in about 45 minutes we will discuss taxes with congressman jim jordyn of ohio, chairman of the republican study committee. we will also talk about gun control congressman diana degette of colorado. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] host: it has been three years since the auto bailout and it remained a campaign issue, especially in the midwest where president obama campaign yesterday. here is the president in akron, ohio. defending the bailout. [video clip] >> over the last three and a half years we worked to make progress. 4.5 million new jobs created, half a million new manufacturing jobs. they counted the auto industry out and now it is coming back stronger than ever right here in

ohio and all across the country. host: three years later, do you think the auto bailout was the right policy? that is the question for the first section of "washington journal." you can also contact us electronically via twitter. you can leave a comment. the twitter handle is -- from "usa today" is this article. romney at tax auto industry bailout.

here is the mitt romney ad. [video clip] >> grew up here in lyndhurst -- 1972, selling cars. >> in 2009, under the obama administration that a bailout of general motors, ohio dealerships were forced to close. >> i received a letter from general motors. they were suspended by credit line. 30-something and fleas out of work. my wife and i were the last ones there. it was like a dream we worked for and worked so hard for was gone. >> and mr. romney, and i approved this message. host: yesterday in "the detroit news" the president of the uaw at this editorial. -- had this editorial.

that is a little bit of bob king's editorial yesterday. here are some of the facebook, as we have already received of this question.

those are some of the facebook comments we received. according to the treasury department, the total amount given was $80 billion and the amount repaid so far, $40.6 billion. jobs added since june of 2009 -- 240,000 jobs. chrysler originally received $12 billion and they paid back $11 billion of that. gm received $50 billion and they paid back 24 billion. gmac, the of the lending arm of gm received 17 billion -- auto lending arm of gm. they paid that $6 billion of that. we want to hear from you whether the automobile bailout is the right policy.

democrat from columbia, south carolina. you are on c-span. guest: -- caller: good morning. i would like to emphasize that, yes, the auto bailout was necessary. i work for a major tire industry, michelin tire in lexington, south carolina. and i can recall under the bush administration, the company was kind of going downhill. we had to downsize on manpower. we lost a lot of employees, contract workers. in fact, the company hired collets students as well. during the time of the bush administration. but when president obama did the auto bailout the company

started picking that up. we are doing exceptionally well. the contract and temporary workers of that unit and the college students are working there. in fact, dan clyburn came there to represent company under the bush administration. so, yes, we see a tremendous difference and sales started picking up really tremendously. it was by the grace of god we could do the bailout and it was necessary. host: we will let your comments stand there. we want to hear from you, whether you think the although bailout three years ago has been successful policy if it has been the right policy in your view. don is an independent from oregon. caller: how can you justify --

none of the policies have worked? everything is based on fallacies. i am not christian, but christianity states -- build a foundation on solid ground. if it is built on fraud, build on the press and people, it is nothing. -- oppressing people. host: we will leave your comments right there. appreciate you calling. was the of the bill of the right policy? carl, republican barry berkeley springs, west virginia. caller: i am not sure. but the bad thing about it is what the union got compared to what the private investors got. this was more or less a payout to the unions than the car companies.

now, the unions are responsible for driving the car industry in the ditch, and yet they are the ones that received most of this -- most of the goodies from obama. i guess we're going to see the great things obama has done for the next 95 days on this program. so i will just sit back and listen to all of the good things obama has done since he has been in office. and i wish you would let a few more republicans billion -- a few more conservatives. because seven out of 10 of your callers are from the liberal persuasion. i am looking forward to it. thank you. host: that was carl from berkeley springs, west virginia. here is a little bit more of barking that the editorial in "the detroit news." he is president of the united

autoworkers. next call comes from rao, a democrat. caller: thank you and thank you for "washington journal." the bridge loans for the auto workers, i am a retired uaw member from upstate new york. if chrysler and gm were allowed

to go through bankruptcy, not only the workers at gm would have been hurt but the independent parts suppliers, non-union workers that supplied the big three, they would have lost their jobs, too, because that are dependent on supplying the big three plants. the retirees would have been hurt, too -- would have gone through liquidation and the pensions would have gone to the pension benefit guaranty corporation. walter ruther said when you are too old to work but too young to die. that is why i support it. host: where did you work when you were a uaw member? caller: i plan that may transfer cases for the big three, parts suppliers. still in business? democrat yes, still in business. host: are you still working? caller: i retired. host: thank you for calling in

this morning. from "the new york times." the auto industry regular reporting on their sales . here are their salesstats -- here are some quick states. gm would down 6%, ford went them 3.8% and toyota up 26% over that past year. chrysler up 12.6%. and finally honda, up 45%. here are the top-selling vehicles, also, by the way, for

july. ford f series continues to be number one, b pickup truck that for it sells. followed by the toyota camry which, by the way, is built in kentucky. chevrolet edsall road pickup, that actually lost 12% on sales -- chevrolet silverado. toyota prius went up the most as far as the auto increase, 110% in sales from july 2011. bruce is a republican from texas. what do you think about the auto bailout policy? caller: i think it is a good thing. it will take a little time to pay back the money but i think he did right on that part. as far as i am concerned right now, i am almost going to be going democrat right now.

of the bickering -- all the bickering. i have been a republican in long time. romney -- i do not think he will do what he says he is going to do. i just feel that obama is doing though right thing. thinking about changing over. i really do. host: that was bruce from texas. here is the headline in "the wall street journal." augusta, georgia. daniel, independent line. caller: how are you doing? my whole take on the situation is that if you take all the contracts back to the table and negotiate all of the contract instead of trying to save the union workers -- that is what the situation was going on. it wasn't that they were trying

to help gm workers but trying to help of the union workers. what needs to happen is we need to bring the contracts back to the table and not pay more money that we do not have to protect those people. host: from "the hill" newspaper. richardson built a. -- guilty.

back to your calls on the auto bailout. carol from ohio -- is it sio? democrat i think it is a good plan. -- caller: i think it is a good plan. the first caller who called -- he said seven out of town were

democrat. i wrote down everything and it is almost equal between the three. he is wrong on that one but he is wrong on the unions, too. because the unions gave people money. an extra money to buy things and send their kids to college. and if a ceo can make $130 million a year why can't a worker make 30 or $40 an hour? because that is what we need in this country. we don't need low wages. we need higher wages so people can get ahead. that is my opinion on that. host: carol, yorktown, does that have any auto plants? caller: no, no. we probably have a thousand people in this little town. host: bill is a republican from rochester hills, michigan, outside of detroit. what do you think of the

bailout? was it the right policy? caller: i don't think it is. most of the cars people are driving our leases. i don't understand how they can be making money that they show on their books -- where does the money come from? people make payments, but where does the money come from for them to make all of this money? host: that was built from rochester hills, michigan. this is from warriors this morning -- reuters this morning.

now back to your phone calls on the auto bailout three years in. was it the right policy? about $40 billion is still owed back by gm and chrysler. then is an independent from tennessee. caller: good morning. don't cut me off, now. i would just like to say that they bailed the unions out. gm still took all the money and put it in nascar, and they wouldn't even give the poor people a raise on their social security of 3% until election time.

and i think that is pretty disgraceful, that the american car and a't buy a $40,000 for it because they don't have money to make ends meet from month to month. host: a couple of more facebook comments -- minneapolis, jim, a democrat. you are on "washington journal." caller: be romney -- the romney add was so of certification because all of those dealers would be out of business if chrysler was allowed to fall.

i did we have been paid back for the loan many times over. did i think we have been paid back for the loan many times over. not just the direct payments but the taxes we collected -- social security, medicare, income taxes, property taxes. all of foreclosures that were avoided at all the sales tax is being paid because people have jobs and are participating in the economy. i think if somebody really did the analysis we probably got payback four, five, six times over from the bailout. it was absolutely the right thing to do. it all comes down to -- osama bin laden is dead, general motors is alive and if romney had been president neither would be true. god bless president obama. host: from "the hill" newspaper -- some other news.

from "los angeles times" this morning. the president was in ohio yesterday. he was in akron and mansfield, ohio. the left-hand column article -- presidents of treatment for a bellwether state.

back to your calls on the auto bailout. newcastle, pennsylvania. surely, republican line. caller: good morning. i have a little cold here. as far as i am concerned, that bailout was all wrong. we should have never had a that stimulus package in the first place because it did nothing for

us, except put as much further into debt. as far as gm, even after the bail them out of a still went bankrupt, still claimed bankruptcy. what sense does it make other than, again, putting us further in debt? but that is the way obama does things. there wasn't anything about that stimulus package that helped us out as far as i am concerned. and there is the wall street, and all of the banks and all the nonsense. it was just a bunch of nonsense. but again, i go back to the fact that i believe president obama was too young, inexperienced, and did not know what he was doing. and he thought this was the way to help the country out. it was not. as far as i am concerned, bailout -- no, absolutely not. it did us no good. they went bankrupt. they should have been allowed to go bankrupt and handle the situation and get rid of the

people were not doing their jobs, bring in some better people, educated people would know how to take care of the jobs and get the show on the road again. thank you very much. host: that will surely from pennsylvania. here are some of the twitter comments we received -- a couple more facebook comments

-- again, if you would like to make a common on the facebook page, -- comment on the facebook page, the section stays open all day long. no hypen in c-span in that case. carlos as an independent in chicago. caller: how are you doing this morning? please, don't cut me off. i have a couple of comments that are all related. the policy -- yes, it was. i don't agree with everything

president obama does, including his foreign-policy -- which you read about syria. but i do agree with the saving of the automobiles in the united states. come on, people. let's use common sense. first we are -- about not buying u.s.a. products and then you want people to buy foreign cars? now we have to compete with the foreign cars that are sold here. it was not about the unions but people who work in the united states and does contribute to our economy. one guy from ohio -- whatever -- i want to echo her call that, again, it is not just about the republicans. you have some republicans who even voted president obama into office. it is about keeping jobs and did you ninth did states contributing to the united states economy. host: by the way, the house is

in at 9:00 a.m. this morning so we only have a two-hour "washington journal." this is their last week of session before the going to recess for august for the conventions. they will be back september 10. the are in again tomorrow, a pro forma session, but that is just because the senate is in the so in case they do anything they should be aware of. and the senate and in today and tomorrow. they will be out until september 10 as well. congress hopes to adjourn, the 112 congress, by early october. once they come back september 10, a little less than a month to complete any business and then of course after the election you can look for a lame-duck session as well. late last night the house took a vote -- bush tax cut both all about november -- "bush tax cuts of about november."

this is from "the national journal." again, this is from "the national journal." nancy cokk writing this morning.

this is the vote tally from last night. extending the so-called bush tax cuts for one year. you need to hundred and 35 to win. you can see, 256. 171 democrats voted against it and one republican, retiring representative johnson from illinois. we will discuss this issue with our two guests coming out, to be met -- members of congress. jim jordan, chairman of the republican study committee, a conservative group in the house. the president was in his district yesterday. that is followed by representative diana degette of colorado. this is from "roll call" this morning.

back to your calls on the auto bailout, whether or not it was the right policy. andy, from lake oswego, oregon. democrat. you are on the air. caller: thanks for taking my call and thank you forces in. a couple of points i will try to make as fast as i can veryone, -- assets of icahn. one, i want to agree that the bailout prevent the closing of hundreds if not thousands of dealerships -- the romney had is so fundamentally dishonest as to be laughable. and governor romney -- when president obama was touting the success of the auto bailout and the managed bankruptcy of general motors, been made the -- he made the point that it was his idea to begin with so it seems, funny republicans criticizing of in their current candidate for president says is something he would of thought of

as a great idea. anyone -- and i was -- anyone watching end attention realize we would lose jobs at the rate of 300,000 to 500,000 month. something had to be done. i think what we look back historically will find the people going to say president obama's decision to allow the auto industry is one of the smartest economic decisions ever made in the history of the country. host: naples, florida. on the republican line. caller: thank you for c-span. i enjoy watching the show almost daily. you always have a love -- a lot of information out of articles. has there any -- ever been anything printed if the

corporate raiders and takeover that bailout? host: this is from "the new york times." the campaign airplane of dan senior. you might remember him when he was in iraq with paul bremer. moments after making remarks about mcaleese culture that are out raged palestinians -- middle east culture. mr. romney looked around the room for dan senio. it was mr. senior's book about entrepreneurs in israel that informed his comments.

if your interested in reading more, this is from "the new york times" this morning. to this is from "the new york times" as well. obama says of romney tax plan favors wealthy only. another issue we will talk with our guests about a little later in this program. maria from new jersey. you are on c-span.

what did you think about the auto bailouts? caller: definitely not. good morning, peter. by an enraged even to hear some of your budget on the show. people, if they don't have any knowledge on the business field they should not even open their mouths. some of these people, they are used to live in a program where the government supplies them. if they do not have any knowledge of business, they should not talk. i have a small business and i resented the fact that politicians -- they take tax money and use it as it suits them best. they decided to bail out the car industry. that is a private corporation making money. if they don't know how to manage -- you know what? let them close the door. like some of us sometimes have to be forced to do.

it is a relic -- irrelevant whether it is a smaller big business. also big business, shame on them because they have it easy. it is much harder to run a small business because you did not have a ceo sitting around with a secretary and manager and assistant manager and so on and so forth. now, obama, did not have any knowledge in business himself. he is a young man, spoiled -- to the best school that we do not even know how to get there. and then, what is the knowledge? a community organizer. and then again, he went to where the money hall is -- politician. shame on him. host: what kind of small business do you have? caller: it is a beauty salon. i came from italy and 1965 and i have been working my feet off to support myself and my daughter.

never take any and use and a program, which i know that other human beings put money on it. people working so hard in the united states. and that is the beauty of it, the hard work to get your place. it is not sitting and let someone else. i am sick and tired of it. i was a single parents, like i said, honorably raising my daughter and my own. if i can do it, anybody else can do it. host: we believe that there. thank you, maria, for calling in. from "the wall street journal" this morning.

that is from "the wall street journal." this is "the new york times" lead editorial this morning. budget crisis averted for now.

and this is "the washington post" -- reliable source. leave it to grover norquist to find a tax angle for the summer

olympics.

again, that is in "the washington post" this one. back to your calls on the audra bailout, whether or not it was the right policy. democrat from georgia. sharon, thanks for holding. you are on the air. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span2. yes, i agree with the automobile bailout. i think there are enough people

who are unemployed right now. god bless president obama. at least he believes in the middle-class. and i don't knock the unions. they keep us from working for nothing. my husband was in the union for many years with an electrical company. people better take the blinders off. when somebody stands up and says i don't know where my money is, it is in a blind trust fund. i could tell them it is in the caymans. and the thing be said about the poor have a say in that -- he has no clothes how other people live or survive -- he has no clue how other people survive because he was born with a silver spoon. would you have a handicapped daughter after a bad car wrecked that barely has a pittance to live on and still mom and dad have to help her. and my husband is a disabled veteran, and it shame on the

government for wanting to cut the military especially. host: sharon, we will leave your comments. thank you for calling in this morning from georgia. in "the washington post" panetta sharpens his tone on iran. our final call on the auto bailout comes from mike, republican from arkansas. caller: how are you doing? i believe the jury is still out on that. i know that reagan did it in the 1980's and we got our money back then. but i believe if that happens again or if the automobile

companies come back to the american people for money, they need to make more concessions as far as the unions go. overall, i believe all in all it was probably a good deal because i know it saved a lot of jobs, but i just believe there needed to be a better business model with the whole thing. that is all i have to say. host: as for calling in this morning. thanks for calling, tweeting, emailing and facebook etc.. we have two guests before the house comes in at 9:00 a.m. >> , republican jim jordan from ohio. the president was in the district yesterday. followed by diana degette, democrat of colorado. we will talk about guns and gun control of her as well as other congressional issues. we will be right back. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> this weekend on american history tv, was the turning point of the american civil war gettysburg or a seven-day battle for richmond? >> in the broader conflict -- mcclellan's failure and arte leave's emergence as a successful field commander marks the decisive moment in the eastern theater that in turn per family shaped the larger direction of the conflict. >> university of virginia professor gary gallagher on the june 1860 battles that drove the union army away from the confederate capital. sunday, more from "the contenders," and look at candidates who ran and lost but changed history.

>> i would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. >> this week, arizona senator barry goldwater, the 1964 republican candidate who lost to lbj. american history tv this weekend on c-spane. >> at the foot of the bridge i was beaten. i thought i was going to die. i thought i saw death. >> in 1965, a 25-year-old john lewis took part in the voting rights march from thelma to montgomery, alabama, on the right that would take them across the edmund pettis bridge. n -- of that alabama state troopers. this is an unlawful march and it will not be allowed to continue. and one of the young people walking beside me said, major, give us a moment to kneel and pray and the major said, troopers, advance. >> "across that bridge," author

and congressman john lewis sunday at 8:00. "washington journal" continues. host: joining me is representative jim jordan, republican from ohio and chairman of the republican study committee. your district in ohio has auto plants. was it the right policy? guest: look, i voted against it. i think gm obviously was in a difficult way but there are other ways to get to solutions short of taking taxpayer money and giving it to certain companies. once you start down the road, where does it end? for example, we have seen the department of energy, this administration pick companies they will give tax dollars to now have gone bankrupt. solyndra. it is just a dangerous place to go and it never seems to end.

we need to get back to letting the market work, letting businesses succeed and fail on their own merits. i understand gm is big and there are ways you could of structured bankruptcy proceedings where gm would come out the other side and still be a great company. but i just didn't feel like putting taxpayer money at risk in doing a bailout with the government deciding you would do this is a good policy. so, i was opposed to it. host: did you get below that? guest: the other thing to keep in mind is, remember, you have the auto task force essentially running the company think about where we have been what this administration. did you -- would you ever think the president of the ninth states would fire at the ceo of general motors, does the government would run general motors and give your tax dollars to 26 companies and a solar and wind new energy area? we are seeing things we never thought we would witness and you laugh to keep that in mind as well. what i will tell you is the auto task force, i believe, decided

to close the plant in mansfield, ohio -- which i have the privilege of representing -- a plan that employed a lot of folks and families were dependent on. once the auto task force took over general motors the plant was closed. i suit -- doozy that impact us to place in my district and the state of all-. host: last night the house of representatives voted on tax cuts to extend the bush era tax cuts for a year. the headline in "the washington post." what was the point of the vote? guest: knott's let taxes going up at a time we want our economy to grow. somebody has to tell me how raising taxes is going to create jobs. that is what the other side is talking about, what the senate voted to do. they voted to raise taxes on job creators, small-business owners and entrepreneurs. someone will have to convince me how that will translate into job creation and economic growth. it is just not common sense. it just does not work that way. what we said is let's try to provide a little certainty for

the job creators. , taxes will not go up for a year, we will extend the current rate, the current tax policy and give us a year if in fact the election goes away -- the way we hope it is going to go and we have a republican president and senate, we maintain the house. then we will have an opportunity to actually reform this complicated tax code. we need to do two things -- we need to make sure taxes the net increase and secondly -- i spoke to a group yesterday and i said think of a tax cut. how many believe there needs to be tax code? every hand went up. not just businessmen but teachers -- everybody understands the tax code is too complex. any tax code on the personal side that says 47% of the population will not participate in the main text, the income tax, is broken. and any tax on the corporate side that says to american

companies you will pay the highest corporate rate and the world when you are trying to compete in the international market, is stupid. if it is broken and stood -- stupid you may want to throw out and do over. we want to freeze the rates where they are now and then next year let's reform the tax code and get something that is simpler, fairer, flatter, less complex and more conducive of economic growth. host: how does this fit into all of the discussions about the budget? the six-month cr, and what will happen budget-wise. guest: unfortunately it will not happen in the senate but it is important to let the american people know where you stand as we had to what many would argue as the most important election of our lifetime. part of what took place system. how it translates into actual policies that move forward -- the good news is we have an agreement this week that we are not going to have a spending bill come due in the lame-duck

session. a six-month continuing resolution, which is a good thing. i learned last session when you have spending bills coming due in a lame duck, it is not where you want to build. spending bills typically become the vehicle where all kinds of things get put on and usually the ones that get shortchanged by the american taxpayer. i am pleased that the spending bill is not going to be coming due. next year -- will flee again we will have a romney administration and republican senate. host: what is your view on the six-month continuing resolution agreement leaders have come up with? guest: we conservatives have pushed for -- basically for the reasons we talk about -- because the alternative is a short-term spending bill stop-gap measure that comes due sometime in november or december in the lame-duck session. we just felt that we don't want that are around. a lame-duck session is -- i would be happy if we did not do

anything in the lame-duck because typically you are going to have people who just lost the election may not be nearly as accountable to the voters as those who just won. if patty murray was right when she took a few weeks ago -- if she is accurate in what she said and they do not want to deal with fixing the tax code and dealing with the defense sequestered and they wanted to get into next year, if they are bound and determined to raise taxes, then unfortunately we will have to wait until next year and that of the case let's make everything the next year when hopefully we will have a republican president and the republican senate and and of course i think we will have a republican house. -- in mansfield, ohio, is the article in "-- host: in mansfield, ohio, here is the article. here is a little bit from the president in your district. [video clip] >> he is asking you to pay more so people like him can get a tax cut.

in order to afford just one $250,000 tax cut for somebody like mr. romney 125 families like yours would have to pay another $2,000 in taxes each and every year. does that sound like a good plan for economic growth? does that sound like a plan you can afford? how many of you want to buy another $2,000 to give mr. romney or me another tax break? ohio, we do not need more tax cuts for folks who are already doing really well. we need tax cut for working americans. we need tax cuts for families who are trying to raise their children and keep them healthy and send them to college and put a roof over their heads. more tax cuts for companies who are shipping jobs overseas.

we need tax cuts for companies who are creating jobs right here in the united states of america. host: congressman? guest: nothing new there. he has been on this message and long time. i would disagree -- the idea we will extend current tax rates is not a tax cut, it is preventing a tax increase. and this idea that he wants to continue to say that folks who make over $250,000 -- which happens to be a lot of small- business owners out there who pay their taxes via the personal and marginal rates, i just think is not helping. as i said in the outset -- i have yet to figure out how raising taxes on those small business owners and job creators, how that will help our economy and create jobs. i just think economics are such it is just not going to do that. i think about the small business owners out there who is president seems to want to attack all the time.

first he says you are a small business owner if you make $250,000 -- will raise taxes and what you build that we will raise your taxes on, you did not actually build it. we had a small business owner in our district would just did a campaign ad where he talked about his business. a friend of mine -- he started an electrical contracting company and got one of his sons who works there, he employed several people in our community. he did build that business. and my guess is he probably makes more than $250,000 a year as a small-business owner. but he is creating jobs were lots of people, lots of families are part of that business. and as president seems to want to attack him. i think most americans can see that for what it is and will remember it when it comes time to vote on election day. host: jim jordan is our guest, currently in his third term. he represents north central northwestern ohio, including mansfield, finley, lima, and

also chairman of the republican study committee. which is what? guest: the largest caucus on capitol hill. a caucus of house conservatives. we have about one month and to divide members. the largest caucus of conservative members and our job is simple, to the conservative things and bush policy in a conservative direction both economic and social. host: west cliff, colorado. carol on the republican line. caller: thank you. i am an old republican, 61 years old. i have just been so disappointed at the way the republican party has been kind of hijacked by this tea party. i am a moderate and a fiscal conservative. but i got to tell you, i don't know what to do about it. i might have to change my affiliation. but we need a balanced approach. we need cuts where it will hurt the least. and we need income.

i have never seen very wealthy people -- and i used to be an accountant -- i never see day the i never seen them the actual attack rates for we never had a free market. it is only a theater -- theory. asked the koch brothers. we are always asking the american people to guarantee loans, to lend money to banks from the federal reserve for practically no interest. trickle-down does not work. we have to really work together. i am just getting to the point -- i see so many evangelicals here in colorado taking over the tea party. and also the koch brothers. host: let's get a response from congressman jordan. i agree with one thing, we certainly need a simpler tax code. the tax code is to complex. we need a fairer, flatter tax code but what we don't need is increase taxes on american job creators. a balanced approach? the american people have seen

through this a long time ago. every time politicians talk about a balanced approach it seems to be this -- we will raise your taxes and we promise we will cut spending later. we always get the tax increases now but we never got around to reducing spending. always get a balanced approach. always get higher taxes and more government every single time. the american people are not going to talk for this anymore, and i don't blame them. this is the old -- old lucy and charlie brown and the football. we promised this time we will actually cut spending -- go ahead and kick, charlie. it will not fly. we need to cut spending. it is not a revenue problem. americans have heard this before. it is a spending problem. right now we have a debt larger than our entire economy. we have a $16 trillion debt, 16 $0.50 annual economy. whenever your debt is bigger than your gdp, whenever it is bigger than your gross domestic problem -- product, it is a bad place to be. it is where portugal, spain, and

greece have gone in big trouble and we read on the front page of the paper. now the greatest country in history is in the same division. this year we will spend over $200 billion in interest to service the debt at a time interest rates are at record lows. they are going to go well. i have to go up at some point. if they just increase modestly over the next decade in 10 years we will be spending more in interest to service the huge debt than we currently spend on national defense, which begs the question -- if you are spending more to service debt than to defend your country, how do you sustain the model? we cannot. we have to but you cannot. it will not work. >> so, if sequestration -- host: if sequestration happens, does that scare you? guest: we do not want to cut defense spending. in the budget we passed, we said

let's not cut national defence, because after all that is where the government is supposed to spend tax dollars. let's not put troops in jeopardy, but let's make cuts in other areas which i argue are in our constitutional responsibility. democrats do not want to go there. they want to raise taxes, so we are in a standoff. host: sarah is a democrat in ohio. go ahead with your question or comment for representative jordan. my question is -- hello -- caller: my question is -- hello? host: we will have you on hold and you can turn down the phone. steve. good morning.

caller: mr. jordan, i wish i could talk to you in person because you all have brought this country to its knees. they gave you a rope and you hung yourself. they put reagan in office. he thought he was a big shot. he created war. then it george h. w. bush created another war, and then george w. bush created another war. every time you are put in charge, you create war. host: representative jordan? guest: i am not sure where to start. the caller mentioned iran. i will tell you i think iran is a dangerous regime running that

country, and a primary concern to our number one allied israel. the sanctions we put in place, let's hope they are beginning to work. iran is a scary, scary regime, and the things ahmadinejad has stated i think we should take seriously. host: this article in "the hill " -- rob portman was frustrated at bush budget office. he saw to distance himself by saying he was frustrated in the high-profile post. what do you think about your senator, rob portman, as vice president? guest: i think he would be a great pick. he has the qualifications, the experience. that leadership quality that you

want in someone that close to the president of the united states -- i think he would be an outstanding pick and he has done an outstanding job both in congress when he was representing his district in the cincinnati area, and now in the united states senate. i would agree with the headline. i was frustrated with the spending level in the bush administration myself, even though i was only here for the last two years. let's be honest, they spend too much money. host: next call comes from south glens falls, new york. kyle. republican line. caller: yes. i want to say what a fantastic show c-span is. as far as the representative, he said there were plenty of other

options for bailing out general motors. if he could elaborate. also, as a followup, why is there not talk about raising the ceiling on social security to make it solvent? i paid social security on 100% of my wages. kobe bryant pays on the first 35% and the rest is exempt. why is not everyone paying on all of the money they earn, and would that not lower the social security rate? thank you for c-span. it is one of the few shows where you get information. guest: i would argue that if you do what the caller suggests, you are raising taxes, and raising taxes on people who i think will help the economy grow and i think that is the wrong approach. there are other things to do to firm up social security.

over time you need to begin to allow younger workers to have greater control of their account, move toward a personal account approach. those are the things we need to look at for the long-term solvency of the system. host: augusta, georgia. ken, a democrat. caller: good morning. you have been civil and upfront with people, but when i see you in the various hearings that you share, you seem to have an attitude, and i do not know if you are playing for the base for the tea party. guest: i'm not playing for anyone, just the folks i represent. caller: you seem arrogant. so many people, and c-span and they seem to have talking

points. i see bobby jindal, the man is brilliant, but he is scouting the same republican line, as if he is reading from a script. why i enjoy ec's ban it is you do not have a script -- why i enjoy c-span is you do not have the script there, and you can be representative jordan. thank you for coming on. tell your colleagues not to repeat these lines time and time again because most of the c-span viewers are up to speed on these issues. host: we have the point. congressman jordan? guest: i am not sure what he is referring to, but we have had several hearings i have had the privilege cheering on the loan guarantee department in the department of energy, and just a couple of facts, one of the reasons i get fired up is

because 26 companies got $16.1 billion of your tax money, and of those companies, 22 of them had a credit rating of double d minus, a fancy way of saying they were junk status. nobody would be willing to put their money there. many of these companies, eight of them, had someone as part of the leadership that was closely tied with the obama campaign, and they got $16 billion of taxpayer money, and three of them went bankrupt. my guess is more will follow. solyndra was the most high profile. one of the hearings where i was fired up was when we had secretary steven chu in front of

the committee and we said what did you base giving 26 company's $16 billion on? was it on the merits, because you look at several of them going bankrupt, or was it because they were friends of the obama administration? we would love to have him back. secretary to, we have been asking you to come back for a hearing. he has yet to respond. we would like him to come back and answer questions. host: prior to entering politics, representative jordan was an assistant wrestling coach with ohio state university, got his bachelor's at the university of wisconsin, and a law degree. did you wrestle at wisconsin? guest: yes i did. host: you have three kids?

guest: yes, two boys are involved in the wrestling program. host: how did you become a member of congress? guest: i never intended to. i was going to help student athletes, but you get married, you have children, you get tired of the government taking your money and telling you what to do. i decided to run for state representative in 1994, was successful, and have been at it ever since. when i first ran, and nobody gave us a chance to win, but if you work hard, it does not guarantee that you will win, but it improves your chances. we're now in congress. host: it has been 30 days since we have heard from joe in georgia. good morning. caller: peter, you are a great

american. admirer ofgreat yours. i am a huge mitt romney supporter. i think he will be the greatest president in history. i'm really getting sick of the class warfare practiced by president obama. i am for success and excellence. why do we have to punish people for success? we need less government and less taxes. we need a tax increase in georgia. our governor wanted one. tom graves is one of our great champions -- what do you think about him, and how do we stop this class warfare? guest: tom is a good friend and a close ally. i agree. we are americans.

there is this idea that you want the american dream, strive for a better life, more success financially and in many other ways as well. we should not put that down. we should focus on setting those goals and working hard to achieve the american dream and not say if you are successful you did something wrong or you are bad. your vision of america is consistent with what most people think and what the country has historically offered citizens. host: frank is an independent in washington, d.c. you are on with congressman jim jordan. caller: i am curious about saving money in the federal budget. we have quite a bit of regulations. we need to enforce them. i am not sure new regulations are the issue. medicare fraud -- the biggest fraud happened a couple of years ago in a company in tennessee.

[unintelligible] $2 billion had to be repaid. that is the tip of the iceberg. in the pentagon, defense contractors had to refund the government, but nobody goes to jail, of course, probably because of white-collar crime, i do not know, but that is a place to look at. we need to put people in jail and maybe we will have taxpayer money. guest: anytime there is fraud, people should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of a lot in taxpayers money should be recovered. i could not agree with that more. in the oversight committee we look into areas where that is taking place and make sure taxpayers are compensated.

host: ralph tweets into you, as you stated your father was an iue union member who receive a pension -- a conflict in your voting record n? guest: i do not see a conflict. my dad worked for general motors. he worked hard. he was a union member. host: harrisburg, pennsylvania. wayne on the democrats' line. caller: hello. my mother raised 12 kids. we started out for. nine of us made it to middle class. from 1969 until 2000, we made it, but we made it with the help of the government. the republicans say government

does not work. even in the poor neighborhoods where i live in it, i see people on food stamps, welfare, that is doing a good deed. medicaid, social security, all of that helps the poor people. listen here, sir, you are republicans, right? wenner you going to help the poor, the middle -- wenner you going to help the poor, the middle class? you always want hand-in-hand with each other. why? guest: i think the best way to help all americans, including the poor, is to have an economy where there are job opportunities and people could get to a better life. i would not define helping people by structuring a system that traps them into dependency and the government.

americans are the most generous people in the world, and we want to help people but we do not want to keep them there. temporary help, whether it be a social welfare program or food stamps, i think that is fine, but we do not want that to be a way of life. a few weeks ago the president and his the administration made a decision they would no longer require a work component for able-bodied adults receiving taxpayer help even though the law had been in place for 16 years. the administration said we are going to change it. i think that sends the wrong message and fosters a dependency on government where we want to help people get to a better life. i think the best way to help people better in a difficult situation is teach them the skills, the work ethics and the

skills said they need to move onto a happier, productive life to experience the american dream. host: in all called the post" this picture of president obama campaigning in ohio. guest: ohio is an important state. it is every four years, and this year it is once again front end center. we get the privilege of largely by deciding who will be the next president, the fed is a large responsibility in both

candidates will be -- and both candidates will be in our state. host: messages. republican line. you are the last call for jim jordan. caller: when the caller said republicans sound like a broken record, that is true, and when mitt romney went to their -- went to israel, he said we could go to war with iran. we do not need another war. john mccain lost because he said bomb, bomb, bomb. you have to change your hard line. guest: we do not want to take any option off of the table. if you lived in the state of israel and the leader of iran was saying the things you -- he

was saying, we do not want to take things off of the table. we want to respect and help our allies israel with whatever they need to do to make sure they are protected. host: this tweet for you, congressman jordan -- raising taxes allows governments to hire teachers, firefighters and police. that is how to raise security and create jobs. guest: look, raising taxes makes it more difficult for the private sector to create jobs. everyone understands we need good teachers in new want adequate fire fighters and protection. that should be a local function. at the federal level we want to create a framework that is conducive to job growth and i would argue that is lowering the tax rates, putting in place the right tax code as well as

dealing with regulatory burden, having a common sense energy policy that uses the energy we have in the right way here dealing with this fiscal mess -- making sure we do not spend more than we take in. if you do that, but the private economy take off, and if that happens you have the resources for education, police and fire. host: congressman jim jordan is a republican from ohio and chairman of the republican study committee. he has been our guest on "washington journal." coming up next, another representative, diana degette from colorado will talk about gun control issues and other congressional issues. we have about 40 minutes left in this morning's show, but first this update from c-span radio. >> international news for you. president obama has signed a secret order authorizing u.s.

support for rebels seeking to depose syrian president bashar al-assad and his government. the order broadly permits the cia and other u.s. agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust the president. a white house spokesman declined to comment. funding is being increased to africa due to a threat from splintered al qaeda groups. more than $82 million has been spent on counter-terrorism assistance for six african countries. they are all key allies in the fight against militants in somalia. back in the states, drought has hit more than half of all u.s. counties in 32 states with the department of agriculture designating them primary disaster areas this growing season, the worst in decades. the u.s. house is taking up

legislation that would help livestock producers in one of its final act before recess. the house bill would restore four disaster assistance programs that expired last year at an estimated cost of $383 million. the house is in at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. live coverage on c-span. the senate is live at 9:30 on c- span to. those are the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> we did not begin is a city in kentucky. there was only a vague, and native american region, later a county, then a state. we begin in 1778 as lois ville, virginia. >> this weekend, joined suspend from louisville, ky. saturday, "literary life."

mitch mcconnell and rebuilding american politics. sunday, three weeks at farmington plantation in 1841 would be key in shaking abraham lincoln's views on slavery. also, the heyday of the steamboat on the ohio river. take a look back at the belle of louisville. exploring the history and literary life of cities across america. this weekend, louisville, on c- span two and 3. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is representative diana degette, democrat from colorado, who represents denver, colorado. good morning. i want to ask you about a press had with three hea

colleagues -- here is the headline. what did you introduce, white, and what has been the response? guest: this shooting was just outside of my district. columbine was just outside of my congressional district. in the new district, columbine is in my congressional district. we are grieving for these victims. we feel terrible and we feel like how can this be in our community, and obviously we will prosecute the shooter. obviously, we look get questions like what his mental health was, how could someone get into a theater like that? one of the issues we have to

look at is a gun violence in all our society. i am from colorado, i support the second amendment and the ability to carry weapons, but i do not see why we should have somebody who can go into a movie theater with a assault rifle and a multiple round clip with 100 rounds of ammunition and should be able to shoot 71 out of 200 people in the theater within less than two minutes. the police were there within a couple of minutes but 71 people had been shot, and the clip had stalled. if he had shot all of them, he might have killed everybody. we need to talk about this in a different way. it is not should we stop guns or have guns. it is really what guns do we want to have? i do not think there is a place in our society for assault

weapons and 100-round ammunition clips. this is an issue i have been working on since i was in the legislature, and i think it is time to have this conversation and the american public agrees. we believe in the second amendment, but we do not think people that are mentally unstable should be able to get this weaponry. host: was it a known fact that mr. james holmes was, perhaps, mentally disabled? guest: i think a lot of that evidence will come out in the court hearing. they're still going through all of that, but that is my point. we may not have been able to know that, and i just do not think anybody should be able to have these assault weapons or large capacity clips. there is no role for them. you do not use it for hunting. some people use it for target

practice, but, again, you do not need a 100-round clip, even for that. the purpose of these guns and magazines is to kill people, a lot of people in the short time. it is like i said, you will never stop somebody from taking a gun into a theater. we need to be realistic about that. you will never stop someone from taking a gun into a classroom. you can try your best to identify mentally ill people, but you can stop someone from shooting 71 people in one minute and half. host: representative degette, four of you introduced the. that was all that was at the conference. were you disappointed? guest: we have many people sponsoring the legislation. the four of west decided to have

that press conference to get -- of boston decided to have the press conference to get the message out, and we have been working on this for many years. carolyn mccarthy, the lead in this, she lost her husband in a terrible shooting him the 1990's. that is the reason she came to congress. the senators have been leaders of this issue. it is leadership coming together to talk mainly about the multiple ammunition clips at that press conference, but we have many supporters. host: do you think there is reasonable chances that your legislation is passed? guest: i have been talking to second amendment advocates on both sides of the aisle, democrats, republicans, about the need to drill down in this

conversation and talk about assault rifles and ammunition clips, which, by the way, there was a moratorium on those sales for 10 years that has expired. i think those conversations need to -- continue and we need to talk about it in a different way. host: this tweet for you -- gun- control laws simply do not work, this happened in a gun free zone with most wounds from a pump shotgun. guest: that is what i've been saying. you will never stop somebody from taking a gun into a theater, but if the person could not get access to an assault rifle and ammunition cartridges like that they would not be able to kill and severely injured so many people. -- injured so many people. host: i want to show you the front page of the "denver post."

cu team was warned about james holmes. guest: this is what i am city -- information about the suspects -- what i am saying -- information about the suspects, mental health is continuing to come out, and we need to look at his mental state and what could've been done. host: dallas, texas. representative diana degette is our guest. jack, independent line, you are

on the air. caller: that was my point, that tweet about the shotgun. it is not hard to take a sawed off shotgun to some place and do as much damage. i am an ex-marine, and i feel these assault rifles help the united states people from letting the government to prosecute some sort of martial law, if it were to happen. most people that have these guns, that is their thing. you could take a pump shotgun or an automatic shotgun and do as much damage or more. guest: i do not see any role in society for these assault rifles or multiple ammunition clips. i do not see a role for that, and the only purpose of those guns is to shoot people.

i do not think we need folks with those in movie theaters. host: what about? guest: we have concealed and open carry laws in colorado. we have very broad gun rights laws. some people say if somebody had a concealed weapon in the theater, maybe they could have shot this follow. that seems to be an unreasonable proposition because it is a darkened theater, 20 minutes into the movie. he is wearing bullet-proof gear head-to-toe, throws tear-gas canisters and opens fire with the assault rifle. even if somebody had a gun, the likelihood they could have been able to take out this shooter -- if the shooter had not had a 100-round ammunition clip, he

would have had to stop, then maybe somebody could have tackled him, or if they had a gun, they could have tried to get him, but also the police were there in a matter of moments. if the shooter had to stop and was not able to move down the patrons, the police might have been able to stop him. he shot almost half of the people in the theater, and some of those high-powered shots when through the wall to the next year and injured people in the next theatre. host: grace tweets -- how is it able to be manufactured? are there not regulations and what they can produce? guest: unfortunately, grace, the 100-round clips are perfectly legal ever since the ban expired in 2004, and that is the legislation, what it does.

it bans high-capacity clips. host: the next call for representative degette comes from illinois. travis. republican line. caller: good day, c-span. i love you, i love your show. i am sick of any representative mickey knee-jerk reactions. it is a terrible tragedy, but you cannot create policy because one person does something wrong. what if he killed people with 1,000 miles? next, you'll relegates miles -- >>, you will regulate smiles? guest: i never heard of anyone being killed by a smile. in congress, we have had 25 moments of silence officially in the u.s. house of

representatives for the victims of gun violence since columbine. columbine was also near my congressional districts. i have constituents and that high school. it is a difficult balance. i agree with you. i do not think people should politicize this so much, but one of the things we could do when we see so much a gun violence, columbine, virginia tech, and all of these places is we could talk about our there are reasonable ways to allow citizens to have appropriate access to their guns, which is their second amendment right, but still stop the assault rifles and is 100-round clips, which people should not happen, and if a mentally ill person slips through the cracks, they could do a lot of damage and that is what we saw in that iraq movie theater.

host: this tweet -- they sound good at first glance, but never defeat the black market. guest: in most cases and in this case, all of this was deemed legally. with the rise of the internet, this shooter was able to get 6000 rounds of ammunition over the internet. so, you might have a black market,, again, if you restrict assault rifles and these multiple-round ammunition clips it will stop people from getting them. there is not a single, clear solution kit is a very tough problem, but i think about that six-year-old girl in the theater there with her mother, and she is dead now and her mother is still in icu.

it makes me very sad. host: do you support concealed or open-carry laws? are you a gun owner yourself? guest: i am not a gun owner myself, but in both of my daughter's bedroom is they have their targets from when they took their nra safety courses. they have good courses that they teach, and both of my daughter's got the bull's-eye. we support gun rights, but we need to think about what happens when a mentally unstable person gets a hold of a weapon that is designed solely to kill people and ammunition clips that can't shoot -- that can shoot 100 poets in moments. host: to you think some of the waiting periods have been successful? guest: they are only as good as

the mental health background checks that you have. we cannot speculate yet what has happened in colorado. of the evidence has not come out -- all of the evidence has not come out about the mental state of this shooter. we will need to find out. if you do have a robust mental health reporting period, waiting periods can help. host: the six-month resolution leaders have agreed on, what is your view on that? guest: i'm glad people on both sides of the capital and both sides of the aisle realize we should not politicize these budget debates during an election season. i speak to a lot of business leaders and others in my congressional district that are worried that politics in

washington might hurt the economy. i think the six-month continuing resolution is a good idea for right now, but i will also save as some point members of congress will have to sit down in a bipartisan way and tackle the fiscal issues facing this country and my suggestion would be we do not wait until december 31. january 1, a lot of things will happen. manticore -- mandatory cuts. sequestration. tax cuts will expire. physician reimbursements. all kinds of issues will come up. if we do not work hard to resolve this in november, it will cause a lot of uncertainty, like last summer, when we almost with off of the fiscal cliff, frankly because of speaker john boehner's irresponsible decision to not raise the debt limit. i was talking to some

commercial realtors from denver who told me that that very action made the commercial real estate market in denver on stable for six months afterwards because people did the want to rent office space because they thought we wriggling adopted fiscal cliff. host: next call for representative the gatt, which give her a eight -- representative degette, who was in her eighth term, comes from bill. caller: first of all, you're going about it the wrong way. you should not go left or automatic weapons. you should go after criminals. you can go on the internet and purchase a semi-automatic, and for $18, they will sell you a conversion kick or a booklet

that could show you how to make an 18-round clip into a 100- round clip. the average murderer in america spends six years in prison. it will cost hundreds of millions of dollars prosecuting this guy and he will probably up for parole in 25 years. you should make mandatory life sentences on people who commit these crimes and you would see this buy list go down if a criminal knows he will get a mandatory 25 for using an automatic weapon. i think you are so ludicrous. this is like going after the peanut, and not the whole bag. guest: i agree with a lot of what you said, that we need to tackle it from all aspects. i do not know what laws are like in ohio, but in colorado we have mandatory life sentences for conviction of murder and the death penalty.

if this man is not put to death for this event, he will spend the rest of his life in prison. i cannot imagine that even in ohio that someone who committed a crime like this would be eligible for parole in 25 years. i do think you are right. there is no magic solution. we need to attack from all sides. host: representative degette, this article from "the washington post." i wanted to rest about the hearing held this week and the vote on the no more solyndras act. how did you vote and what was that act? guest: it is a bill that would pretty much stoppe government loan guarantees in the solar industry. this program was started under

president bush with bipartisan support in the house to give government loan guarantees for solar, wind and alternative energy to go off and try to develop new technology, and the government loan guarantees were to guarantee private funding that came in. one of the companies was solyndra. when they first came in with their proposal under the bush administration it looked like a good idea to the department of energy. they were developing solar panels. it was approved under the bush administration, and then it was funded under the obama administration. what happened is after those decisions were made, china flooded the market with cheap solar panels and they put billions of dollars into support for the solar in just -- industry. that caused the bottom to fallout of the market in the

u.s. for solar panel development, and solyndra, unfortunately, started to fall apart. the department of energy, looking at that, was looking at a choice to either lose five again million dollars of taxpayer dollars or try to restructure the loan to make the company solvent, and they decided it would be better to try to recoup some of the taxpayer money than just let the company go bankrupt. the subordinated the government interest, let lenders, in, and the restructured the loans. -- come in and restructured the loan. unfortunately, it went bad, and it is unfortunate that it did. several other smaller companies went bankrupt as a result of china's efforts, but i do not think we should not try to have loan guarantees for these projects in this country. one thing that is imperative

from a national security and energy standpoint is we need to develop alternative energies that are clean, domestic and create jobs in this country. i think continuing this program is important. i think this no more solyndras act would have the effect of eliminating the loan guarantee program and i think that would be unfortunate. there are ways to tighten it up. we could make more specific rules for how we would subordinate the government's position, but the eliminating it is a poor idea. host: independent line. joe. virginia. thank you for holding. you are on with diana degette. caller: representative, if i let you take away my hundred-round clip and my assault rifle, how long before you take away my 9-

millimeter? you keep making arguments for taking away, taking away. you say you uphold the second amendment, yet you want to take away stuff. that is not upholding the second amendment. that is taking away from everybody because of one idiot. guest: i do not think the second amendment gives people the have to go right to have any weapon you want. you would not argue we should have a shoulder-mounted grenade- shooter or something like that legal. people should have hunting weapons and handguns for self- defense, too, but i do not think there is a role for these assault rifles and large- capacity clips. i do not think it is an absolute situation and i think we can make a distinction. if we pass legislation, you will find me among the people

standing up for second amendment rights. host: you worked a graduate of colorado college and you have a law degree from the new york school of law. she is currently in her eighth term. grace tweets clearly states, well regulated. why do people allow the pro-gun lobby to ignore that part of the amendment? john, republican line. good morning. turned down the volume on your television. caller: the television is on the new. host: great, go ahead. caller: we are looking at increasing gun laws again, but if you look at the problem they had in norway last year, nearly 80 people were killed, and this was done with two handguns.

restrictive laws, because of them, the man was able to do it with two handguns. he knew no one else was armed. he loaded the clouds over and over again. he was shooting people for three and half hours. use the example of japan. they have restrictive laws and a study found 25 years ago found the japanese in the united states with as much access to firearms have a much lower murder rate than even in japan. it seems that people for more gun legislation have almost no knowledge of firearms, almost 0. guest: let me say this, john. i never said by eliminating these assault rifles and multiple-round ammunition clips that we will completely

eliminate gun violence. that shooter in norway was able to go to an island where there were no police and was able to do this devastation over a number of hours. in the iran theater, the police were there in the -- aurora theater, police were there in a couple of minutes, and we would not have been able to stop him from shooting, we would have been able to stop him from shooting 71 people in less than two minutes. that is the kind of thing- talking about. if there is more we need to do in society. i agree with that. i do not think there is an easy solution, but we need to talk about this in a column and rational way. his coat toady -- host: tony tweets, it is become too hard to

take a dangerously ill people off of the street, let's change mental health laws first. guest: we do need to get mental health laws in this country. the person who shot my dear friend and colleague get the deferred -- gabrielle giffords had a history of mental health issues, and everybody knew about it. that is a discussion we need to have. host: we have about 10 minutes left before the house of representatives called into session. the last two days, correct? guest: the last one day. host: it is a pro forma tomorrow? guest: i did not think we will have votes. host: you come back september 10 and try to get out by early october. guest: it is an election year, and i think there is a lot of work that needs to be done. i would like to see a jobs bill

comes to the house. i would like to do some of the budget bill and tax legislation. i would like to do that now, but i do not think that is the intention of republican house leadership. host: do you miss being in the majority? guest: i was in the minority for 10 years before i was in the majority. i presided a lot in the chair, and died in joint -- and i enjoyed that. ibm good at being in the minority. -- i am good at being in the minority. i passed a couple of pieces of legislation, along with a republican the my committee, and one was a bill to eliminate red tape for small hydro-electric producers, and i think "national journal" said it might be the only bipartisan energy bill to pass this year. we also passed a bill to address

the terrible drug shortage situation in this country that has been signed by the president. hospitals and doctors were fighting terrible drug shortages with pediatric cancer is the end other things. i got together with a republican from florida and we were able to get this bill made into law. everyone is been and ibm, too, but some things are getting done -- everyone has been discouraged by partisanship in washington, and i am discouraged, too, but things are being done. caller: it is amazing the people that hate their country, take their government, and because of their lives are afraid of their government. something else i have to comment on, i try to get in when jordan

was there -- something that is never, ever said is that for the last 30 years, ceo's and other upper management, 30 and 40 years ago they were made in approximately 40% of their employees. because of different laws passed and opportunities past, that is now getting pretty close to 400%. in other words, the middle and worker class's, their income has stagnated or gone down, and all of -- all the republicans want to do is keep giving them more and more and more, and making people afraid of their government and so afraid that they are voting against their own best interest.

you taking this break is just amazing -- to the amount of income you make, yet you are very seldom in session, and you are getting nowhere when you are in session. it is just flabbergasting. guest: susan, i agree with you. i'm flabbergasted, too, and as i just said to peter, congress has a lot of work to do, and a lot of us think we should stay and do that work, working on tax and job-creating legislation. so, i agree with you. unfortunately, i'm not in charge of setting the schedule because i am in the minority. a couple of things about what you said -- there was a poll done recently. 62% of americans who support gun ownership, as i do, and you do,

also support banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips because they realize these guns are only used to kill people. i think we need to think about that as this debate goes forward. the second thing i want to say to you about the increasing gap between the wealthiest 1% of this country and everybody else is that is a real gap. study after study has shown in the last 15-to-20 years, the very wealthy has increased their amount of wealth and at the same time the amount of poverty in this country is going up at an alarming rate, and that is one reason why as we address this economy, trying to get back on our feet, eliminate the deficit, many of us believe everyone needs to participate. that is why we think that while the tax cuts should be expended -- extended, the people making

under to under $50,000 should continue getting tax cuts, but those that make more should pay more taxes for the additional income they make over $250,00. we think that is equitable and would help share in rebuilding our economy. host: representative diana degette is a democrat from colorado, and on the front page of your home town newspaper, " the denver post" --

is this a big debate in the presidential election in colorado right now? guest: this is a huge debate in colorado, because like to rest of the west, our economy is largely based on energy production and we have all types of energy. we have vast reserves of natural gas. we have development of solar and wind power. a federal energy policy is critical. what i recently sent to a large conference in denver in is i think we need to get an energy policy. we seemed to stumble along from issue-to-issue, like these solar tax credits and other things. my view is this -- we need to look at every option in our energy policy. we need to develop wind and solar and energy conservation, which is the low-hanging fruit

of this whole debate. i support development of natural gas. host: through fracturing? guest: colorado has large reserves, and that can be gotten through fracturing. when we do fracturing, we need to do it in an environmentally sound way. i have a bill designed to support environmentally-sound drilling. also, i think we can open more of our public lands to drilling, but i do not think all of our public land should be opened to drilling. some have strong wilderness characteristics that should be preserved for future generations. i think we need a balanced policy that looks at short-term energy production, domestic oil and gas in a sound way, mid- range energy production and the longer term like solar and wind.

it is an all-of-the-above strategy, but needs to be done in a sound way. host: miami. independent line. a few minutes left. caller: we have repeatedly been told that guns do not kill people, people kill people, so if i were to use the same argument, cigarettes did not kill people, people kill people. host: we will have to get a final word comparing it to drug law policy. guest: i think it is true that people kill people, when they have a high-capacity assault weapon, unfortunately they can kill many people in a short time and we need to talk about this. host: you are bringing up the report on lore richardson.

knowing what you know about that report, will you vote? guest: i will talk about it with my staff. host: diana degette has been our guest on "washington journal." thank you for joining us. we appreciate it. the house of representatives has come into session. they have turned down the cameras. they'll be marching in as we speak. thank you for joining us. we'll see you tomorrow on ." the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. commouncommune from the speaker. -- the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., august 2, 2012. i hereby appoint the honorable steve womack to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, suffolk county police department, new york.

the chaplain: god almighty, call upon him. he the sovereign. god, almighty, we ask that you bless upon all elected officials, guidance and patience required to carry out the difficult task of legislation before them. grant them commitment to be dedicated to the interests of our country before the interests of even their ownselves. mohammed stated that the leader of people are the representation of their deeds. we ask god almighty, that he have our elected officials with the values that we ask of our nation. we ask you, almighty god, that

you look to us with mercy, regardless of gender, ethnicity, religion or political party. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance this morning will be led by the gentleman from virginia, mr. wittman. mr. wittman: ladies and gentlemen, please join me in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five further win-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wittman: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore:

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wittman: mr. speaker, after today congress completes its business till september without finishing critical items, leaving many sectors across this country uncertain about their fiscal future. looming defense cuts or sequestration still hang over the congress as unfinished business. i am extremely disappointed congress is leaving town without addressing such pressing issues and with such little time scheduled in the rest of this legislative year. many americans in america's first district are frustrated with washington's lack of action and accomplishments as this country struggles to rebound from these tough economic times. virginiaans and all americans have the right to be upset with such irresponsible procrast ration. just ration threatens our national security and sends a wrong message to the american people and to the world about our commitment to defend this great nation in the future. congress should stay in washington to finish the business of the people. i am prepared to stay in washington as long as it takes.

these issues are too important to wait. mr. speaker, with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from pennsylvania seek recognition? does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent? does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. ms. schwartz: to strengthen our economic competitiveness we must have private sector growth in cutting edge industries. as we work to reform our corporate tax code, it's critical that we can have policies that reflect our 21st century economy -- innovation economy and promote new manufacturing base on the best ideas developed right here to america. today i will introduce legislation to incentivize manufacturing and research and development right here in the united states. it keeps american businesses competitive by reducing their tax rate on patented products by more than a half to 10%. this is a major incentive to

keep production here in the united states and will better ensure american companies that choose to stay in the u.s. can compete with foreign competitors, expand to new markets and hire new workers. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting american entrepreneurship, american innovation and american jobs. sign on to the innovation promotion act to build america's economic leadership in the world and promote job creation right here at home. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. traditionally, members of congress return to their districts during the month of august to avoid the hottest, muggiest month of the washington year. but given our current circumstances and the invention of air conditioning, i think we should break that tradition. senate crates have passed the democrat's plan to raise taxes. mr. hut gren: a family of four will see their taxes increase by more than $2,000 per year. house republicans have passed the only plan in washington to

stop the tax hike in its entirety. it will cost 700,000 jobs. i stand by the house leadership who stated this week that if the senate takes actions to address these threats the house will be in washington in august for the purpose of sending solutions to the president's desk. we have a job to do, and 23 million unemployed americans are waiting. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mcgovern: i call for the attention of stronger gun safety laws in this country. this congress has not only failed to address the issue of gun violence in the united states, it has weakened gun safety laws. i am proud that my home state of massachusetts is has the lowest firearm fatality rate per 100,000 population of every

industrialized state. i am proud of the advocates across the commonwealth including boston's mayor and the founder of the organization, stop handgun violence. today, stop handgun violence is hosting a rally calling on congress to pass stronger gun legislation. i applaud their work and the effort of other organizations like the brady campaign as they continue to educate and advocate for sensible legislation. what more will it take for this congress to bring commonsense gun control measures to the floor? how many more tragedies? silence is no longer acceptable. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from mississippi is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i'm a c.p.a. by trade. i spent many years in my former life weighing through volumes of tax code, trying to make sure that my colleagues follow

the last letter of the law and try not to get stuck paying more taxes than they owe. mr. palazzo: but they don't need a c.p.a. to tell them we need a simpler, fairer and flatter tax code. last week the u.s. senate sent a strong message when they voted to raise taxes on small businesses and families. in south mississippi alone it would increase taxes by an average of $2,200 per family. that's a total of more than $723 million more that social security mississippiians would have to pay. in addition to the extra tax burden, a recent study from ernst & young said we could lose as many as 710,000 jobs and wages could decrease by almost 2%. now, i'm no rocket scientist but i'm pretty sure that the people of america and south mississippi don't need a rocket scientist to tell them the tax hike are the last things we need right now. that's why the house stepped forward yesterday and passed legislation to stop the tax hike and that's why we're committed to working on tax reform to make our tax code

simpler, fairer, flatter for all americans. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. barrow: mr. speaker, i rise to pay my respects to a tireless crusader in the quest to protect america's children from violence and exploitation. ernie allen, recently retired as the president and chief executive office of the national center of missing and exploited children where his mission was to protect our nation's children. under his leadership, the center played a crucial role in recovering some 74,000 children. with ernie at the helm, they saw the recovery rate climb from 62% in 1990 to 94% today. while there's no official record book for what ernie's accomplished over the years, his record lives on in the lives he's saved and the families he's reunited.

i know i speak for my colleague in the caucus and for thousands of grateful families across the country in thanking ernie allen for a job well done. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, our economic problems are solvable, they just require confidence in the american people. mr. higgins: the american people lost confidence in congress and it's easy to see why. exhibit a, the inability to reach a deal on debt reduction. last year the speaker and president negotiated a plan to reduce the debt by $4 trillion through spending cuts and revenue increases. revenues that would come not from raising taxes but closing special deals. institutionalized corruption. that planned represented a balanced and bipartisan approach.

the economy today would be performing much better had that deal been enacted but the tea party control republican house rejected that deal. exhibit b, to rebuild the infrastructure of america. we just spent $89 billion rebuilding the roads of afghanistan. last week we passed a bill to spend just $52 billion a year in rebuilding roads and bridges right here in america. that's a weak plan. in fact, it's pathetically weak. that's why the american people lost confidence in congress. the best tax policies is to invest in america and the american people and to bring lost taxpayers back to work. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent? ms. wilson: obama cares and you should do.

first off, it's my body, not yours. i alone bear the burden, pain and joy that it brings. please stop trying to regulate my reproductive organs. they belong to me. have you ever had a menstrual period? have you ever felt unbearable pain during childbirth? will you be there for a mother when she needs prenatal care, formula, diapers? will you support the head start program? will you focus on creating good public schools again? will you perform foster care and stop greasing the prison pripeline with children? they are mothers living in trailer parks and public housing single handedly raising millions of grandchildren. where are you when grandmother is trying to feed the children? the only time i see you on the floor of the house is trying to take away grandma's social security and attacking her medicare and food stamps. grandma doesn't have a car so

she has no i.d. so she can't vote. for some reason you care about a baby right upon the minute it is born in the world and then you disappear and desert the children you claim to protect and love. shame on you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. wilson: jobs, jobs, jobs for the american people. obama cares and so should you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. remind members to heed the gavel. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i call a privileged -- a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 755, in the matter of representative laura richardson of california. resolved that the house adopted the report of the committee on ethics dated august 1, 2012, in the matter of representative

laura richardson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama is recognized for one hour. >> mr. speaker, i yield to a lady with whom i am honored to serve, the gentlewoman from california, ms. sanchez, the ranking member on the committee on ethics, for purposes of debate only and i ask unanimous consent that she be permitted to control that time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> as chairman of the committee on ethics, i rise in support of a resolution before us today which calls for a reprimand for representative laura richardson of california. article 1 of the institution gives congress the responsibility for punishing members of our body for disorderly behavior. and in the house it is the committee on ethics, the only evenly divided committee made

up of five democrats and five republicans and served by a completely nonpartisan professional staff that has been entrusted with the responsibility to enforce the rules of the house and recommend actions such as that before us today when a member or staff acts in a manner that violates the spirit of public trust. the obligation, therefore, falls to this committee to review those allegations that are a member has violated the ethical standards that the american people expect and deserve from those of us who are privileged enough to work for them. men and women who wear the title of representative of this great nation. . this unfortunate story begins in october of 2010 when the committee during the 111th congress first began to receive complaints from several members of representative richardson's staff, both from the

washington, d.c., and long beach, california, offices. that representative richardson required her staff to perform campaign work. the committee began an initial i choirry based on these complaints, as well as from media reports consistent with those complaints. on november 3, 2011, the committee, now in the 112th congress, empaneled an investigative subcommittee, appointed representative charles dent, of pennsylvania, and representative john yarmuth of kentucky to lead this bipartisan subcommittee in reviewing the allegations against representative richardson. mr. bonner: joining mr. dent and mr. yarmuth were two members pulled from a pool of members who assist the committee when needed. in this case, they are representative rob bishop of utah and representative ben ray lujan of new mexico. these four members, two

democrats, two republicans, served on the investigative subcommittee and over the past nine months led an extensive investigation, supported by the committee's dedicated, nonpartisan, professional staff deviling deep into this matter. -- deaf ving deep into this matter. -- deviling -- delving deep into this matter. ultimately the subcommittee unanimously agreed to a statement of alleged violation against representative richardson. mr. speaker, while the full committee report, the investigative subcommittee report, representative richardson's responsive views, and all gibts were -- compibblets were filed by the ranking member -- exhibits were filed yesterday by the rank and me yesterday morning and have been available since that time here now in summary are the

seven counts of violation. first, representative richardson violated the purpose law, title 31, section 1301 united states code by using official resources of the house for campaign, political, personal, and other nonofficial purposes. second, representative richardson violated house rule 23 by retaining a full-time employee in her district office who did not perform duties economies rat with their compensation. third, representative richardson violated house rule 23 by behaving in a manner that did not reflect credibly upon this house when she unlawfully used house resources for nonofficial purposes. fourth, representative richardson violated house rule 23 by behaving in a manner that did not reflect credibly upon the house when she improperly compelled members of her

official staff to do campaign work. by threatening, attempting to intimidate, directing, or otherwise pressuring them to do such work. fifth, representative richardson violated house rule 23 by behaving in a manner that cannot reflect credibly upon the house when she obstructed and attempted to obstruct the investigation of this committee into these allegations. sixth, representative richardson violated clause 2, the code of ethics for government service, by failing to uphold the laws and legal regulations discussed above and being a party to them. seven, representative richardson violated house rule 23 by failing to abide by the letter and spirit of house and committee rules. mr. speaker, the record should note that any time a member is confronted with a statement of alleged violation, he or she

has the option of challenging those allegations with a public hearing, of an add jude cantory subcommittee, or in the case of representative richardson, negotiating a resolution with the investigative subcommittee. in this instance representative richardson negotiated a resolution in which she admitted to all seven counts in a statement of alleged violation and has waived her rights to any additional process in this matter, including waiving her right to a hearing. representative richardson has also agreed to accept a reprimand by the house as well as a $10,000 fine. to be paid out of personal funds to the u.s. treasury no later than december 1, 2012. in the history of our country, five members have been expelled from congress, 23 members have been censured, and eight

members have been reprimanded. representative richardson negotiated and we recommend the sanction of reprimand. the investigative subcommittee unanimously adopted the report recommending a resolution including these terms to the full committee. and on july 31, 2012, the full committee adopted the resolution, the recommendations of the subcommittee. mr. speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield to the distinguished ranking member of the ethics committee, ms. sanchez, for any comments she may have. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. sanchez: i want to thank the chairman for his work in this matter an he has addressed in his opening comments some important aspects of this particular matter. representative charles dent andon yarmuth, who led the investigative subcommittee, will speak in greater detail

about the facts of this matter and how and why the committee reached the recommendation of sanctions that comes before the house today. i would like to briefly remind our colleagues why we are discussing this matter on the floor today and the importance of the ethics process to the integrity of the house. as noted before, the ethics committee is unique in that its membership is evenly divided between democrats and republicans. in that bipartisan spirit, i would like to cite the observations of two former chairmen of this committee about the role the ethics committee and role it has in overseeing the house. a former republican chairman of the committee once said that the ethics process is not a trial. instead it is a peer review process. in that same vain a former democratic chair of the committee said, the purpose of the ethics process is not punishment but accountability and vedibility. accountability for the respondent and credibility for the house itself. the committee followed these

important principles in assessing the conduct of our colleague, representative laura richardson. the recommendation for sanction we present to you today will ensure that representative richardson is held accountable for her conduct. it will also reaffirm the credibility of the house by demonstrating our commitment to upholding and enforcing the ethics standards that apply to all of us equally. how the committee conducted the investigation in this matter reinforces the goals of accountability and credibility. this matter was gun by the committee on its own initiative in the last congress. the members of the subcommittee did not prejudge the outcome of this matter, nor did the members of the full committee. out of fairness to all house members and staff, it is important to point out that the mere fact that an individual is the subject of an investigation doesn't mean that a violation has actually occurred. the existence of an investigation doesn't reflect a judgment by the committee on the allegation. this is true whether the

investigation has been publicly acknowledged by the committee or whether it remains confidential. the committee conducted a thorough and fair investigation. representative richardson was represented by counsel throughout the committee's investigation. she was provided with copies of materials gathered by the subcommittee. representative richardson also chose to waive certain procedural rights and steps in the investigative process that were available to her. the subcommittee listened to her views and interpretations of the facts of the investigation as well as appropriate sanctions. the full committee also took into account her views. ultimately members of the house of both parties waived the allegations regarding representative richardson and based on the facts concluded that her convuct did not meet the ethical standards that apply to all of us in a number of respects. the cop clution was bipartisan and it was -- conclusion was bipartisan and it was unanimous. the misconduct in this matter was serious and in accordance

with the house press department it merits a serious sanction of reprimand. representative richardson has agreed to accept the sanction of reprimand for her conduct. usually it is the committee's work in investigative matters like this one that receive public attention. but the committee's nonpartisan staff provides advice and education to members and staff every day. the report issued by the committee in this matter serves both purposes. if you have not already taken the opportunity to do so, i urge my colleagues and house staff to carefully read the committee's report. as the report says, the boundaries between our official, political, and personal roles are sometimes clear and sometimes they are complicated. this matter illustrates the consequences of failing to heed those boundaries. finally, i wish to acknowledge and thank my colleagues, representative charlie dent and john yarmuth, rob bishop and ben ray lujan for their hard work on the investigative

subcommittee. in addition, i want to thank all of our committee staff, although we are a bipartisan committee, we have a professional nonpartisan staff. all of the members of the committee appreciate their continuing hard work and service to the house. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves her time. the gentleman from alabama. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, i am now pleased to recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. dent, who ably served as chairman of the investigative subcommittee for any comments he may have. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. dent: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from alabama and the gentlelady from california for the leadership of the committee. as a member of the committee on ethics and as chairman of the investigative subcommittee or i.s.c.n. this matter, i do rise in support of the resolution which calls for the adoption of this committee's report and will serve as a reprimand of representative laura richardson for her conduct and will impose

upon her a $10,000 fine. i do not relish sneaking -- speaking under these circumstances. this is indeed a solemn moment when the house must consider punishing one of its own members. as the chairman stated, over the last nine months as members of the investigative subcommittee, my colleagues, mr. yarmuth from kentucky, mr. bishop of utah, and mr. lujan of new mexico and i conducted an extensive investigation into the allegations regarding representative laura richardson. the subcommittee met on 20 occasions. in total the i.s.c. and staff conducted 12 interviews during this phase of the inquiry. and reviewed the transcripts of 17 interviews conducted. during the committee's earlier phase of its inquiry. the subcommittee also reviewed thousands of pages of documents. i appreciate the hard work of each of the subcommittee members, especially the ranking member, mr. yarmuth of

kentucky, a pleasure to work with. i'd also like to thank the nonpartisan professional staff of the ethics committee who conducted the investigation with dignity and professionalism at all times. deborah, cliff, sharia, and brittany. at the conclusion of a thorough investigation, the subcommittee unanimously concluded that there was substantial reason to believe that representative richardson had violated the code of conduct and other laws, rules, and standards of conduct. the chairman outlined the seven counts in the statement of alleged violations which was unanimously adopted by the investigative subcommittee. here's the summary of the findings of the report and why the committee recommends that representative richardson be reprimanded by the house for her conduct. as discussed fully in the investigative subcommittee report, fundamentally representative richardson failed to acknowledge the boundaries between the official and political realms. on page 59 of the i.s.c.

report, it reads in part, quote, this case is about boundaries. the house entrusses members with a -- entrusts members with a great deal of discretion over a large amount of taxpayer resources. this constructive trust requires members to delineate between the official, political, and the personal in ways that are at times quite tidy and at others, tangled. representative richardson did not acknowledge these boundaries. she acted to consume the resources endowed to her as a member for whatever purpose suited her whims at the moment, be they official acts, her re-election, or personal needs. the i.s.c. discovered significant evidence suggesting that her wrongdoing continued even after learning of the committee was investigating her. if the committee fails to exact a steep price for such conduct, the message is one of a set of rules with a toothless enforcement mechanism, i close quote.

representative richardson's misconduct included, first, she improperly compelled or coerced members of her staff to do campaign work. representative richardson required the staff of her district office in long beach, california, to perform campaign work, each week night from approximately 6:30 p.m. through 9:00 p.m., during at least the two months prior to the 2010 primary and general elections. this practice alone accounted for hundreds of house of conscripted campaign work by public servants who did not wish to perform it and may not be forced to do so. she also required the district staff to perform addition at campaign work on the weekends. . she applied the same thing to our washington staff. second, representative richardson used official resources of the house for

campaign and nonofficial purposes. while the report has a detailed eposition of many of the resources used by representative richardson, some of the improper resources includes the use of staff time during the day to conduct campaign activities, repeated use of the house email system to conduct campaign system, use of the m.r.a. to lease a car which she parked at her house and used as her only mode of transportation in the district, regardless as to whether her destination was official, campaign or personal in nature. third, representative richardson paid her deputy district director as a full-time house employee but for months before the 2010 elections she directed this employee to conduct campaign work for significant portion of each day. additionally, in 2011, nearly a year after representative

richardson received notice of the committee's investigation into misuse of house resources, representative richardson hired a new district director who, with representative richardson's knowledge and approval, spent much of his time performing campaign work. taken together, a theme emerges. representative richardson used her staff as she saw fit. the evidence does not demonstrate isolated incidences of compelled campaign work. if that were in fact the case we would not likely be here today. it demonstrates a constant effort by representative richardson to direct and pressure her official employees to perform as much campaign work as possible, regardless of whether or not they wanted to volunteer. the environment representative richardson cultivated in her office was so poor that one of her employees, a detailee from the wounded warriors program, wrote in her letter of resignation, quote, as a

service-connected disabled veteran, it is said to say i would rather be at war in afghanistan than work under people that are morally corrupt, closed quote. just as concerning as the substantive violations, if not more so was the significant evidence that representative richardson obstructed and attempted to obstruct the investigation. to fulfill our constitutional duties, the house must take action against any member who improperly attempts to frustrate a committee investigation. the investigative subcommittee concluded that representative richardson obstructed and attempted to obstruct the investigation into these allegations. specifically, representative richardson directed her staff to testify that fair campaign work had been voluntary, even in cases where staff had not volunteered. she also attempted to obstruct the committee's investigation by altering or destroying evidence. and finally, representative richardson obstructed the investigation by failing to

provide materials responsive to a subpoena issued by the investigative subcommittee. the investigative subcommittee served representative richardson with that subpoena only after months had passed with representative richardson ignoring numerous requests from the i.s.e. that she provide responsive documents. even they the investigative subcommittee discovered documents that representative richardson had in her position, custody or control and nevertheless failed to produce. based on these conclusions, the investigative subcommittee found in a representative richardson committed seven different violations of the code of official conduct or other laws, rules or standards of conduct. throughout this process, representative richardson has been afforded every opportunity to defend herself. ultimately she initiated a negotiated resolution and admitted to the seven counts in the statement of alleged violation. she received a copy of the investigative subcommittee

report five days prior to its adoption and was given an opportunity to provide her views to be considered by the committee. through her misconduct, representative laura richardson has violated the public trust. while no member wants to sit in judgment of a colleague, it is our duty to protect the integrity of the house. accordingly, on behalf of the committee, mr. speaker, i recommend that the house adopt the committee's unanimous report and that the report serve as a reprimand of representative laura richardson for her misconduct. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield to the gentleman from kentucky, a member of the ethics committee, for such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. yarmuth: i thank the gentlewoman from california for yielding. as a member of the committee on ethics and as the ranking member of the investigative subcommittee in this matter, i

rise in support of the resolution that calls for the adoption of this committee's report and will serve as a reprimand of representative richardson for her conduct and will impose upon her a $10,000 fine. after the investigative subcommittee unanimously concluded that there was substantial reason to believe that representative richardson had committed these violations, representative richardson initiated formal discussions regarding a negotiated resolution of her matter which would avoid a hearing. they engaged representative richardson delaying hearings for more than a week to continue to negotiate. on july 18, 2012, representative richardson agreed to the terms of a negotiated resolution with the investigative subcommittee. as a part of that resolution, representative richardson has admitted to the seven counts in a statement of alleged violation. there is no longer a factual

dispute regarding whether these violations have been proven. on july 16 -- july 26, 2012, the investigative subcommittee unanimously adopted its report and transmitted it to the full committee. representative richardson was provided a copy of the report and pursuant to the terms of the negotiated resolution she was given five days to submit her views. on july 25, 2012, representative richardson submitted her views on the report in writing. those views were transmitted, along with the investigative subcommittee report, and considered by the full committee. as noted in the committee's report, the members were not persuaded by representative richardson's submission. some of the terms in the negotiated resolution require action only by the ethics committee or representative richardson, but there are terms that have been brought before the house today, mr. speaker, and that is the need for the house to impose the punishment that all parties agree is an acceptable sanction for representative richardson's

misconduct, a reprimand by the house of representatives and the imposition of the $10,000 fine. it is important for all members to understand that it is our responsibility to ensure that if our staffs wish to work on our campaigns, they must do it on their own time outside of their office and without the use of any official resources. a staffer is free to volunteer but a member cannot compel them to do so. mr. speaker, it became clear during the investigation that representative richardson did not believe that she was compelling her official staff to work on her campaign. it was equally clear after hearing from members of her staff that they believe they were being compelled to do so. there are examples of representative richardson providing explicit directions for her staff to work on her campaign. there are more numerous examples when representative richardson's actions would lead any reasonable staffer to believe they were required to do campaign work or face

retrution. the way members treat and manage their staffs is often as important and significant an influence on employee understanding and actions as any words a member may use. ultimately, it is also the member's responsibility to know and manage what is being asked of their staff and what isn't. as this case shows, when these rules are broken members are not only responsible, they will be held accountable. mr. speaker, i once again support the approval of the ethic's committee report and the sanctions imposed on ms. richardson and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield to the gentleman from colorado, the chairman of the congressional black caucus, for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized for two minutes.

mr. cleaver: thank you, mr. speaker. the committee has examined the case and reached the conclusion of the subject of the investigation as agreed to accept responsibility and in fact has affixed her name to the findings as a confirmation of such. and as a supporter and colleague of the subject of the investigation, i know that she regrets the violations and hopes the reprimand by the house will allow both her and the house to move on to address the great issues facing the nation. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from california. ms. sanchez: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves her time. the gentleman from alabama. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, i am prepared to close unless there are any other speakers that seek recognition.

ms. sanchez: yes. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, i'm happy on the part of the committee to yield five minutes to representative richardson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. richardson: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the ranking member for yielding time and it's my understanding that i would be provided additional time if needed. i had no desire or intent to prolong the debate on this report, but given what has now been stated during this debate, which is contrary to what i understood to be agreed to, i want to make sure that my colleagues are aware of several issues critical to understanding the full context of this resolution. first, i want to assure my colleagues that contrary to the inflammatory suggestions in the full committee report, i do take these findings very seriously and do accept the responsibility for the specific conduct set out in the statement of alleged violations. second, i set forth in my

statement of views, including in the committee report, several significant concerns about the manner in which the committee conducted this investigation. i find it was interesting that the ranking member stated in the initial discussion that the subject of an investigation does not mean that an individual or a violation has occurred. well, in fact, in this investigation there is seven areas where i feel there has been a violation. prejudgment and improper influence of witnesses by the ethics committee, the very matter that the ranking member just mentioned. and i'll state for the record what specifically was stated in those statement of views. during the rule 18-a inquiry at the outset of the committee's process, the committee counsel improperly influenced witness by telling them a year before any such decision had been made by the ethics committee. that the ethics committee was likely to impanel an investigative subcommittee. thereby clearly signaling that the ethics committee staff, at

least already believed that i, representative richardson, was guilty of misconduct and influenced subsequent staff testimony. for example, during the interview of angel, a key staff witness, ethics counsel told her it's completely up to the full committee on what they want to do. they make the final decision, which could be anything from dismiss the matter entirely to investigative by impaneling an investigative subcommittee. the counsel continued, if that happens, you will be called, you will be placed under oath, so that is the process. chances are, this is important, chances are they are going to want to impanel. this is according to her transcript on number 34. committee counsel told former district director during his first interview that the chances are very likely that you are going to be interviewed again. if you are going to be interviewed again it will be under oath and it will be in front of members of the

committee. my recommendations could be anywhere from dismiss the matter as being, you know, not a violation or impanel an investigative subcommittee or, i think, you probably know which way at this point we're looking. eric's transcript page 83 and 84. committee counsel told the staffer the committee's choices in this matter are to dismiss the matter because the information received lacks merit or lacks sufficient information to believe a violation occurred. or we recommend that an investigative subcommittee be impaneled. you actually won't hear back from us until such time we decide to interview you again. and the reason is that as i said, everything is done confidentialally. i expect we would not be impanel and investigate a subcommittee until the beginning of the 112th congress because there is insufficient time left in this congress to do so. so more than likely it will be

january before we impanel before doing -- by doing any additional work. and then finally, the committee counsel told kenneth miller during his first 18-a interview on november, 2010, that when i present the findings to the member, i will be giving them a full briefing on what i believe was violated, be it house rules, campaign law or federal criminal statutes. miller's testimony, page 47. . during these interviews with my staff, the committee attorneys made clear to staff witnesses that the ethics committee staff had already determined that i had committed violations at the very first stages of the preliminary inquiry. committee staff explicitly requested that my staff not speak with my own counsel, a recognized form of prosecutorial misconduct, which effectively deprived me of opportunity to actually learn of the specific allegations against me until the final stages of this investigation.

anoupsing the resolution had been negotiated, new and additional allegations appeared in the investigative subcommittee report, supported by attorney proofers that i still to this day haven't seen. the full committee report takes issues with my raising these concerns stating the resolution is a matter that i waived all my procedural rights and that the time rising for these objections has passed. these concerns should be taken seriously by the committee as i brought them forward. third but most importantly -- i request additional time. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, i would inquire of the gentlelady from california how much additional time does she intend to seek? because as i have heard her comments, respectfully, it sounds like those were all contained in her response which was included in the report submitted to the house. how much additional time would she be seeking to conclude her

comments? ms. richardson: is was told i would be allowed to continue to request additional time to complete my presentation. i would say approximately less than five minutes. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, i will grant the gentlelady five additional minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for an additional five minutes. ms. richardson: thank you, mr. chairman. the purpose of me standing today, i had no intentions of speaking because i believe we had agreed to a certain format of what would have occurred, but the most important issue that i bring forward is the comments of mr. dent. third, with respect to the account of charging obstruction of the committee investigation, i want to make clear that the statement of alleged violations does not assert anywhere that i deliberately failed to produce documents in response to requests for information and a subpoena as referenced in yesterday's public statement by the chair and ranking member. i did not admit to this conduct

and i certainly do deny it and it's my understanding that the committee is aware that in fact it was not included. with respect to the conduct to which i did admit, my statement of views explains that my office calendars were adjusted retroactively but only to accurately reflect the history of the time worked by my deputy district director. discussion abouts that adjustment in fact took place before the committee commenced its inquiry. i did at the very beginning of the committee's preliminary inquiry suggest, and, mr. chairman, i think this is very important, i acknowledge the statement of alleged violations . in fact much of which has been said today has been in fact true. but what i want to make emphatically clear and what i want to emphasize that i have never taken or threatened any action against any staffer who did not volunteer to work on my campaign.

there is no doubt that a number of staff felt compelled or coerced to do so. that was not my intent and i deeply regret that this occurred. so i want to make sure, very clear to the committee, i'll repeat that statement. there is no doubt that a number of staff felt compelled or coerced to do so, and that was not my intent, and i deeply do regret that this occurred. i never told any staff member that they would be out of a job if they did not work on the campaign and it is undisputed that i was not present at the staff meeting at which the time this statement was made. with that context and these clarifications, mr. speaker, i respectfully ask that my colleagues would refer as was stated by the committee that they would refer to my public reference to this matter, my statement of views which are included in the report. as i conclude, mr. chairman, and the ranking member, i look forward to the resolution of

this matter. in fact, i sought the resolution of this matter for well over a year and i have agreed to the items that were set forward. however, some of the details that were set in the language that was said today was not what had been discussed. so for the record i wanted to clarify that. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady may not reserve her time. the time is controlled by the gentleman from alabama. the gentlelady from california. ms. sanchez: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. i just feel it's important to point out several important issues that were raised by ms. richardson in her comments on the floor today. much of what she has stated on the floor today were included in the views that she filed after reviewing the report that was issued. she raised these points in her

views of the report and i feel compelled to add that the committee took those views very seriously. and they responded and refuted those points in its response to her views, which is all included in the report which has been made publicly available. nothing that has been stated on the floor today by any member, but most especially mr. -- sta are already included in the report to which representative richardson has responded. again many of the points she raised we investigated, took very seriously, and included in our response to those views. i don't think that there's anything further to add other than she has been given an opportunity to voice her concerns at every step of the process, and we have scrupulously adhered to a process to try to take her views and her suggestions into account.

and we have arrived at the report which is unanimously agreed on by all of the committee members w that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time is reserved. gentleman from alabama. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, i'm prepared to close if the gentlelady, ranking member, has no further speakers. ms. sanchez: i have no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady yield back? ms. sanchez: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentleman from alabama. mr. bonner: mr. speaker, in closing i want to once again thank members of the committee as well as members of the pool for their tremendous service that they render to this institution. and on behalf of the entire house i want to again thank the nonpartisan professional committee staff for their extraordinary hard work and commitment to the house of representatives and to the american people that we all serve. as is often noted on the floor, especially during somber moments like this, public

office is a public trust. and for the vast majority of members who have been honored with the opportunity, the privilege to serve in this the deem's house, there is an unspoken duty to hold ourself up to a higher standard. unfortunately, as representative richardson has admitted, she did not live up to that higher standard and as such she did a disservice to her staff, to her colleagues, and while it is ultimately up to her constituents in california to be the final judge of her actions, i think it's safe to say she did a disservice to the hardworking taxpayers from all corners of this country who expect and deserve more from their elected leaders. throughout the course of this matter, the investigative subcommittee heard desperate, sometimes emotional pleas for help from members of representative richardson's staff. representative dent has shared at least one of the stories

with the body today. and even since word first broke yesterday of this resolution this morning, the committee has received calls from other staffers thanking us for bringing this matter tomorrow a public rureb. -- resolution. as a former hill staffer myself, i have great respect for those staffers who are willing to come to the ethics committee with their stories and heartfelt concerns. that is not an easy thing to do against a member of congress, particularly when that person claims to be your boss and you are made to feel that your job is in jeopardy. at the end of the day, however, we must remember and never forget that the real people involved are the american people. i was particularly moved by one of ms. richardson's former staffers who testified this certainly should not be an example as to the way an elected official of this

country should conduct themselves under any circumstance. mr. speaker, i am simply haunted by the statement of another staffer that mr. dent referenced, a lady who is part of the wounded warrior program, someone who was willing to risk her life in service to her country, and ended up coming home a disabled veteran. she told the committee and it bears repeating, it is sad to say that i would rather be at war in afghanistan than work under people who are morally corrupt. mr. speaker, while some might prefer a harsher sentence, perhaps even a few might think a reprimand is too severe, i urge my colleagues to support the unanimous recommendation of the only evenly divided committee in this house of representatives. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say

aye. those opposed, no. the aye vs. it. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. mr. bonner: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama. mr. bonner: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.res. 755. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has agreed to the house amendment to the senate amendment to h.r. 1905, cited as the iran threat reduction and syria human rights act of 2012.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, charity declares the house in recess for a period less than 15 minutes. >> some members are taking a break as they continue debate on this last day of work on this

live coverage of the convention from tampa. >> at the foot of the bridge, i thought i was going to die. i thought i saw death. >> in 1965, a 25-year-old john lewis took part in a voting rights march from selma to montgomery, alabama, on a route that would take them across the edmund pettus bridge. >> we came within hearing distance of the state troopers. and a man identified himself and said, "i'm major john cloud of the alabama state troopers. this is an unlawful march and it would not be allowed to