congressionals directory. it includes contact information, at district maps, and committee assignments. also, information on cabinet members, supreme court justices and governors. you can pick up a copy for $ 12.95 at c-span.org/shop. >> coming up on c-span, members of the house and senate committees on recent leaks of classified information. then the un secretary general on the violence and political unrest in syria. after that, more about syria with senate floor speeches from

john mccain and joe lieberman. tomorrow night on c-span -- live coverage of the 68 and your radio and television radio congressional correspondents dinner. house speaker john boehner and comedian wayne brad address the gathering. it >> everyone thinks back to vietnam, they think about the history of the be-52, the cold war. a different kind of power associated as opposed to other long-range bombers. >> he had two sons, union and confederate. they fought against each other in 1862. here they are on the porch talking about the old days. >> we have one to the east. the one to the west is 903.

they've really a reference the moment of the bomb. "swatch before -- watched for the travel of the local content vehicles. our next office in jefferson city, missouri. >> "the new york times" reported this week that the u.s. and israel or behind the -- were behind the stuxnet virus. today, it was said that those leaks are jeopardize american lives. they spoke before reporters for half an hour.

>> the senate intelligence committee has had a meeting with the director of national intelligence. we invited the house chairmen to attend the session and we're very pleased that they did we work very closely together and we have expanded that group now to include the four of us. we will be working together to try to produce some changes in the senate authorization bill which has not been completed. the house has completed their bill but we have not. we will work with the house membership on language that can

be acceptable to both sides to codify a certain process which we hope will be more efficient in retarding leaking and also being able to stop it. also able to evolve more tools to control it and where it cannot be controlled, to a be able to take additional actions. because of the timing, this will have to be done in a month or so, i would think. we would be working together in that direction. i would like to ask my distinguished vice-chairman to make some comments. >> let me say thanks to leadership of chairman feinstein and chairman rogers, the ranking member.

we have worked closely on any number of issues. there is no more important issue we have to work on than this issue. i think it goes without saying that all of us are upset about the fact that not only have leaks occurred but there has been just a cascade of leaks coming out of the intelligence community over the last several weeks and months. it is our clear intention to put a stop to this in the best way that we can. these are part of the nature of this town, we understand that, but the fact of the matter is that we have the kind of leaks that have been coming out in the past few weeks that puts lives in danger and it infringes upon the ability of the intelligence community to do their job. in our meeting with the general, we knew before we engage in this that he was extremely upset about this issue. he is as well as every member of leadership team in the

intelligence community. we have a pledge from them to continue to work with them on all of our issues, but particularly on this issue as we move forward to make sure that they have all the tools to work with internally on the issue of trying to make sure that would put a stop to this kind of leakage. now, i would like to call one chairman rogers. >> thank you very much. we have worked on some things in a bipartisan way is and i would like to thank senator feinstein. we have done a lot of important things for our national security. we have been working in the spirit of bipartisanship. to talk about the severity of these leaks, i hope this sends a very clear message about how dangerous this has become. this is not as an isolated incident, and that is what has brought us together.

this seems to be a pattern that is getting worse and more frequent. the severity of the leaks are serious. i had a meeting with a series of leaders from the agency's to important worked around the world on very difficult assignments. these are the people that we asked to leave their families and go too dangerous places to do hard things parent of the frustration and their inability to get a handle on this, their inability to keep a secret not just in this town but what it means for their ability to conduct their work overseas is incredibly damaging. this has been a serious problem as i have seen. a few weeks ago, i launched an independent review of a very specific week and it turned into something and a little bit bigger and i want to tell you through reviews with officers, review materials, public

sources, there is a need for a formal investigation. the committee as material that they were directed to expand the scope of classified information they gave to the press. we know in some cases someone from a seven of the media was present in the classified said. recently, a group of intelligence officers was disclosing directly how many of the leaks over years have made their jobs more difficult in their relationships and their ability to interact with sources and assets around the world who are doing great things for their own countries and the u.s. as well. the cia informed us that they cannot respond to our requests for information regarding leaks. if every troubling offend. the national security division has recused himself from one element of the investigation suggesting that some of them could have come from sources within the department of justice or the fbi a.

the source of the leagues could be in a position to influence the investigation. we are trying to work out where this might be the best place for this to happen. it must be complete. it must be empowered to examine any office or department of the u.s. government. it must be free of influence. we get to the bottom of what is a growing and serious problem. we will give the tools to prevent this from happening in the future and i look forward to the opportunity to work with the members to make sure this happens. i turn it over to the ranking member. >> i want to acknowledge the relationship that has developed

between senator feinstein and senator chambliss. the issues we deal with are ported and we have to work together as a team. i have been on this committee close to 10 years. this is one of the most serious breaches that i have seen. this puts us at risk. this hurts our ability with our allies to have them work with us and get information and it hurts us in recruiting assets to give us intelligence affirmation that will allow us to protect our citizens to work through issues that are important to the whole issue of peace throughout the world. we know how serious this is and we will deal with it as we started today coming together in both the house and senate intelligence committee deciding

where we will go. the issue has to be solutions. we have to change the culture of anyone who works in the intelligence community to educate them and let them know how serious these leaks are and the ramifications which means we have to put together a policy that people know what the policy is. if you violate that, you will be held accountable. we would love to find out who did the leak here and how it occurred. that happens are not, those are tough cases. it has to be a partnership between the administration and between the senate and the house. we are going to move forward on this case and we feel very strongly that we have to do this to protect our national security. >> we to address your questions to a specific person?

[inaudible] >> this is not finger-pointing. he wants to stop that problem. we're not finger-pointing. the house will to his own investigation. we will put changes in the bill this has to stop. when people say that they don't want to work with the u.s. because they cannot trust us to keep a secret, when allies become concerns, when the life is in jeopardy, that is a

problem. the intelligence is no longer kept with strict scrutiny this is within the number of people that need to have it. one of the problems is that we're learning that some many people know that becomes very hard to bit come -- to make a prosecution. what the representative was saying is that this is about limiting the numbers of people that know. we have some ideas, we have discussed them today, and you will certainly know that we have points an agreement.

>> i will not prejudge what the fbi has charged with responsibility of doing. wherever the responsibility falls out, that is where it will be. this is not meant to be a political exercise. this is too critical to the future of the intelligence community of the u.s.

it is our intention to get to the bottom of these leaks. we want to make it difficult for the leaks to occur and the consequences be dealt with immediately as strongly. >> you had come into a decision. there is classified information at the time. what is it you're looking to do? >> i cannot go into it right now. this morning was the first time i had a chance to outline some of my thoughts to the committee. we need to discuss it. it is important that the house and senate are working together because it will never get done. the first people will know are the three people here and we need to go through that process. >> [inaudible]

>> i understand that. i had some discussions with chairman rogers about that. i have asked time to look at it. the special program does not bring the changes that need to be made. yesterday we had a hearing with the inspectors general of the various agencies and one of the things and i am looking at is the possibility of giving the inspectors general more authority. it is clear that the security aspects of the existing agencies have not really gone -- down the job. we need to find out why. i am delaying that decision. a special prosecutor can take years. we don't have years. we need to legislate, we need to

get some solutions very quickly. >> do you think that this was politically motivated? >> we are not politically motivated. wherever the chips fall, they fall, but we want a fair investigation and we want to be able to see that we have the processes in place to deal with this. i did not believe that we to let the present time. -- i did not believe that we do at the present time. >> this could constitute an act of war. respond togoing to that question. we will do our due diligence and

we will get this situation and get that changed. >> would you favor some changes in guidelines to the fbi in terms of investigating journalism? >> there is a possibility of looking in that direction. that is a possibility. >> [inaudible] >> i will not discuss it. i will say that leaks jeopardize american lives. >> do you have any indication that they're coming from capitol including from lawmakers themselves? can you rule that out? >> i have no knowledge at this time.

>> [inaudible] >> i will not comment on the scope of the investigation. that is a determination that the fbi has to make. that is a whole other issue that is out of our round. we do this on a fairly regular basis but obviously for something like this, it is important that we have the director and as we did this morning. there are other heads of agencies involved that we need to have been for discussion. they have always been willing to come in and dialogue with us. we will have a sit-down in an informal way to be brought up to

speed on where the investigation is. >> [inaudible] >> i don't think you can say that today. >> i don't think we should make that determination. i outlined some of the challenges. you have the national security division that has recused themselves from certain aspects of the investigation. the fbi was in receipt of some of the information along the way. so, at some point, you have to ask yourself a question. we were told this morning that

the cia was going to withhold information into this with the deed to believe that if we're going to make this non-partisan and fair and complete, which means it has to follow the lead set they have, you will have to have at least some sort of an outside look because of the nature of the media leaks. someone who might have been in the chain to influence the investigation might be part of the investigation. you should probably have someone outside of the normal track of investigation on the particular leak case. >> i do not believe this is politically motivated. the issue is about whether or not this was used politically. this is very serious. the leadership is judged on how you deal with the problem. that is a serious problem. we need both the house and

senate intelligence committees administration to work with us not only to deal with the actual leak but to deal with what we do to change it. we want to make sure that these do not get out in the field. the issue that was raised about where we were with respect to -- your question, your question. what was your question? >> [inaudible] >> if you look at what happened before 9/11, we did not share information and it cost us dearly. what we have to do, we have to make sure that we put processes and procedures in place so that everyone knows what those processes are because we still cannot close down intelligence, we have to get it to the right

person. this has to be pursuant to a process and procedure. >> [inaudible] >> we got the information, we got leaks. that is what will look at now an investigation. you cannot make predetermine nations when you are evaluating and looking into changing the process and how did these things occur. we will have to answer that as we move through the process. >> i agree with my ranking member. that is the whole point of having an impartial investigation and it should take you where you go. one of the challenges is that even there is only a small

jurisdiction of the investigative authority. you can see where it gets messy. our goal is to determine what is the best course for a fair, impartial, and complete investigation. >> [inaudible] >> i am not point to answer that question here. i don't believe that this is an appropriate question right now. i respect your asking it but that is not with his press conferences about. >> [inaudible] >> if you deal with clandestine activity and if it is covert

activities, which has a special place, it is all classified and very few people have access to it, technically. if you notice, i don't believe that they're coming out of the the one of these committees. they're coming from elsewhere. as a chairman of the house committee was saying, so many people now have information which did not exist that way. information is shared more broadly. this is critical, tactical covert information, it puts lives at risk. this is what we are concerned about. >> any clandestine material is received in the media. the scrutiny that covert action gets and the seriousness of both is incredibly serious.

we have regular covert actions discussions, reviews.we made sut with the law and we have that ability to make sure it is compliant. both of these committees in a bipartisan way take any covert or clandestine activity as seriously as we take any issue and we have staff dedicated to those programs, we have members to spend quite a bit of time in constant review of operations and make sure that it is complied with all law as a move forward. i would hope the public would have understated. that is the purpose of these committees, so you can have these kinds of tough scrutiny and a classified setting. that is a huge responsibility but i don't know anyone that does not take that very seriously. >> thank you very much. thanks, everybody. thank you. thank you.

host: call[captioning performedy national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> and more about the house and senate in c-span's congressional directory. this includes committee assignments, information on cabin members, supreme court justices, and the governors. you can pick up a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling. >> still ahead, the u.n. secretary-general on the

violence and political unrest in syria. after that, more on syria with senate floor speeches from john mccain and joe lieberman. then, ben bernanke testifies before congress. >> on "washington journal" we will get congressional calls to investigate leaks of classified information. h.r guest is michael hirsc then, a discussion on spending cuts which could cost up to million jobs. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. >> sunday night at 9:00 eastern and pacific, on american history

tv, marked the 25th anniversary of ronald reagan's 1987 speech from the brandenburg gate in west germany. also, "the contenders." american history tv, this weekend, on c-span 3. the u.n. secretary general said u.s. monitors in syria were shot at today while they tried to reach the site of a mass killing. he spoke to the u.n. general assembly along with the former secretary general kofi annan, now the special envoy for syria.

>> i called to order the general assembly for a solution to the syrian arab republic. in follow-up to -- and we have invited the secretary general of the united nations, , the secretary-general of the leak of the arab states, and did the special envoy -- the secretary general of the league of arab states, and the special envoy, kofi annan, the assistant

secretary general for the the commission on human rights. we welcome them to this meeting. >> the secretary general of the beater. your excellency is here for the illegal arab states.

he is the assistant secretary general for human rights. ladies and gentlemen, there is na meeting today that is an encouraging moment for the syrian people. dozens of men, women, and children were killed and hund reds were wounded.

they were abused through these elements. [inaudible] am appalled by these crimes. the fight is ongoing. we cannot deny innocents are dying on a daily basis in great violation of human rights and international humanitarian law. i will record the words of the commissioner on the first of

june. she indicated these acts may amount to crimes against humanity and other international crimes and said that they may be indicative of a process of systematic attack against civilian populations that have been perpetrated. they repeated them to the international criminal court. such crimes require an independent and impartial investigation.

in this regard, i wake up the resolution adopted by the human rights on the first of this month. they conducted a special inquiry. i look forward to the investigation announced by the syrian government. on s yria, the general assembly has the response abillity to enter national peace and security.

the international community is a viable mechanism in moments of deadlock. on february 16, they adopted this 66-253 which called for the appointment of the special envoy is of the arab states, implementing the provisions of chapter 8 of the charter. i address the assembly durin ga g a formal meeting to

address a six point plan. they are playing a complementary role. i cannot convince this. in the same context, i should recall the resolution of the league of arab states at syria's meeting on the second of june

which called on the council to carry out their responsibilities. the resolution also provide it for the united nations general assembly. we must find a way to end the violence and to facilitate after a peaceful comprehensive

solution. i urge all members to operate this. we need to have a prank and results oriented discussion on syria. we must move promptly. the lives of tens of thousands of syrians are at stake. the community of this organization is also at stake. considering the urgency, i have invited you all as the secretary

general of the league of arab states. we will discuss this urgent crisis. before giving this, i call on you to observe a minute of livesce to mourn those who wer or claim by these brutal actions in syria.

>> i now give the floor to the united nations secretary general mr. bianchi moon -- ban ki moon. >> let me begin by welcoming the secretary general. and our joint special envoy.

we join forces. this continues to determine the rate. each day seems to bring new addition. they have the execution-style killings. for many months, his government has lost all legitimacy. the trail of blood lead back to those responsible. any regime or leader that

tolerates such killing of innocents has lost his fundamental humanity. are shocking and sickening. some work cut with knives. we condemn this unspeakable atrocity and will bring those response will to account. they were initially denied access. they are working now to get there. i just learned that while trying to do so he did not do so with small arms. peaceful protesters called for

dignity and freedom. we see evidence that the syrian government is leading up under the six. plan endorsed by the security council. many elements have come to arms and no longer expect the plan. the longer this country goes on, the longer the path toward peace. we must recognize that these acts with unity and risk.

our priorities remain clear, it to stop the violence and protect the syrian people into their right. there is a political solution to the crisis. ladies and gentleman, the plan remains the centerpiece of these efforts. we continue to support with the compliance. at the same time, i would welcome discussion among key stakeholders on how we can act more effectively. no one can predict how this will evolve. we must be prepared for any eventuality.

they endorsed the legal arab states to appoint our special envoy. this is unacceptable. they must correct the situation immediately. i wish to express my appreciation for the secretary general and the commitment of the legal arab states for the people of syria to realize their aspirations that have been tonight for far too long. i would also like to recognize the extraordinary performance of the envoy not only for this but

also for his important contribution. i will pray if observers with the loss of dedication. they are the eyes and ears of the international community. they reported their backpacks objectively and without bias. they have full knowledge of the risks. it is incumbent to do everything within our power to end the advance.

as they have warned, syria [inaudible] so are we. syria can move from the tipping point to a breaking point. the dangers are imminent and real. i called on the presenpresidento implement a six point plan safely and without interference or intimidation. it can allow the teams to operate freely. there are 100,000 syrian refugees and neighboring countries. i call on all states with maximum influence.

more people are forced to form this period of violence must end. now is the time for the international community to take action in the name of this. >> thank you. i now give the floor to his excellency. >> thank you.

mr. president, this is the first time i am taking the floor before the general assembly since the election as president. i am pleased to extend to you and your country. i like to express our experts appreciatioappreciation. i wish you success. i would like to express my ban ki-ation to bomb ke moon and his efforts to achieve a solution to this growing crisis.

there is a special envoy of the united nations. they deploy in many efforts. i hope he will succeed. the council of the states adopted the resolution in the second of this month with the regard to this here. asked about the steps to come out. this is in light of the continue its d support of the quality by the government and the continuation

of regular forces. violence continues until other regions. this is in violation of the government to implement the plan as well as the security council resolution. more than 15 months have passed since the crisis. they are in means to overcome it.

it is the complete cessation of violence, those of which are victims of this. they are putting a political solution that guarantees the aspirations to the syrian people for freedom and democracy. i would like briefly to go through the efforts. this has engaged in graphic dialogue. they were calling for the

establishment which all syrians are equal regardless of their factions, communities, and tenants. this should be adopted in a democratic manner. they are making sure that the syrian government is implementing the arab solution plan to which the syrian government pledged to carry out its provisions on the seventh of september. they did not succeed in stopping the violence. they are taking punitive

measures. they are making different offers and economic boycotts. also, all these efforts taken by the arab league did not lead to the sensation of violence. this was duty bound with article 52. we realize that without the syrian corp., this plan would

never succeed. the review of the update [unintelligible] it emphasized the following. it is behind this program that is in violation of the syrian

governments pledges as well as the immediate implementation of the six. plan. they are completing the task in revealing the identity and bring them to justice. it also emphasizes the need to enforce criminal accountability. calling on all parties to operate closely with the joint envoy. they can receive the deputy of

this. desk of the convoy was adopted by the security council. the new party is entitled to introduce any changes to the nature of that mandate. they have the crimes perpetrated against the syrian people including all powers to the international monitors to enable them to provide this. the resolution of the council

stated this. they can take measures to guarantee the application of the plan. this includes the imposition of applying the six. plan. they can resort to be sentenced chapter. they are stopping all maritime and city communications as well as all means of communication partially or completely. as is evident, the council does

not call with the council to resort to the use of military options. the council of ministers calls for using means of political, economic or commercial pressures enshrined in the un charter. they called upon this egyptian one. they can stop be formal and informal stations.

they can stop any form of diplomatic operations. they are of bobbing on the member of states. it will implement the six. plan. it is on all acts of violence that cannot be glossed at. it has the future of syria. there is our search to find political solutions.

they can unify their stand with the ratrequirements of the phas. they call on here to overcome the differences. these are for different parts of the opposition. this broke as a peaceful unpopular resolution. it has legitimate consequences.

this is an internal syria and a fair. the bay are bound to decide their future. -- this has found it to decide their future. this can be in the conflict. there are states of the region. they are interested to undertake their main role.

this cannot be achieved in a vacuum. this should be with a strong backing of the international community. mr. president, i call for backing and supporting these measures. i call to end of this crisis and achieve a political solution that will enable the people to live in freedom and democracy. i would like to say the syrian people are looking for the meeting. i hope he will grant the hope

that we are capable of assisting it to break the cycle of violence. the credibility is at stake. >> thank you. i now give the floor to the special joint envoy of the united nations. >> mr. secretary general, three

months ago, after a year of crisis and a stunner guidance, they gave me a tough job. they asked me to lead a united effort on behalf of the league of arab state to stop the violence and launched a political process for a transition that meets the

legitimate aspirations of the syrian people. today the deployments of the united nations observe this. i must compare this. it is not being implemented. let me pause here and express my horror and condemnation on the fact that a new massacre of civilians was perpetrated yesterday. my heart goes out to the victim's and their families. this took place two weeks after the massacre that shocked the world. those responsible must be held

accountable. we cannot allow this to become part of everyday reality. as he has clearly explained, at the crisis is escalating. the violence is getting worse. the abusers are continuing. the country is becoming more polarized. syria's people are worried about the threat. nine days ago, i met the president outside in damascus. i told him that the six. plan is not being implemented. i strongly urged him to a visible steps to radically change his posture.

i urge him to make a strategic decision to change this. i also made clear that his government must await on behalf of the organizations. . president a sod believe that the main obstacle was the actions of militants. all parties must seize of violence. the first responsibility lies with the government. this has intensified. some have been released.

agreement has been reached by humanitarian assistance. the our demands much more. this is not indicated a change of cause. ordinary people continue to make their voice heard. they stated they see no reason. they have and is a painted done this. this has become more deadly by a series of bombings that are indicative of the president's.

the future is likely to be one of oppression. all of them will lose. when i joined the speech on the second of june, many have expressed their frustration and anger. they also have concrete ideas on how to increase pressure. to the time has come to determine what more can be done to secure implementation of the plan and what other options have existed to digest the crisis.

they can act quickly. the process cannot be open ended. the longer we wait, the more polarize this situation will become. the harder it will be. we must find the common ground to act as one. individual launcelot resolve the crisis. -- individual actions must resolve the crisis. we must chart a clear course for

a peaceful transition. we can help resolve the crisis. if we generally unite behind one process and speak with one voice, it is still possible to enable syria to emerge from this crisis. i will spare no efforts. for the people of syria few are living through this nightmare, at the community must come together and act as one. thank you.

>> i thank his excellency. i give the floor to his excellency. >> mr. president, the commissioner is currently on a mission and has asked me that i deliver the statement on her behalf. we continue to witness the deterioration of the human rights situation in syria. yesterday we received reports of killings.

last friday, the human rights council met for the fourth time in a special session to address atrocious and vince. the council 00 event -- events. the council condemned the killings, and 49 children. it seems many of the victims were summarily executed in their houses. the syrians committee reported

that armed terrorist groups were responsible for these killings. the human rights council requested that independent counsels on the syrian arab republic would conduct a comprehensive and unfettered inquiry consistent with international standards. these killings are indicative of widespread and systematic attacks population size and may amount to a crime against humanity.

in certain areas, it amounts to an internal armed conflict. they chigger the possibility of war crimes -- bay triggered the possibility of war crimes against humanity. i asked them to consider referring this to the international criminal court even more urgent. because of a consistent denial of access to the country, the commission continues to investigate human rights violations. a may 24 day published an update based on missions in march and april. it is reported that the violations continued on the basis in an increasingly

militarized context. they concluded that most of the serious human rights violations were committed by the syrian army and security forces. they receive several accounts commited by anti-government armed groups including acts of torture as well as use of children for messengers. last week they concluded the mission in countries neighboring syria on the basis of which it has documented continuing serious rights violations in syria. they documented a pattern of civilian injuries reportedly rising from live ammunition and

force against protesters as well as from discriminant attacks and lack of this. civilians are being killed by snipers aren't seeking food for other basic necessities. government forces have detained this including children to compel those individuals to turn themselves in. several hundred detainee's were comparinconfirmed last week. many thousands of civilians are believed to remain in detention. the whereabouts are

unknown. my office has received fresh accounts. they perform psychological torture, threats, right to family members. detainees also suffer from cruel and degrading conditions. in this context, i urge the government of syria to release all persons arbitrarily detained and allow access to all detention facilities. i also call upon the governments of syria to take steps to immediately halt the widespread

and systematic practice of torture. people are dying as we speak. i urge the international community to unite share as well as in the security council and to speak with one voice to all syrians including the governments and armed opponents in order to convince them to pull back from the brink and begin negotiations for peaceful process of change. there would be a terrible cost for not doing so. this six. plan must be implemented -- the six point plan must be implemented. they must cease of violence and create the environment for a peaceful solution of the crisis facing their country.

we need protection of rights for all syrians regardless of their beliefs. >> of violence and political unrest was a topic on the u.s. senate floor today. john mccain and joe lieberman called for u.s. military intervention to assist the opposition. >> is to come as no surprise to any of our colleagues that the civil war raging has only deteriorated further of the past two weeks. a massacre that bashir al-sadr's forces

committed in the syrian town of jula. at least 108 civilians, the majority of them women and children, are now believed to have been killed, some from repeated shelling by assad's tanks and artillery, but most slaughtered in their homes and executed in the streets. survivors describe a scene so gruesome that even after 16 months of bloodshed and more than 10,000 dead, it still manages to shock the conscience. there are now reports of another massacre by assad's forces with as many as 78 syrians dead and that syrian authorities are blocking access to the scene for the u.n. monitors on the ground. these massacres of civilians are sickening and evil, but it's only the latest and most appalling evidence there's no limit to the savagery of assad and his forces. they will do anything, kill anyone, and stop at nothing to hold on to power. and what has been the response of the united states and the

rest of the civilized world to this most recent mass atrocity in syria? more empty words of scorn and condemnation, more hollow pledges that the killing must stop, more strained expressions of amazement at what has become so tragically commonplace. indeed, as jeffrey goldberg has noted, administration officials are now at risk of running out of superlative adjectives and adverbs with which to condemn the violence in syria. they've called it -- quote -- "heinous, outrageous, unforgivable, breathtaking, disgraceful" and many other synonyms for the same. i don't know what else they can call it, and yet the killing goes on. the administration now appears to be so desperate that they're returning to old ideas that have already been tried and failed. let me quote from a "new york times" article that appeared on may 27. quote -- "in a new effort to halt more than a year of

bloodshed in syria, president obama will push for the departure of president bashir al-assad under a proposal modeled on the transition in another strife-torn arab country, yemen. the success of the plan hinges on russia, one of mr. assad's staunchest allies, which is strongly opposed to his removal. this is a case history repeating itself as farce. trying to enlist russia in a policy of regime change in syria is exactly what the administration spent months doing earlier this year and that approach was decisively rejected by russia when it vetoed a toothless sanctions resolution in the u.n. security council in february. and how is this recycled policy working out? well, last week a human rights organization disclosed that on may 26, a russian ship delivered the latest russian supply of heavy weapons to the assad regime in the port of tartus.

last friday, the russian foreign minister issued a statement on the jula massacre and blamed it on the opposition. president putin, after blowing off a trip to washington in favor of a visit to europe, suggested that foreign powers were also to blame for the jula massacre. he went on to reject further sanctions on the assad regime and to deny that russia is shipping any relevant weapons to assad. not to be outdone, the russian foreign minister also last week described the situation in syria this way -- quote -- "it takes two to dance, although this seems less like a tango and more like a disco, where several dozens are taking part at once." you might think this alone would be enough to disabuse the administration of its insistence against all imperial evidence that russia is the key to ending the violence in syria. you might think so but you'd be wrong. asked last week whether he could envision some kinds of military inter-- kind of military

intervention in syria without a u.n. security council resolution which is subject to a russian and chinese veto, the secretary of defense said, no, he cannot envision it. similarly, the white house spokesman, jay carney, rejected the idea of providing weapons to the syrian people to help them defend themselves, saying that would lead to -- quote -- get this -- get this -- "if we supplied weapons to the syrian resistance -- quote -- "it would lead to chaos and carnage." and that it would "militarize the conflict." it would "militarize the conflict" after more than 10,000 slaughtered by bashir assad with russian weapons, iranians on the ground, that it would militarize the conflict. it's difficult to even muster a response to statements and actions such as these. u.s. policy in syria now seems to be of subject to the approval

of russian leaders who are arming assad's forces and who believe that the slaughter of more than 10,000 people in syria can be compared to a disco party. meanwhile, the administration refuses even to provide weapons to syrians who are struggling and dying in an unfair fight, all for fear of -- quote -- "militarizing the conflict." if only the russians and the iranians and al qaeda shared that lofty sentiment. i pray that president obama will finally realize what president clinton came to understand during the balkan wars. president clinton, who took military action to stop ethnic cleanse not guilty bosnia -- cleansing in bosnia and did so in kosovo without the u.n. security council mandate, ultimately understood that when regimes are willing to commit any atrocity to stay in power, diplomacy cannot succeed until the military balance of power changes on the ground. as long as assad and his foreign supporters think they can win militarily -- which they do --

they will continue fighting and more syrians will die. in short, military intervention of some kind is a prerequisite to the political resolution of the conflict that we all want to achieve. the question i would pose to my colleague from connecticut and to the administration is this -- how many more have to die? how many more have to die? how many more young women have to be raped? how many young -- more young syrians are going to be tortured and killed? how many more? how many more? before we will act? how many more? and i would like to also ask, when will the president of the united states speak up in favor of these people who are fighting and dying for freedom? i thank my colleague from connecticut for his continued involvement. we shared the same experiences

that i have in refugee campedz,, meeting people who've been driven out of their homes, family members killed, tortured, young women raped as a matter of policy and doctrine of the ass assad -- of assad's brutal forces. mr. lieberman: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. lieberman: madam president, it's an honor to join in this colloquy with my friend from arizona, though i, obviously, take no pleasure in it because it's a -- it's an outcry, a kri de corps, a cry of the out about the slaughter going on in syria now, once again with the government killing its own people to maintain its own presence in power. and it's an outcry because essentially now for more than a year, the rest of the world, including the united states, has offered these victims of the

brutal violence of the bashir al assad regime in da msk us -- in damascus, essentially words, words of condemnation, words of sympathy. but those words or the few cell phones we've given them, those syrian freedom fighters, don't -- don't stand up against assad's tanks, his -- his guns, the brutality of his forces. and so i'd say the answer to the question that my friend from arizona posed -- how many more people have to be killed? -- obviously, too many people have already been killed. it's time for the u.s. to show some leadership. senator mccain and i are not calling for american troops on the ground in syria. and we're not calling for the united states alone to take action here. there is a coalition of the willing. if we continue to say that we're not going to take action to help

the victims of assad's brutality until and unless we get authorization from the u.n. security council, there's never going to be any hope go to these victims in syria because the russians and -- and probably the chinese will veto any u.n. resolution. every time we say we have to go to the u.n., we raise the -- the power of russia to protect its ally in -- in damascus. but there's a coalition of the willing ready throughout the arab world, and i think some in europe and elsewhere, which will not act until the united states shows some leadership here. madam president, i want to just briefly put this in a historical context. after the nazi holocaust of the last century, the world said, never again, never again.

we have kept that pledge in some cases, such as bosnia and kosovo, although it took us too long, too many people were killed before the world acted. in other places such as rwanda, we turned away from the slaughter of people there. and once again, we're challenged to show the victims whether we're true to our words. i read something a few days ago in "the washington post," an article that was drawing parallels between the genocide in bosnia during the 1990's and the killing that's taking place in syria today. there was a 37-year-old survivor of the veb -- srebenitzka massacre, who said it's bizarre -- i'm quoting now --

it's bizarre how never again has come to mean again and again. it's bizarre that we live in a world where srebenitzkas are still possible. what's happening in syria today is almost identical to what happened in bosnia two decades ago, end of quote of the survivor. so what is the world waiting for, a syrian srebenitzka when thousands are killed by their own government before we act? i hope not. and that's why we speak out today. look, just within the hour, a story was posted on reuters news service out of beirut, six hours after tanks and militiamen pulled out of al-kabair, a syrian farmer returned to find only charred bodies among the smoldering homes of his tranquil hamlet.

there was smoke rising from the buildings and a horrible smell of human flesh burning, said a man who told how he had watched syrian government troops in sha shabiha -- these are the government-sponsored gangs, militia, gunmen, attack his village as he hit in his family olive grove. it was like a ghost town, he told the reporter. senator mccain and i have been explicit for some period of time. we have been both to turkey and lebanon to talk to leaders of the opposition and people in the refugee camps, and they simply say to us as americans you are our only hope, this from a people whose government has been determined in its antiamerican posture, the outside government, and yet people now turn to us as they always do in a time of

crisis around the world and say this is what america is about. america has a moral government that cares about people's right to life and liberty, and we will not be saved unless you get involved. i hope the latest events move our government to go beyond words to actions and immediately -- and again, senator mccain and i have talked about actions we support, arms to the opposition fighters, training of the opposition fighters, safe havens in turkey and perhaps other neighboring countries to syria where they can be trained and equipped, provision of intelligence that we have which will help the opposition fight to defend themselves and their families. frankly, if it was up to us -- i know i can speak for senator mccain. i think if we really wanted to help and turn the tide quickly without a lot of unnecessary loss of life, we would use allied air power, americans and

our allies, and we would hit some targets important to the assad government, and i think that would break their will and it would increase the number of defections from assad's army and from the very important business community and would result in a much sooner end to this terrible waste of life. so that's our outcry, and that's my answer to your question, my friend from arizona. i thought you were particularly right in condemning the idea that if we get involved, it militarizes the conflict, the conflict is already mill arrestized on one side. russia and iran are providing us with all the represents he needs. meantime, the opposition is scrounging around paying exorbitant prices just for bullets which they have been running out of. i ask my friend from arizona,

people say that intervention in syria will be much harder than it was in libya, and i wonder if he would respond to that argument against us getting involved? mr. mccain: i thank my colleague, and i also want to point out that traveling in the region and meeting with the leaders in these various countries, it cries out for american leadership. i think my colleague would agree, in a coordinated partnership with these countries, but they cry out for american leadership. and meanwhile, the president of the united states, as this slaughter goes on, is silent and his spokesman, his spokesman says they don't want to militarize the conflict. how in the world could you make a statement like that when

10,000 people have already been slaughtered? that to me is -- is so bizarre, i'm not sure i have ever seen anything quite like it. you know, there is always the comparison, i say to my friend from connecticut, about libya. you know, there is an aspect of this issue, libya was not in america's security interests. libya was clearly a situation where we got rid of one of the most brutal barriers who was responsible for the bombing of pan am 103 and the deaths of americans, but if syria goes on the path to democracy, it's the greatest blow to iran in 25 years. hezbollah is broken off. they lose their last client state, russia loses their last client state. iran loses the most important ally they have in the region. and finally, i would say to my

friend, we keep hearing over and over again that extremists will come in. al qaeda will come in. you know, we heard that in tunisia, we heard that in libya, we are hearing that in egypt and we're hearing that again negligenting the fact that al qaeda and extremists are the exact ant they -- antithesis of who these people are. now, they have been repressed with brutality whereas al qaeda as we know believes in acts of terror. and i agree with my colleague, if we provided a sang -- sanctuary for these people in order to organize, to care for the wounded, to have a shadow government set up as we saw in libya, then i think it's pretty obvious that it would be a huge step forward. but again, my friend from

connecticut has often said so eloquently that probably the most immarty words ever written in english is that we hold these truths to be self-evident that all of us are endowed, all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. people of syria that are suffering under this brutal dictatorship and being slaughtered as we speak i believe have those inalienable rights, and the role of the united states was not -- has not been to go everywhere and fight every war, but it has been the role of the united states of america when it can to go to the assistance of people who are suffering under dictatorships such as this, one of the most brutal in history. and for us to now consign to the good graces of russia and whether they will veto a u.n. security council resolution,

resolution as to whether we will act or not on behalf of these people is a great advocation of american authority and responsibility. finally, i would like to say that senator lieberman and i have visited these places, we have seen these people. i wish all of our colleagues, i wish all americans could have gone to the refugee camp where there is 25,000 people who have been ejected from their homes, the young men who still had fresh wounds, the young men who had been gang raped, the families and mothers who had lost their sons and daughters. it's -- it's deeply moving, it's deeply, deeply moving. as my friend from connecticut said, they cry out, they cry out for our help. we should be speaking up every day on their behalf, all of us, and we should be contemplating actions that stops this unprecedented brutality.

mr. lieberman: madam president, i thank senator mccain. i think he -- he spoke with real clarity and strength. it's exactly what we need to continue to do. i want to just go to this point that he made. some people say we shouldn't get involved in syria because we don't know who the opposition is and therefore we should be cautious before helping them. we have had the opportunity to meet the opposition and their leadership, both the political opposition and the military opposition, and i would tell you to the best of my judgment, i believe it's our judgment, these aren't extremists. these are syrian patriots. as senator mccain said, this whole movement started peacefully. they went out into the squares in big cities in syria. they were asking for more freedom. they weren't actually at the beginning asking for an overthrow of the assad's government, but what was assad's

response? he turned his guns on them and started to kill them wantonly. when they decided there was no peaceful course because he rejected every compromise alternative that intermediaries put in, they took up arms such as they could find. the danger here is not that the people who are the leaders of the opposition are extremists or terrorists. the danger is that the extremists and terrorists will take over this movement if we and the rest of the civilized world don't get involved. and the syrian opposition will be sorely tempted to take their support because they have no alternative. we simply can't let that happen. i know that there is a lot going on in our country. i know people are worried about the economy, as we are, of course, but america's strength and credibility in the world has actually always been not only what we're about by our founding documents and our history but

what maintains our credibility and strength in the world which is a foundation of our economic strength. and the longer we give words but no action in response to the murder and rape of victims in syria, the lower our credibility is, and we can't afford that. and senator mccain said, i just want to emphasize it, the main reason to get involved here is humanitarian. it's what america is about. it's about the protection of life and liberty. but it happens to be that this makes a lot of strategic sense, too, because the central -- the number-one enemy we have in the world today is iran, and if assad goes down, iran will suffer a grievous blow. some people say and some still say it, including high officials of our government, that it's not a question of whether bashear

al-assad will fall but when. i don't agree. having been over there talking to the opposition, talking about what's happening, this is a profoundly unfair fight. assad has most of the guns and systems and the freedom fighters have very little. he will keep doing this as long as he has to, and this battle will go on, this war will go on a long time with thousands and thousands and thousands of more innocent people killed as they were earlier today. so the facts cry out at us to take action. i hope and pray that we will. senator mccain and i and others, senator rubio has an op-ed in "the wall street journal" today that speaks to some of the points we have made and others on both sides. i hope we will continue to speak out until finally there will be action to save the lives of innocents. madam president, i would like to ask unanimous consent to include in the record a series of

questions that opponents of our involvement raise and the answers that i would offer to

one of my concerns is as you look at the volcker rule and the trades, it becomes difficult to determine what is prop trading and what is macro hedging. as you sit in a classroom, it might be easy to work through

the volcker rule. in practice, is it not very difficult to use the rule to stop the -- a j.p. morgan? >> in this specific case we are still very much investigating. in general, yes, a different trade proprietary trading from hedging activities and market-making activities is inherently very difficult and regulators are looking at 19,000, letters to try to figure out how to do that as best as possible. the one comment i would make which my colleague governor -- made yesterday is that one requirement of the volcker rule is that there be very extensive explanations to the supervisors and advanced for complex hedges as well as auditing and a proper incentives for the executives involved in the activities of the traders. so at a minimum, if the volcker rule would have been in place,

that might have been helpful. >> i am not opposed to it. i am concerned about the implementation. is it the silver lining that there was no tax pair lost? j.p. morgan has the appropriate capital requirements to cover their loss. this is what you will talk about later on today when you talk about basel iii. isn't the real issue not thousands of new rules and a 2000 page bill, but an increase of the capital requirements of american banks, making sure they have more skin in the game and that the taxpayer will not bear that loss, but investors and those banks are going to be responsible for the losses of bad trades? >> i agree with you entirely. the reason for high capital requirements and we are looking to greatly increase capital requirement is because we will not be able to anticipate everything that could happen. the good news here is that j.p. morgan's losses are a small fraction. there is a very substantial

capital base that has been lost to shareholders. the taxpayers are not in danger in any way. so, yes, capital is extremely important and i agree we do 100%. >> in essence, we increase those ratios. i imagine -- i do not have much time -- but you agree with the surcharge making sure there are larger banks required to hold more capital? >> yes, yes. >> sometimes, and i know you have to do this, but when you talk to us what you say can be open to interpretation. i do a nice job of that. but as you are talking about the clip, as we are talking about taxes, are you telling us if we allow nothing to happen and you see all of these taxes increase, the bush, obama tax cuts go away, there will be a direct impact on economic growth and job

creation? >> i am looking not just at the taxes but also of the sequestered and the end of the payroll tax and everything else, yes. of course, economic forecasting is not a science. but everything we understand about fiscal policy, yes there would be a short-term fiscal impact. >> are you telling us extend them? >> i am telling you to try to avoid a situation in which you have a massive cut in spending and increase in taxes hitting at one moment as opposed to trying to spread out over time in some way that will give -- create less short-term drag on the u.s. economy. >> i appreciate your testimony. i yield back. >> thank you. senator lee? >> thank you for joining us today. what are some of the risks that accompany quantitative easing? can you walk us through those?

>> well, i think the preliminary thing to say is that since we have less experience with quantitative easing, our estimates are understanding of its -- and exactly how much is needed and so on are less than the traditional monetary policy. in terms of potential side effects, a number have been identified but the two we pay most attention to first, there are some who believe that greatly expanding our balance sheet would make the exit strategy more difficult and therefore inflation is more likely and that might be deflation expectations to go up. i want to be clear that we are very confident that we can exit in a timely way from our balance sheet strategy. and there is in fact no justification.

>> go ahead to your second point. >> the second one has to do with financial stability. the question is -- does the process -- the prospect of lower interest rates for a long time does it create problems for life insurance companies or pension funds? does it on to success of risk- taking? does it lead to a facts that could be counterproductive in the longer term? there we do extensive monitoring, extensive analysis to try to identify any such problems but it is possible we might miss something. >> and it sounds like you are not discounting, you are not refuting the possibility that it can happen -- have inflationary effects. you are saying that you can time it in such a way that it is less likely to?

>> there are two situations. one is our timing. in any monetary policy easing episode, there is a question of getting it exactly right. too soon or too late and it is always the case that if the fed waits too long you can get an inflationary effect. what i am talking about here is the question of whether it is technically possible to undo the balance sheet. we are confident that we will have the technical tools to bring the banking system down to a more normal level when we decide it is time to tighten monetary policy. on the technical side, we are comfortable. it is always the case, under most normal traditional monetary policy, that the timing of this stimulation is difficult. it is always possible that you could undershoot or overshoot,

and that is unavoidable. >> with treasury yield rates being at all-time historic lows, i think it becomes difficult to dispute that at some point in the next few years, we will start to see a normalization and yield rates return to their historic averages, perhaps above. do you have a sense and can you offer us any insight into when we might expect to see that happen? >> um, well, we've indicated that we expect to keep short- term rates low until late 2014 at least. but even then, longer-term rates might be rising if, in fact, we are removing short- term rates, reductions epoch point, since long rates include expectations of short rates be on that window, you could be seeing some movement

by then. we do expect, of course, rates to normalize overtime. the exact timing is difficult to judge. we see the economy moving at a moderate pace and the right direction. at the point of which we are comfortable that it is time to withdraw monetary stimulus is obviously quite uncertain. >> is there are risks of a sharper rebound along -- the rates low? -- the longer you keep the rates low? >> i don't think so. it is true that the quantitative easing measures have pushed down so-called term premia on longer-term rates. if those were to normal as quickly, that would make the increase in rates a little faster than might otherwise be the case. but we have stress tested both our economic models and our financial portfolio -- the

financial portfolios of financial institutions, and we do not see at this point any serious risk to economic recovery or to financial stability of that return of interest rates to more normal levels. but it is obviously something we need to pay close attention to. >> thank you, chairman bernanke. >> chairman bernanke, thank you for your testimony. for the members. the record will remain open for five business days to submit additional questions or a statement. we are adjourned -- adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> more about the house and the senate in c-span is congressional directory. c-span'congressionals directory. it includes contact information, at district maps, and committee assignments. justices and governors. you can pick up a copy for $12.95 at c-span.org/shop. on "washington journal"this morning -- we will look at classified information leaks. our guest is michael hirse. and steve bell will be on it. "washington journal" is alive every day at 7:00 a.m. >> the b52 -- everyone thinks

back to vietnam. they think of the history. cold war. there is a different kind of the power associated with the b52 as opposed to other long-range bombers. >> the user to friends coming union and confederate avenue themselves prior to the civil war. they fought against each other in 1862. here that are at age 100 sitting on the porch talking about the old days. >> of one to the east marked 901, the gate to the east is marked 903. they really reflect and reference the moment of the bomb at 902. what local content of vehicles the first week of every month on a book tv. and watch for the history and literary culture of our next doc. that is on c-span to and c-span 3.

>> the new york times reported this week. united states and israel were behind a computer virus that hit iran's nuclear program. there are published details about the drone strike on terrorists. the eight leaders of the house and senate intelligence committee said the leaks are jeopardize american lives. they spoke to reporters for almost one half an hour. >> are you ready? the senate intelligence committee has just had a meeting with the director of national intelligence. we invited the house chairman, mike rogers and the vice chairman to attend the session.

we were very pleased that they did. senator chambliss and i work closely together and we have expanded that group now to include the four of us. we will be working together to try to produce some changes in the senate authorization bill, which has not been completed. the house has completed their build, but we have not. so, we will work with the house membership on language that can be acceptable to both sides to codify a certain process which we hope will be more efficient in retarding leaking and also being able to stop it. and also being able to evolve more tools to control it. and where it cannot be controlled, to be able to take

additional actions. this, obviously because of the timing, we will have to be done in the next month or so i would think. so we will be working together in that direction. i would like to ask senator chambliss, my distinguished vice chairmen to make some comments. >> thank you. let me just say thank you to the leadership. the four of us have worked closely on any number of issues. there is no more important issues that we have to work on it than this issue. i think it goes without saying that all of us are extremely upset about the fact that, not only have leaks occurred, but there has just been a cascade of leaks coming out of the intelligence community over the last several weeks and months. it is our clear intention to put

a stop to this and the best way that we can. leeks are part of the nature of this town of. we understand that. but the fact of the matter is, when you have the cabinet leaks that have been coming out in the last few weeks, it put lives in danger, and it infringes upon the ability of the intelligence committee to do their job. so in our meeting with the general, we knew before we engaged that he was extremely upset about this issue. he is, as well as every member of the leadership team in the intelligence community -- we have a pledge from them to continue to work with them on all of our issues, but protect early on this issue as we move forward to try to make sure that they all the tools to work with internally on the issue of trying to make sure that we put a stop to this kind of leakage. i would like to call up chairman

rogers. >> thank you very much, senator. we have works in -- on some things in bipartisan ways. i went to thank you you all. through the process, with and we have done a lot of important things for our national security. working in a spirit of bipartisanship, to of all four of us come forward today and talk about the severity of these leaks. i hope it sends a clear message about how dangerous this has become. and it is not just an isolated incident. and that is what it has brought us together. it seems to be a pattern that is getting worse and more frequent. and the severity of the leaks are serious. i had a meeting just yesterday with a series of officers from the agency and other agencies who do important work around the world on a very difficult assignments. and to the person -- these are the line officers, the folks who we asked to leave their families and go to dangerous

places to do hard things, the frustration and their inability to get a handle on this, their inability to keep a secret, not just in this town and would means here, but what it means for their ability to conduct their work overseas is incredibly damaging. this has been a serious problem as i have seen. a few weeks ago launched an independent review. a very specific leak that turned into something a little bigger. i just want to tell you that through reviews with icofficers, there is a clear need for a formal investigation. the amount you are suggesting that the agencies were directed to expand the scope of classified information, they give to the press. in some cases, at someone from a segment of the media was present in the classified setting. recently, a group of intelligent officers, as i said before, has

disclosed directly how many of the leaks over a period of years have made their jobs more difficult. in their relationships, and their ability to interact with sources and around the world. they are doing great things for their own countries and for the united states as well. today, the cia informed that they cannot respond to our requests. a troubling event and deed. they do -- suggesting some of these leaks could've come from the sources within the goj or the fbi. it appears that these leaks could be in a position to influence the investigations. the investigation must do this, we agree on this, we are still trying to work out where this might be the best place for this to happen, it must be complete, it must be empowered to examine any office or department of the united states government, it

must be free of influence from those who conducted or reviewed the programs issued, and must be fair. it must be non-partisan appeared to problems. one, that we get to the bottom of what is a growing and serious problem. the nation's -- nature of these leaks. and that we put together legislation quickly that moves to get the tools to beat minute to to prevent this from happening in the future. i look forward to working with all the members here to make sure that happens. >> good afternoon. first thing i want to of knowledge -- the relationship that has developed between all of us. the issues we deal with in the intelligence committee are so important. we have got to work together as a team, bipartisan, so we can go to the administration and get issues resolved. i have been on this committee close to 10 years. this is one of the most serious

breaches in the last -- that i have seen. it puts us at risk. it puts lives at risk. it hurts our ability to have our allies were with us and get information. it hurts us in recruiting assets. it hurts our ability to protect our citizens throughout the world. we know how serious this is. got to deal with it. we will deal with it. we started today coming together, but the house and the senate and intelligence committee deciding where we are going to go. we have to absolutions. what are they? the first thing we have to do, we have to change the culture of anyone who works in the intelligence committee, to educate them and let them know how serious these leaks are coming and the ramifications. means we need to put together a policy that we know it the policy is. you violate the policy, you will be held accountable.

that is important. we would love to find out who did the leak and how it occurred. and how important and dangerous it is. whether that happens or not, those are tough cases. we need to use as an example to change these policies. that is where we are right now. this has got to be a partnership between the administration and the senate and the house. we are going to work and move forward on this case, the sleek case. we feel very strongly that we have to do this to protect our national security. >> would you address your questions? [unintelligible] to of and concerned making such a big deal -- this is going to

be bigger at the white house? >> this is not fingerpointing that anybody? . we have a problem and we want to stop the problem. we are not finger-pointing. the house will do its own investigation. we are doing a bill. we will put changes and the bill. but this has to stop. when people say they do not want to work with the west because they cannot trust us to keep a secret. that is serious. when allies become concerned, life is inset's jeopardy, that is a problem. the point of intelligence is to be able to know what might happen to protect this country. and we cannot do that if the intelligence is no longer kept with strict scrutiny within the number of people that need to have it. one of the problems is that we

are learning -- is so many people know that it becomes very hard to make a prosecution. so, rep was saying about changing the culture really is correct. about limiting the numbers of people who know given things. it is correct. so we have some ideas. we have discussed them today. you will certainly no or a point of agreement. [unintelligible] >> and will not prejudge what the fbi is charged with the responsibility of doing. we will meet with director muller this afternoon. we know that an investigation has already begun. it will be done a very poorly.

we have been through this before and the bush administration. wherever the responsibility falls out, that is where it is going to be. if it is in the administration, that is fine. it is not, fine. this is not meant to be a political exercise. this is too critical to the future of the intelligence committee of the united states. it is our intention to just to get to the bottom of the issue of these leaks. as we move forward to try to make sure that we put measures in place, that not only make it more difficult for future leaks to occur, but the consequences of those future please be dealt with immediately and strongly. [inaudible]

what did you looking to do legislatively? >> i cannot go into it right now. this morning was actually the first time that i had a chance to outline some of my thoughts to the committee. and we need to discuss it. it is important that the house and the senate worked closely together. we will never get it done if we do not. the first people that will know are the three people here. and we need to go through that process. >> would you support a special prosecutor looking into this? >> i understand of that. i have had discussions with chairman rogers about that. i have asked for little more time to look at it. special prosecutor -- does not bring to one's attention the changes that need to be made. yesterday we had a hearing with

the inspectors general of various agencies. and one of the things that i am looking at is the possibility of giving these inspector general more investigatory authority. it is clear that the security aspects of the existing agencies have not really done the job. we need to find out why. so, i am dealing that decision. a special prosecutor can take years. we do not have the years. we need to legislate. we need solutions before us very quickly. >> would you dispute the charge that it is politically motivated? >> we are not politically motivated. one thing we said, wherever the ships fall of a fall. but we want a fair investigation of.

we want to be able to see that we had the processes in place to deal with this. i do not believe that we do at the present time. [inaudible] >> do you think cover should be involved in the oversight on this? >> i will not respond to that question. was asked in a way -- we are going to do our diligence. we are going to get this situation hopefully changed. >> to think there will have an easier time questioning journalists? >> there is a possibility of looking in that direction.

not discussed it. it is certainly a possibility. >> what about underwear bomb plots. >> and will not discuss it. i will say that leaks jeopardize american lives. >> to have any indication that the leaks are coming from capitol hill? >> i had no knowledge at this time. [inaudible] >> i'm not going to comment on

the scope of the investigation. that's a determination that the f.b.i. has to make. that's a whole other issue that's out of our r.e.m. the purpose of having director muller in today is we do this on a fairly regular basis but obviously when something like this happens, then it's important that we have director clapper in as we have this morning and we have director mull for the and other heads of agencies that we need to have in for discussion, they're always willing to come in and dialogue with us. we're going to have a sit-down in an informal way with director muller to be brought up speed on where the situation is. >> do you feel like the pen yum has swung? >> what is the question? >> do you feel like it's come so far since the commission said the was too much secrecy. had the floodgates been open?

>> i don't think you could say that today. >> do you think this might be politically motivated for this to go to the white house? >> well, i don't think we ought to make that determination and i outlined some of the challenges they have. you have the d.o.j. national security division has recused themselves from certain aspects of the investigation. the f.b.i. was in reseat with some of the investigation cha was released. and at some point, you have to ask yourself the question and in our review we were told that the c.i.a. was going to withhold information at this time leads you to believe that if we're going to make this non-partisan. if we're going to make it fair and complete, which means it has to follow the leads of which they have, that you're going to have at least some sort of an outside look because of the nature at least in the public

sources the media leaks, clearly shows that someone who may have been in the chain to influence an investigation may in fact be a part of the investigation. given that, it would only lead one to a conclusion that you should probably have someone outside the normal track of investigation on the particular leak case. >> this is an event that happened. it's very serious. this is about the united states of america. leadership is judged on how you deal with a problem. and that is a serious problem. and we need both the house and the senate to work with us. not only to deal with the actual leak that has occurred now, but to deal with what we're going to do to change the culture of leaks generally to make sure that sources of messages do not get out in the field. and the issue that was raised about where we were with respect

to the -- your question over there -- your question -- what was your question? no. right there that you raised. >> [inaudible] >> and that is a very important issue. if you look at what happened before 9/11, it was stow piped. we didn't share information and it cost us dearly. when we look at the solutions, we have to make sure we put process and procedures in place so that everyone involved in the intelligence committee knows what those processes and procedures are because we cannot close down intelligence. we have to share and it get it to the right person but it has to be purient in the procedure only those that need to know are going to know. >> does it concern you that conversations -- [inaudible]

>> you can't make predeterminations when you're evaluating and looking into the exchanging the cross and how to do these leaks occur and we'll have to answer that as we move forward into the process. >> last question. >> i agree with my ranking member. that's the whole point of having a complete fair and impartial investigation and it should take you where you go and one of our challenges here amongst us is that even the d.n.i. has only a small jurisdiction or smaller jurisdiction of investigative authority. d.o.j. is recusing themselves from aspects of it. you can see where it gets messy and our goal is to determine what is the best course for a fair, impartial and complete investigation. >> next question. >> last question. >>[inaudible]

>> i'm not going to answer that question here. i don't believe it's an appropriate question right now. i respect your asking it. but that's not what this press conference is about. >> about the use of -- tools should there be room for that or [inaudible] >> well, there -- you know, if you deal with can destin activity and if it's covert activity which has a special place, it's all clarified. and very few people have -- classified and very few people have access to it technically. i don't think leaks are coming out of these committees. they're coming from elsewhere and as the chairman of the house

committee is saying there are so many people now have information which didn't exist that way, the stove pipes are down. information shared more broadly. well, if this is critical tactical covert information, it puts our allies at risk. and this is what we're concerned about. >> any clandestine activity is perceived in the media sometimes. the scrutiny that covert action gets and the seriousness on both committees is incredibly serious. we have regular covert action discussions, reviews, we make sure it's compliant with the law. and we have that ability to make sure that it's compliant with the law. and so i wouldn't go under any notion that it has to be on any particular action has to be on the project page of the paper has to get scrutiny. both of these committees in a bipartisan way take any covert

or colon destin activity by the united states as serious as we take any issue. so i would hope that the public would have some understanding. that's the whole purpose of these committees so that you can have those kinds of tough scrutiny in a classified setting. that is of huge responsibility buton any pen that doesn't take that responsibility very seriously. >> thank you very much. thanks, everybody. thank you. thank you.

>> more about the house on the senate in c-span's congressional director. -- directory. also information on cabinet members, supreme court justices and the nation's governors. you can pick up a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling at c-span.org/shop. >> tonight on c-span -- live coverage of the 68th annual radio and television correspondents's dinner. it starts at 9:00 p.m. eastern tonight and you can see it live here on c-span. >> >> mr. gorbachev teared down this wall. >> sunday night at 9:00 eastern and pacific, on american history tv, mark the 25th anniversary of

president ronald reagan's 1987 speech from the brandenburg gate in west germany. and also our series, "the contenders." 14 see political figure who is ran and lost but changed political history. this sunday, 1884 james blaine, american history. this weekend on c-span3. >> they're often referred to as the conscience of the congress and after having work there had almost two years, i can't think of a better name. it is really the heartbeat of the people. >> executive director and general counsel of the congressional black caucus, angela rye on the role of today's caucus. >> it is designed to ensure that members of congress that who are african-american can come together on issues that are playing the community at large, issues that are playing their district to final commonality. they are here to discuss

proposals to advance the causes of people that don't have a voice. >> more with angela rye sunday at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span. >> now house speaker john boehner holds a briefing he warn negotiators working on a compromise on the house and senate versions to the highway bill that they need to reach agreement by june 309 or he will back a six month or more extension of a existing highway and transit programs. >> the weekly alligator feeding. good morning, everyone. last week's job numbers were more evidence that president obama's economic policies are standing in the way of real

economic growth and standing in the way of creating more jobs in our country. unemployment has been higher than 8% for 40 consecutive months. family wages are stagnate. everything from gasoline to groceries to health care is more expensive. and half of recent college graduates are either unemployed or underemployed. but instead of working with congress, remove barriers to job creations, the president is at the university of nevada, las vegas, at a rally talking about student loan rates. he should be here working with us to ensure that they won't double. instead of our good faith effort being responded to, all we've heard from the white house is silence. but that's a story of the obama administration. in over two years, the democrats here in congress gave the president everything he wanted. a stimulus spending binge,

health takeover and more. and now we're here working to clean up the mess, the president and senate democrats are more interested in gimmicks than they are in real solutions. you know, there's no better example than the 30 past house passed bills that would help create jobs. our plan for american job creators, most of these bills are all sitting over in the united states senate and these bills would expend energy production, eliminate excessive regulations and stop the washington spending binge. they will help create jobs for college graduates who feed these jobs to pay student loans and address the high gas prices american families are dealing with. today, we arery peeling the president's tax on medical devices. and the weeks ahead, we are

going to remove barriers hurting and small -- hurting small businesses around the country. one of the biggest challenges that they are facing is they have no idea what the tax rates are going to be next year. they're looking at a giant tax increase come january 1. this would be the largest tax increase in american history. and next month, the house will pass a bill to extend those current rates for a year. and there's a bipartisan agreement between republicans and top democrats. you've seen all the names out there the last couple of days who believe that we should extend all of the current tax rates to provide some certainty for small business owners. and it will give congress time to craft reforms that will simplify the code for families in small businesses. we're also committed to fully repealing the president's health care law. which is driving up health care costs for small businesses and making it harder for them to

hire new workers. unless the supreme court throws out the entire law, we need to repeal what's left of it. and we need to enact common sense reforms in a step-by-step manner that will protect the american people's access to the care they need from the doctor they choose at a lower cost. >> do you agree with senator mccain's call to investigate in the classified leaks appearing in the newspapers? >> i'm concerned about the leaks. and i think the administration should heed the advice of former defense secretary bob gates. when after the bin laden raid and a lot of details were coming out, he promptly went over to the white house and use some colorful language to try to stop any more leaks from occurring.

>> and if i could follow up, please, do you believe that these are all politically motivated? >> i don't know what -- i'm not going to imply any motives to this, but when we leak a sensitive data, we disclose methods, we disclose activities that put our intelligence officials and our military in a more dangerous position. and it should not happen. >> he had given some information in his opening statements that there were negotiations, talks going on. he thought there could be a mutually acceptable agreement his side and your side as to what to do. is there any talks going on there and do you take such a rosey view of his as the attorney general? >> there is absolutely no

conversations going on. the department has not responded to the leadership letter that went down there several weeks ago. the department of justice has not responded to the subpoena issued by chairman isiah. and we are going to do everything we can to hold the president of justice accountable for what did or did not happen with regard to fast and furious. now it's pretty clear from the evidence that has been laid out that someone at the department either knew or should have known what was happening with regard to fast and furious. but those people need to be held accountable. and then secondly from february 4th on, the department refuses to disclose information with

regard to their activities that have gone. and so we're -- gone on. so we're working closer with the community and we will continue to work closer to the community to try to make sure that the department of justice complies and answers the questions that have been outlined to them. >> and are you closer to moving on a -- or as you said constitutional obligation? >> all options are on the table with regard to what may need to be done to hold the department of justice accountable. >> any event that the supreme court strikes down the health care law, what would house republicans do, if anything, before the election to make sure that people with pre-existing conditions are not dropped and make sure that kids under 26 are not dropped from their parents'

insurance and make sure that seniors don't get stuck in the doughnut hole again? >> we won't pass a 2,700-page bill in the middle of the night that no one has read. what we won't do is tell the american people we need to pass a bill before we don't know anything in it. republicans believe in a common sense approach to fisting the problems within our current health care system. >> will they be before the election? >> we'll have to bait scombathe see what the supreme court does. -- wait and see what the supreme court does. >> it's you have to get 218 people to agree on anything. doing that stuff that she laid out is going to be enough to -- even if there are particular provisions. are you concerned how difficult that will be after the supreme court rules? >> i'm not going to speculate on that the court will or won't do. we believe in a step-by-step approach to fix problems within

our current system. and so we'll just have to wait and see what the court decides. >> mitt romney said he would prefer in congress just buy a little time that the new scomplferings the new congress can deal with it as opposed to having a big stefpblgts is that a bad or good idea? >> i'm not concerned about what's going to happen at the end of the year. that's why the house has removed to replace the sequester in a responsible way. that's why the house will vote to extend all of the current tax rates for a year so that businesses have some certainty. and nobody knows what the election's going to produce. but it's clear that we're going to have to take some action whether it's long term or temporary. we're going to have to take some

action. and the idea that we're going to wait to do a year's worth of work in five or six weeks after the election is preposterous. that's why i've pressed all year long for the president and senate democrats to move, move our job bills that are over there. move something that replaces the sequester. the president knows and the secretary of defense knows that the sequester would undermine our nation's ability to protect the american people with these massive defense cuts. they ought to be moving. >> going back to the aspect of when to deal with these issues, are you worried or are you concerned that the events in spain and greece could become a contagion that would force talks to happen earlier than the election? because both sides seem to content to wait this out to see

what happens. >> both sides? i gave a speech a month ago -- i didn't give a speech a month ago just to hear myself talk. i outlined my willingness to deal with these issues now. there's no reason to wait until the end of the year. just because there's an election doesn't mean everything has to stop in washington, d.c. >> are you worried that spain could still forcing an earlier resolution? >> the problems in europe are serious. it's their recession. it's affecting our economic growth today. and i don't see any light at the end of the tunnel. >> last question. >> the republicans -- at what point do you need to start talking about doing extension considering how few legislative days you have left to do these new york cities? and also if the democrats continue to offer provisions that do not include the keystone

pipeline, do you see that this bill ever passing? >> i have a lot of confidence in the members on the conference. and frankly, i believe in a bipartisan way the conference on the highway bill wants to come to a resolution. so i'm very hopeful that they'll get into serious discussions quickly. because if we get up to june 30th, i am not interested in some 30-day extension. frankly, i think if we get to june 30th, it would be a six-month extension and move this thing out of the political realm that appears to be in at this moment. thanks. >> more about the house and the senate in c-span's congressional directory. it includes contact information,

district maps and committee assignments. also information on cabinet members, supreme court justices and the nation's governors. you can pick up a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling at c-span.org/shop. >> on washington redskins this morning, we'll look at -- "washington journal" this morning, we will look at congressional leaks at classified information. our guest is michael hirsh and steve bell with the bipartisan policy center will outline his group study that shows spending cuts set for january 1 could cost up to a million jobs. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> they're often refer to as the conscience of the congress and after now having working there for almost two years, i can't think of a better name. it is really the heartbeat of the people. >> executive director and

general council of the congressional black caucus, angela rye on the role of today's caucus. >> it is designed to ensure that members of congress who are african-american can come together on issues that are playing the community at large, issues that maybe playing their district where is they can find common-lawty. they're really coming together to discuss leaf solutions and proposals to advance the causes of people that don't have a voice. >> more are ang that rye sunday at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span. >> thank you. chairman casey -- >> federal reserve chairman ben bernanke testified before congress yesterday. he said another recession could hit the u.s. without action by congress. on january 1, the bush year of tax cuts are expiring as well as the payroll tax cuts signed into law by president obama and hundreds of billons of dollars of automatic spending cuts are scheduled to take effect. the fed chief said those tax

increases and spending cuts could damage the economy. >> which more than offset a trash in decline in government spending. labor market conditions improved in the latter part in 2011 and earlier this year the unemployment rate has fallen about 1% point since last august and payroll employment increased 225,000 per month on average during the first three months of this year. up from about 150,000 jobs added per month in 2011. in april and may, however, reported pace of job gains slowed to an average of 75,000 per month and the unemployment rate ticked up to 8.2%. this apparent slowing in the labor market may have been exaggerated by issues related to seasonal adjustment and the unusually warm weather this past winter. but it may also be association with some catch-up in hiring on the part

it may also be the case that the large gains seen earlier last year and this year were associated with some catch-up in a hiring on part of the players that pared their work forces aggressively after the recession. the deceleration may indicate this catch up has largely been completed and consequently, more rapid gains in economic activity will be required to achieve significant further improvement in labor market conditions. economic growth appears poised to continue at a moderate pace over coming quarters, supported in part by accommodative monetary policy. in particular, increases in household spending have been relatively well sustained. income growth has remained quite modest but the recent decline in energy prices should provide some offsetting left to real purchasing power. while the most recent ratings have been mixed, consumer sentiment is nonetheless up noticeably from its levels late last year. despite economic difficulties in europe, demand for u.s. exports has held up as well. the u.s. business sector is profitable and has become more competitive in international markets. however, some of the factors that are restraining the economy persist. notably, households and businesses appear quite cautious about the economy.

for example according to surveys, households continue to rate their income prospects as relatively poor and do not expect economic conditions to improve significantly. concerns about developments in europe, u.s. fiscal policy, and the strength and sustainability of recovery have left some firms has been to expand capacity. the depressed housing market has been an important drag on the recovery. despite historically low mortgage rates and high levels of affordability, many prospective -- prospective home buyers cannot obtain mortgages as standards have been impaired. at the same time, all large stock of faith -- of vacant houses and a backlog of foreclosures will add further to the supply of vacant homes. a few encouraging signs in housing have appeared recently including some pickup in sales and construction, improvements of homebuilder sentiment, and

the apparent stabilization of home prices in some areas. banking and financial conditions have improved significantly since the deficit and crisis. myth -- recent stress tests conducted by the federal reserve to the balance sheets of the 19th u.s. banks show those firms have added $300 billion to their capital since 2009. the tests also show that even in extremely adverse hypothetical economic scenarios, most firms remain able to provide credit to u.s. households and businesses. lending terms and standards have become less restrictive in recent quarters although some bar or such a small businesses and as noted, potential home buyers with less than perfect credit, are still reporting difficulties in obtaining loans. concerns about sovereign debt and the health of banks and the number of your area countries create strains in financial markets read the crisis has affected the u.s. economy added -- by acting as a drag on

exports, wearing a business and consumer confidence, and pressuring markets and institutions. european policy makers are taking a number of actions to address the crisis but more will be needed to stabilize euro area banks, calm market fears about finances, to be workable fiscal framework for the euro area, and lay the foundations for longer-term economic growth. u.s. banks have greatly improved their financial strength in recent years as i noted earlier. nevertheless, the situation poses a significant bricks -- risks to the economy and must be monitored closely. as always, the federal reserve remains prepared to take action is needed to protect the u.s. financial system and economy in the event financial stresses escalade. another factor is the drug be exerted by fiscal policy. reflecting on going budgetary pressures, real spendi