what they care about is that >> did he say big purple dinosaur? >> he did not care what you were. man or woman. what they care about is that i sent you, and you have my ear, and speak for me. and they will treat you just fine. i probably traveled there more than any other the administration official. i spend tremendous amounts of time in the kingdom dealing with all levels of government, including the secret service there. i was treated incredibly well. a postscript to that in my private life now, i also have cause both for business and otherwise to travel to the kingdom, and have can treat it -- continue to be treated well. i'm not treated differently because i am a woman or have my voice or opinions taken less seriously. quite the upset. someone once said, you're more effective because you have all the benefits in saudi society of being in terms of politeness as a woman, but you have all of the same juice as any man of any rank in the kingdom. you have the best of both worlds. >> what is your best saudi story?

>> the first time i went to the kingdom, it was in a prior job. the first call i made was to fran to say, what can you give me for advice? i would echo what fran says. the key factor is, you're going to represent the president. whether it is saudi arabia, which we've had a close, terrorism partnership, or, frankly, yemen, which i've been to more than anybody in the administration in the last year for sure. very different environments, but the key point is, i have been sent as the president's emissary, and that is important

to the president with whom i'm meeting in yemen are going to turkey are going and seeing the king of jordan. the same doors are open because i am going at the request of the president with a message from the president, with specific things to discuss on the president. and that is the key. >> anne-marie slaughter wrote one of the best covers. to be fair, i don't think she was thrilled with the title. nonetheless, it sold a lot. she is a book deal and it is working well. michele flournoy, when she was possibly up to sisi chuck hagel a secretary of defense said, i've got two daughters. i am interested, there is this sense that part of the reason why national security positions are dominated by guys is there not burdened with other responsibilities. my unfair question to both of you, can national security women still have it all?

>> yes. look at someone like susan rice. clearly, a national security woman if there ever was one. if having a beautiful and well-adjusted family and being at the top of your game in a national security for fish and is having at all, then absolutely. >> ditto. >> there are a lot of examples, which i think prove -- >> you can. look, in fairness, to be very kind of honest, i tell young women coming up, you can have it all, mostly you have it in sequence. it is not about having it all at the same time. because to do that, to get through these periods which open and a family that everybody has to besides on to that.

my children were very little when i was at the white house. i couldn't have done that if i did not have a phenomenal nanny who had been with me and a spouse that signed on to the idea. i wasn't taking the kids to the doctor, just wasn't possible. i wasn't making parent-teacher conferences. that had to be ok with everyone. you can have it all as long as everyone is signed on to that program for a period of time, and there are going to be sacrifices. the time i gave up with my children when they were little, i can't get back. one is grown and in college now, and there are things i missed. but we were all proud of the fact that we had done this for a period of time. you worked very hard to make them a part of it. >> to be realistic, you also -- having at all means making choices. i believe firmly, you do what you want to do. whether that is doing things in sequence, whether that is prior to rising at one point in your life or another.

having it all is really making those choices, the freedom to make those choices. these are all folks who have had wonderfully supportive spouses and the means to do this thing. obviously we have to be realistic about that as well. >> we have to talk about the sony movie. everyone is talking about it. it is a broad issue of cyber. when you look at cyber crime today, a segment on msnbc that was pushed back, talking about the revelation, hacking, and international. despite the humor of it, a lot of big issues related to this. whoever did this nation or group, there is a fragility that seems ready profound in the i.t. and cyber world. the second part is when governments are actually sponsoring or providing resources with some speculative is happening in this case, how do you deal with that? fran, i know you don't with this to some degree. it seems this is an area where the speed is rocketing up in

terms of the capacity. i am wondering if we are prepared. how much of your dashboard is filled with this kind of subject? >> we have taken a lot of steps to harden our own defenses, physical and virtual, but we have to do a lot more. i think cyber is the place where our two hats and cyber security -- homeland security really comes together, whether it is infrastructure protection on the homeland security side or dealing with international or the threat of terrorist actors using cyber as of that were for -- vector for the attack. i personally think we need to use the lessons that we have gained from a decade plus of counterterrorism improvements, structural, policy wise, legal, and, frankly, cultural. i am working hard to drive the policy apparatus and the national security community toward we have to learn the lessons that have been so beneficial to bring all of the tools, the whole approach, diplomatic, criminal justice, prosecutorial resources. sanctions.

all of those things can be brought to bear against cyber actors. >> i think to add on what lisa is saying, this is an area where there has been bipartisan support. the administration talks to many, not just me. look, we could use a national cyber terrorism center. >> we don't have one? >> we don't have a single national cyber center. each of the departments, like the 9-11 counterterrorism days. what would the legal authorities be? a national center work permit you to do that. it would be nice if we could learn the lesson we learned post 9/11 from a physical attack. learn this before -- >> isn't it a fun world to live in? i read a lot of novels. i have been reading david

intimations novel lately. it is all about your work. there's one novel, "blood money" and another, "the director." in it, it is about the terrorism world converging. right in your sweet spot about what to write about. there is nasty stuff that goes on. from the point of what you can do and also to the point that you realize the notion of liberty we have and a certain degree of freedom, and the ability to be naughty is over in the coming world that people can intervene. you seem so relaxed and nice and cool people. if you know the world is so dark and what is coming, how do you have this detached and relaxed lisa, that i think you are? >> if i did that here, i would be making a lot of people nervous. i think there would be a lot of people that would question that i am as relaxed and forgiving as you indicate. one of my staff members here may argue with that. look, we have to learn lessons. that is the only way we're going to be productive. there is a lot bad stuff them as

you say, both in the cyber realm and with what we're confronting will stop -- confronting. >> do you ever wake up in the morning and things feel good? >> no. >> i said this to someone the other day. i have developed a bit of a have loaned the and -- pavlovian response to the ring tone on my blackberry. it only goes off in the middle of the night. on a monday night it went off to tell me about the horrific attack. in peshawar. i only get bad news at that time of night. frankly, when i meet every morning with the president, along with susan rice and others to talk about overnight intelligence briefing and the issues we are confronting of the day, it is never good news. a point president obama reminds me of regularly. but the plus side is, i have the greatest job description in the world, which is i get to help keep people safe with a huge apparatus and tremendously dedicated professionals and the community across the board. but that is a pretty good thing

to keep you going. >> the joke was when i would show up unannounced to the door of the oval office, i was a little black cloud. for much of the same reason. i could kill a conversation, stop by meeting just by walking through the door because everyone knew if i showed up unannounced it is because i needed to speak to the president of the united states at that moment. it wasn't 10 minutes, it was now. it was clear the room so i could talk to him. the converse of that is also true. if there was good news in my area, some of the else was going to tell the president. >> so true. >> so i feel very confident that john brennan does not get to run in and tell the president we have bin laden. good news travels around me. bad news came to me to deliver.

you know, you sort of accepted that in the job. >> 100% true area deciding when to make that phone call. those are key moments.

>> how many calls did you have to make? >> the first one was literally my third week in the job. calling the president to tell him one of the boston bombers was dead and another was still

at large. it is not a decision i hesitated about, even though i was three weeks on the job and have never woken him up to be sure. >> is he a nice guy at 3:00? did he say, thank you so much?

>> i knew he would want to know because there was a public safety issue. that was the point. there was a manhunt underway. we did not know what else could follow. making the decision to go back to where we started, your job is knowing quickly and with relatively little and invariably perfect information, when to make the call, when to interrupt and go to the oval office to be the person who clears the room, and that is something you learn every day.

>> i want to ask one last question. we have a great full house of people, many of whom could be on the stage as well. i want to try to get back to women in these roles. i don't know her name, i don't think any of us do. the woman in the cia that played such of pivotal role in the associative intelligence to track the courier. she was the spark who really tipped things in a different direction in finding bin laden. in the limited amount of investigation i have done around this, i am left with the impression that the cia is a male dominated culture that took a long time, if ever, to appreciate the role she played and finally left intact because -- left in fact, because there was no room for advancement. she had been passed over so many times. so that story, when he think about women of washington, she would be a woman i would like to interview on the stage. it is not a good one when it comes to these issues. i would like to get your take, not on that particular issue, perhaps you may not be able to talk about it, but the culture of intelligence. >> interestingly enough, she was not the spark for this. i should tell you, multiple directors have been worried about this issue. ask secretary albright, myself, michele flournoy, a group of us if we would please look at this issue inside the cia. i think this started with director panetta. it was supported by john brennan, the current director. we looked at women in the cia, promotion pass, what we could do to encourage it. by the way, this is not just a quality issue.

it is a very important issue but also in terms of intelligence gathering, women bring different tools, have different access, especially in this part of the world. so it is an important national resource issue in terms of making sure women are competitive. i guess the outcome of that is there are changes made. i'm not really at liberty to explain. >> it was a problem? >> it was considered a problem and a problem that required attention at the director level. multiple directors had taken it on to address it. i think great strides have been made. even though changes take time to bring about results. i would say to you, it is an issue across, not just the cia. that just happens to be a place i know good deal about. the other thing i would say about the woman you're talking about, in fairness to the institution, no single analyst, because i was there when we put the pieces together, this is a team. to some degree how she was treated, was a result of claiming credit for herself that was shared by a team. by the way, when you think about how women in the national security area, how do you break the path that is broken? -- that i have broken and lisa has broken? by and large, women i have dealt with in that arena, are that

result, not about credit. part of her issue is this is about credit after the fact. it was a team, it really was a team. she deserves a lot of the credit, but not all of it. >> lisa? >> i think it is not just an issue in intelligence but law enforcement. the issue up promotion pass, succession planning, making sure that as a leader and organization you are thinking about those paths. what i would say, and it will take time to change, i am getting briefed almost daily by incredibly talented women in the intelligence community. >> so the pipeline is good? >> that is what i am seeing. it is tremendously exciting. on the operations side, that may be a different pipeline. there is real talent there and we have to make sure the changes fran is alluding to take root. and that we can capitalize on that. >> it is worth saying right now, for example, number two and number three are both women. there is a good future including on the operation side. >> and department of defense on an act and basis. let me open up the floor. right here. chris fowler. >> it is not so much a question but breaking news. sony noted they pulled the

release and not releasing the film "the interview." that just came through. >> i am so glad you brought this up. >> just before we walked in, a number of theaters said they were not going to carry the release. i must tell you how wrong i think it is of sony in the theaters. when you are confronted with aa, -- with a bully, the idea is not to cave, but punch them in the nose. the notion that sony and the theaters is not going to react is the kilis. what will happen if there is a david ignatius novel that pokes fun at the regime in russia and all of a sudden they get attacked by the russians, are they going to pull it then? i think it is a horrible idea and president. >> we will bring a mic to you. i went to come back to the issue in a moment. >> i work and study in the city.

i am pretty tall, so now i will be seated again. two questions for the lawyer, knowing the restrictions of your office, the third for miss townsend. to do take a survey -- i was looking and thinking about the remarks, specifically the associated forces elements.

could you take a look at that? today's lat had a note about the president's judicial nomination. 305, which beats this point for any of his predecessors. and, miss townsend, could you take a survey of the -- how you feel about the threat of the attacks on the united states? >> could you explain the acronyms? >> i have not read that piece. but he is tremendous. from last summer? on the piece, authorization for the use of military force, the president has stated quite clearly he wants to work with

congress. an amuf would have strong bipartisan support for military action for the work in theory a -- in syria and iraq. i took my lawyer had off when i went to the white house. i think it was great congress was able to push through a huge chunk of judges into the system because we need them desperately. >> dedicated denial of service attack. what is that? that is when you try to log on to your bank's website and it will not come up. that is a failure of a single website. there is a flooding to deny it by traffic. we saw this in the financial services sector leading up.

would we, would we not enter into negotiations with iran? miraculously the attacks stopped once we had those negotiations. you will see more of this. frankly, what you hear on the private sector, financial services in particular, there needs to be a better, stronger relationship with the government. the government understands those sorts of attacks are generally used against the private sector to put pressure on the government. the private sector there's a burden. in the private sector, there is a tremendous cost to that that companies bear and while there is a dialogue, there needs to be more. i think both sides recognize that and are working toward that. >> sarah harvard, the huffington post. i have two questions. could you speak about that

terrorist designation list and how that affects u.s. policy? we have learned to key as partners in could a stand -- kurdistan have been removed from tier three status and how the concerns may be affecting other potential u.s. partners. the other question i have is about how concerns around gender-related violence with the islamic faith and how that affects u.s. foreign-policy. >> on the designations list, i'm not familiar with specifically what you're referencing in terms of kurdistan, but it is one of the tools we use. david cohen has done terminus worked in the sanctions arena both on terrorism and with iran. i think, frankly, it is something we need to use more and do more with. if we can stop the flow of money, as fran referenced earlier, that is a key

ingredient to depriving the actors from the lifeblood that allows them to perpetrate really heinous crimes. >> does cuba automatically, the -- come off the state-sponsored terror list with normalization? is that a separate step? >> it is a separate announcement today that president obama has asked secretary kerry to undertake a review, review asset that is guided by a statue. he will move out on that. >> did you want to comment on the gender issue. and isil? one of the concerns is there are a number of female hostages, there is also violence, rapes, forced slavery, modern slavery.

we all know that is horrible, but to the degree you begin thinking about how you undermine the legitimacy in the eyes of the region -- what would be your advice? >> again, i think there are several issues to look at when you consider this. remember, just last week isis release of pamphlet for how to treat women. you can enslave them, rape them. basically women are the spoils of war. as horrible as that is, understand when you're talking about taking the enemies women and raping, murdering, torturing and abusing them, it is part and parcel of a genocide. i am not going to simply conquer my enemy, i will eliminate my enemy. we have to understand it is part of the strategy. somebody said to me, well, this is a cultural issue. would we say slavery or racism is a cultural issue? this is a human rights issue. we have to approach it just as we what any of the other issues and take it on directly. i do think in terms of the narrative piece, this is part and parcel of how you counter the narrative and have people

understand the moral bankruptcy of what they are suggesting. this is not -- they want to make this in the context of an islamic and religious argument. this is not. this is a moral argument to me, and we have to be willing to confront them on that. not my name in great britain is an islamic organization. we need all of the voices to tackle this. >> will, yale. >> can you talk about the factional fighting in libya? and the extent of isil's involvement in libya? >> this is something that fran referenced.

the intent is almost to branch out, whether it is in libya, taking up the calls for allegiance from the extremist group in egypt, engaging to form these links. i think that is a huge area of concern. both expanding the islamic state of the caliphate -- >> this seems to be happening, right? the defense minister was saying, throughout africa you see groups mimicking isis and also making efforts to coordinate and communicate with isis. have you shut that down? >> this goes to the effort fran talked about with counter extremism. reducing the idea there are somehow invincible. we saw them making a series of inroads and have freedom that was not checked. and gaining currency amongst sunni tribes and others in iraq. we have done a lot to push back

on that. to blunt that momentum. we have to do more and do it with a range of voices and partners. you saw the first military action taken this summer, late summer in september with five gulf countries, including a woman pilot from the emirates. >> the islamic state came out and said they wanted to crucify. >> very quick. >> earlier you mentioned the new political actors you call terrorists, etc., etc., as forcefully for you, you work as a bureaucrat, i did for 30 years. you have the talent to be smart so you have to start thinking like them and be creative. >> thank you. up here in front. >> i am chris with the virginia quality bar association and will turn it back to sony because i spent 18 years in hollywood. it was really interesting the progression and i totally agree we should not given to the

people, but this morning talking about losing $100 million. sony, this is. then they canceled the new york premiere, and now they have canceled the entire thing. i mean, on one end, we cannot give into them, on the other end, they are creating a huge potential problem financially in the financial markets. almost 7% they have lost. sony's stock has stopped. i don't know the answer is -- >> let me take your question and piggyback. because when janet napolitano left her job and went to run the university of california, one of the discussions we had with her was how you balance responding

to threats in a way, and yet you also realize the society and the strength of society is running normally and not being bullied. put it into the broader issue or how you look at the whole swaths of your jobs. how do you create a healthy balance? between dealing with their people -- i know people out there only think about the problems. it was interesting that tony abbott, the prime minister of australia, told everyone what you can do is to continue to go out and live your life normally. it is holiday time, enjoy. don't let people disrupt. how much of that becomes your discussion internally? does that ever affect the decision you make as to whether you announce or not? >> well, first you have to give people information so they can take steps to be safe. i think we have evolved in favor of giving more information in --

and doing so responsibly. there are two challenges. one is strategic that you just mentioned, and day to day dealing with the crises that come up of invariably. but also keeping her on the strategic vault. it is a very tough challenge. i face it and assume fran did, and making sure you are taking the steps you need to to respond to an individual crisis and operational matter, but not losing the strategic focus. because you will need that when you need to respond to a particular crisis because you have to be concerned about the second, third, fourth order effects of any action you take. >> when the prime minister abbott made the statement, i

hearkened immediately back to right after 9/11 when president bush said, keep shopping, go out and was criticized and made fun of. the point to that is right. you have to have confidence and a sense that your government, people like lisa, and the tens of thousands of public servants behind lisa are dedicating themselves 24-72 dealing with -- 24/7 to dealing with the problem and threat so that you can go about living your life. there is going to be an impact on sony. by the way, sony, rightly or wrongly, bears the responsibility for that. in terms of measures they took or took inadequately to detect -- protect their system. there will be an impact there. just as there was an impact on the financial services sector. look, there is this balance and there is this cost to it, but i do think a larger strategic sense, it sends a horrible message because guess what? this is not a one-off. the studios will face this problem again so we need a better framework. >> right here. >> i have a quick question.

real quickly, does that exist or are there plans to arm within homeland security and counterterrorism for the islamic leaders, organizations or institutions domestically here to work with you on strategies and the narratives in the war against terrorism? >> before you answer, i will grab a couple in the lightning round because i feel guilty. real quick. lightning round. >> i am linda, and i want to say i dance in the periphery of intelligence and two of the most respected individuals i know.

my questions on russia, if you could touch on that because it is going downhill fast. cook's russia and my friend right back here. >> i am a reporter with foreign policy magazine. a few weeks ago vice president biden spoke about the roles of some of our allies having supported certain rebel groups in syria and was criticized for having spoken about that, but a lot of it was mentioned before. i larger question is, do you find in the fight against terrorism, some of the american allies distinguish between the good terrorist who support certain political objectives that a particular ally has versus bad terrorist who they want to go after? i am particularly talking about the case of pakistan. >> make it short. good terrorist versus bad terrorists.

we have a couple of questions that i will attack on my own. during the first bit of the obama administration, you did not see much backstabbing going on between the national security divas and the team. the bush administration was ripe -- rife with backstabbing. i am interested in whether you think in addition to asking in addition to asking about the good terrorists versus the bad terrorists question, russia and whether there is a new arm and homeland security about what environment is better for smart national security making? is it better when you have a competition of rivals or better to keep it all fields and -- sealed and bottled up and no one knows? lisa, we will start with you. >> i challenge the premise. look, i think more and better and robust views in argument are always going to be better.

that is what i am trying to get at the situation room. that is what the president welcomes, and i see him having a daily. >> interesting. any thoughts on these other questions? >> with regards to homeland security arm, we are doing a lot in an effort to deal with communities on violent extremism and you'll see more of that in the coming months. >> fran? >> backbiting? i would say to you, welcome to the last two years of any president who serves two terms. i do think some of that is almost inevitable by virtue of time. i do not think that is unique from one president to another. we need more outreach, involvement of the islamic

community, and i think we need the same thing right here. i would encourage the administration to do that. russia, i am deeply worried that putin has taken that signals or -- misread signals from us as weakness, so he sees an opportunity and lack of engagement. i think putin will continue to be aggressive, if not checked pretty closely. i don't remember the third one. >> good terrorist versus bad terrorist. >> when i sat in the siege, used to say, there's a real distinct difference between those who simply hate us and those who want to kill us. i was all about focusing my time and attention on those that wanted to kill us.

while the people who hate us are offensive, in terms of bandwidth and hours in the day, you have to pick your battles. >> you are both extraordinary. thank you for your candor and humor. happy holidays. thank you so much. [applause] >> at the end of the year, the last women of washington, thank you for being here today. thank you to everybody. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cae satellite corp. 2014] >> on the next "washington journal" --

we will take your calls and you can join the conversation via facebook and twitter. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this month is the 10th anniversary of our sunday primetime program, "q and a." we're featuring authors, historians, journalists, filmmakers, and from 2005, kenneth feinberg. 2006, the importance of the african-american experience to u.s. history. 2007, robert novak and 50 years of reporting in washington. from 2008, the value of higher education in america. from 2009, conservative commentator as teacup -- s.e. cupp.

>> a look at some retiring members of congress. then, tributes to senator rockefeller. later, republican senator tom coburn. west virginia senator jay rockefeller is retiring after 30 years in congress. most recently, he served on the senate commerce committee. he talked about his time in office to his recent farewell dress. this is 39 minutes. >> the senator from west

virginia. >> madam president, i ask to give my remarks. >> without objection. >> and i ask unanimous consent .o speak on morning business >> without objection. >> for hours and hours. [laughter] objection. >> i come today with a spirit of reflection and optimism about our future. torrent --ompelled premise of what we don't achieve and what we can't achieve when we refuse to compromise. my mind that the job of public service is very hard work, and it's an extremely noble and honorable calling. here in the united states senate, we have a unique ability and responsibility to do very

big things. ignite innovation in our schools and industry, protect a healthy country foster global change borne from policies that lead the world. at the same time, we have the opportunity to touch individual lives, case management, one on one with casework than often reaches people in their darkest hour. i love the senate. i love the senate. i love the intensity of the work, the gravity of the issues. i love fighting for west virginia here. i learned to love this fight, as many of you know, as a 27-year-old vista worker in the tiny coal community of emmons, west virginia. it was a place that set my moral compass and gave me direction. where everything in my real life actually began. where i learned how little i knew about the problems that

people face, there and in other places in the country, how little i knew, and what a humbling experience that was for me. my time there was transformative. it explains every policy i purr sued and every vote i have cast. it was where my beliefs were bolted down and where my passions met my principles. emmons was where i came to understand that out of our everyday struggles, we can enlarge ourselves. we can grow greater, truly making a difference couldn't be an afterthought. it never could. rather, it requires a singular focus and relentless effort. it would be hard but the work mattered. that's the deal here.

important undertakings can't be halfhearted. you have to commit your whole self, almost like pushing a heavy rock uphill. with both of your hands you push because if you let up for a split second with either land you and the rock go tumbling backwards into the abyss. there is always so much at stake. even today in west virginia, too many are struggling. they're fighting to survive. i call them hardworking when i really should say hard surviving, but they are hardworking and trying to survive. they're wary of the future. they're scared of their possibilities. sometimes they're afraid of themselves and of their inadequacies which have been bred in, partly through a

scotch-irish transition, partly a transition that says strangers are bad, i was bad for quite a long time but that's the way people are, they don't really want to change, so change comes slowly. so we just simply fight twice as hard. and nothing stops us. there is vast dignity madam chairman and vast honor in helping people. you cannot let go of it. i believe genuinely in the ability of government to do good, to serve, and to right injustices. this is why the senate must be a place in which we embrace a commitment to be deliberative, passionate and ryan lenting but it must be a place in which we are driven only by the duty and

trust bestowed upon us by the people who put us here. this is where everything else should be put aside, boxed out, as it were. yes, politics led us here, but this is where we shed the campaigning, or should. and embrace our opportunity to lead, to listen, to dig in, to bridge differences, to govern, and to truly make a difference. at our core, we must be drawn to the hard, all-consuming policy work that lives in briefings, hearing rooms and round tables back in our states. yet our north star must always be the real needs of the people we serve. and so policy to me starts with listening. it is seeing the faces of our

constituents, not just thinking of a policy in terms of a policy, but policy in terms of people who it would affect. faces. you see your constituents, you hear them out, you understand their needs and their problems. you get to know them very well. and especially in a small state like west virginia. listening to constituents and colleagues here alike is absolutely necessary. good policy is born out of compromise. compromise is not easy, but it can happen and when we truly listen to each other, it very well could. we separate our campaign selves from our public service selves. the cruelty of perpetual campaigns destroys our ability to fulfill our oath of office, madam chair. it is hard to build a working

relationship in this institution without an honest and open approach with our colleagues. republican or democratic. but we must build that relationship because together we can do so much, and without that we can do, as we have seen, nothing. listening and compromise were key to the work of the national commission on children in the 1990's. i was the chair of that commission which included the bipartisan group of government officials and an elected -- or appointed experts in various fields from all backgrounds. there were many of us, 32, and we went all over the country for two years. i can tell you that reaching consensus was tough, but we listened and we debated and we came to trust. even the most liberal and conservatives among us knew and each of us that -- that each of husband the best interest of

children at our heart. that was not in dispute. while meeting in williamsburg, virginia, which is is where we happened to be meeting at the time, i had to leave for an important senate vote on iraq. i handed over the gavel to our most conservative republican member. someone in whom i had trust. that shocked people, but it helped on the consensus. in the end, we were proud, madam president, to vote 32-0 in support of the legislation that we put forward, and our policy statement as a whole. and included bold policies, it included the creation of a new refundable child tax credit for the first time, and a major

expansion of the earned income tax credit, which has lifted millions of american families out of poverty. it worked because we listened to one another, respected one another, and we wanted to come to an agreement. it was clear, it was obvious, and there it was, 32-0, unbelievable. but it happened. is that possible these days? my answer is yes. and i believe that we can see that the spirit again as we addressed the future of the bipartisan children's health insurance program, chip, the way it's known, it currently provides health care to 8.3 million children and pregnant women nationwide, and 40,000 of those are in west virginia. chip is so important to me

because it offers health care which is tailored to children. to wit, it has both mental and dental health care tailored to children. it is in fact better coverage than the affordable care act provides children. from those early days at vista i have seen the devastating toll that a lack of medical care can extract from a child's well-being and their health, their self-esteem, particularly their self-esteem and even their will to succeed. many of you also know the names and faces of children who have gone without access to proper health care and those are who we fight for. that is why chip has always been a bipartisan effort, driven by the needs of real kids and their families. senators grassley and hatch were instrumental in its creation over a period of a couple of

years, long arguments, and they continue to be strong advocates. the bipartisan chip program has opened doors for millions who desperately needed to get into a doctor's office and had never been able to do so and now are able to do so. but a warning -- every door that chip opened will be closed if -- unless we can agree to carry chip funding past mid-2015 and i don't know what the protects for that are, all i know is if they aren't done properly, those doors close, those kids had access to doctors but they don't anymore. and that's unconscionable to me. you have to look at the faces of those children in your own states and think about that.

it is those individual faces that i remember. remembering for whom we work is paramount. when any corporate c.e.o. comes to my office, i show them apprized birthday gift from my four children, our four children -- my wife is here. a picture of a hardworking coalminer whose face is honest but hurting, and very proud. that picture means so much to me because it embodies the spirit of those i am here to serve. and silently reminds us of why we must work towards a common ground, why this is not about democrats and republicans, but it's about the people that we're here to serve, bringing different viewpoints to what that means.

senator mike enzi and i are not on the same side of every vote, to put it mildly, but we're very, very good friends. a friendship that was made years ago when i was serving on the president's coal commission and he was the mayor of gillette, wyoming. going slightly crazy trying to build houses fast enough for all the people moving in there to to -- through coal. he also had sideburns. i say that off record. on a gray day in january, 2006, west virginia was frozen in disbelief when we learned that 12 trapped miners were killed in sago mine, a mine in the north central part of the state. in the days that followed as we struggled to make sense of what had happened, senators enzi and senator isakson joined senator

kennedy, senator manchin and myself in west virginia. they, the first two, did not merely visit. they came to understand. they came to learn. they came to share in the grief and to offer their support to the community. and you could tell that in their faces. together out of tragedy and because they were members of the health and education committee, labor, we forged a compromise on mine safety legislation that brought about, frankly, the prongest safety improvements in a generation -- strongest safety improvements in a generation. huge for us. only 16 states mine coal but we're one of them. to this day, senator isakson carries a picture of one of the sago miners. it is not in the wallet that he's carrying today, it's in

the other wallet that's back in atlanta, i don't care where it is, that picture is in his wallet every single day. we knew that as public officials, compromising and really leading meant governing, which is why we were there. answering the needs of our country is our responsibility, and we do that best when we work shoulder to shoulder. it was working shoulder to shoulder when we set our country on a path to future innovation. a few years ago america's domination in our innovation, our inventions and creative problem solving was eroding, and we all knew it. we needed to act. we needed to reinvigorate our leadership in those areas and keep our jobs and our future more secure. we answered that call with the bipartisan compromise that delivered the america competes

reauthorization act. i will never forget that. this legislation made historic investments in science, basic research, and science, technology, engineering and math education. senator kay bailey hutchison, who preceded john thune on the commerce committee, senator alexander, and i sought unanimous consent to get the bill passed because we thought we'd worked out the details pretty well. and do it prior to the recess. therefore we had to do it by unanimous consent. but there were five objections holding the bill still. instead of retreating to party corners, and pointing fingers, we compromised right on that center aisle right there next to senator collins, and we wandered up and down, we added a little money, took a little

money off, mostly took a billion dollars off, we removed a couple of programs that weren't absolutely necessary to satisfy kay bailey or lamar alexander, and we had ourselves a $44 billion bill over five years on which we agreed. we didn't have to have a vote. senator hutchinson, senator alexandertain arabously worked to clear the holes. it was -- tenaciously worked to clear the holes. it was just beautiful. a $44 billion program to reinvigorate our nation cerbrally and productively. together together we passed a bill to catapult us to success. reaching moments like those requires persistence. it demands collaboration, it demands trust and compromise, and it is so worth it.

i'm driven by the process of creating policy. i love doing that. it's grind being, it's intense, it can be frustrating and sometimes heartbreaking -- often heartbreaking. but when we accomplish something that is maintainingful to the people who have trusted us to represent them, there is no greater reward. we have to know who and what we must fight for in our work and in our own personal views. we have to know and understand those who will benefit, those who will lose, and we have to be ready for it to take a long time, much longer than we thought; sometimes five years, sometimes ten years. that makes no difference. you keep at it. you don't let go of it. because if you keep at it, somewhere along the way, some combination of senators is going to say, yeah, that's okay and then we get ourselves a bill. and also we keep in our souls

the faces again of the people that we try to help. the people who, in my case, are all too often left behind. the senate must face serious social and policy issues, from health care to cybersecurity, caring for veterans coming home, building up our infrastructure, making our economy work for everyone. these are our core responsibilities. i'm proud that we've made some measure of progress. and while we seem right knew to be at an impasse, i know that the senate will rise to the mission of addressing our biggest issues at some point and in some way, and it will happen. as a governing boated, we must not allow recent failures to take root, to mean too much to us. we must not be focused on episodic "gotcha" issues rather than working to address broader, more systemic problem-solving.

no one else is going to step in to do this if we doovment the trut--if we don't. the truth was on full display a few weeks ago when the senate refused to move forward on another issue. i have taken very seriously my 14 years on the intelligence committee as a member and as chairman. because the global threats we face increase daily as the world becomes more connected, we depend on the highly trained professionals at n.s.a. to zero in on those threats. there's really only 22 of them that make sort of final decisions. they're highly trained. they've taken the oath of office to protect our nation. now, i don't think that we have any excuse to outsource our

intelligence work to telecommunication firms. i work on the commerce committee. i've seen what the telecommunication companies do when they can get away with it. you know, everything from cramming to -- just all kinds of not very nice things. it's the job of government to address this issue. the private sector and free market alone cannot solve those kinds of problems -- and should not. that is a government responsibility. being carried out, i might say, with great success. a lot of people say, oh, well what if? but the fact of the matter is, nobody has ever been able to show me somebody whose privacy has been, you know, influenced or broken into by the n.s.a.

you know, good, hardworking people can be destroyed by circumstances beyond their control. it is our job not to let that happen. it is our job to help, to give everyone a fair shot. to say that, of course, is much easier to say than to do. but that is our charge. too many children come into a world where circumstances preclude the opportunities that they should have. we cannot discount the many challenges our society still faces. it's unconscionable, madam president, in it a country like ours that people go -- in a country like ours that people go without health care or go hungry or have no place to call "home." when shareholders in the free market cannot or will not solve our problems, it's government's responsibility to step in every time. people can decry government all

they want, but we're here for a reason. when private companies decide there isn't enough profit to provide internet to rural areas, then we step in and we expand broadband, allowing the e-rate to go fathe farther and farther. it now covers, i think, 97% of all schools in the country. or maybe the private sector decides they can't make enough by insuring the sickest of our children. we must act. that is our core mission. it's who we are as an institution. it's who we must always be. we have worked to give children a fair shot through the e-rate program, which introduces even the most rural classrooms and smallest libraries to the internet, access to research, but it gives every child the key to unlock their potential. it doesn't mean they will, but

it means they can. we know health care is fundamental to a fair shot as well. we can't learn or keep a job if we are sick. but providing that care hasn't always been as profitable as some companies would like. so we make sure millions of americans could have the dignity of access to health care under the affordable care act. my friend sam is one of the faces i will never forget. when he was battling childhood leukemia and hit his lifetime insurance cap -- a technical term with a savage consequence -- his parents' insurance company walked away from this courageous little fighter. his parents, both schoolteachers, were left with heartwrenching decisions, like

getting divorced, which they considered, so sam could qualify for medicaid. well, in the end, it didn't matter. sam lost his battle with cancer. but today, under the affordable care act, we have made sure that no insurance companies could abandon someone like sam when they need help the most. health care reform won't ever take away the crushing agony of parents with sick kids, but heartbreaking situations like sam drove us to say "no more," and we changed the law. parents deserve to focus every bit of their energy fighting for their kids in every way, not fighting profit-obsessed insurance companies. so we did the right thing, madam president. we did the right thing. government also did the right thing when i fought for what i thought my life depended on it,

because it did, to pass the coal act of 1992, long-forgotten. we had to step in and stop some coal companies from walking away from benefits which they had promised, by contract, to retired coal miners and their widows, folks who are mostly in their 70's and 80's. passing the coal act was enormously important to our country. it not only prevented in absolute terms a national coal strike in 1993, but it delivered on the promise of lifetime health benefits earned by 200,000 retired coal miners and their widows. they would not have been taken care of if those companies had had their way. nor can we rely on the private sector alone to take care of our veterans. it's government's duty to provide the health care they earn. we do this thri through

community-based clinics and improved services for ptsd, brain injuries and family support. it is expensive. bob portman and i sort of wanted to pass a bill which would cause the military, the department of defense, give all people entering the military mental health screening, not when they came back from iraq or afghanistan or somewhere else but before they went in, and then on an annual basis do that again to build a database, to make sure we knew that we could take care of them better when they came home. we rightly asked the government to take on some of society's most fundamental needs. l when i founded -- when i founded emmons, it was a community of hardworking people on their own trying to survive. the free market had not made madessured thasurethat communitd

good roads or school buses or any clean drinking water or safe jobs, but from my point of view they deserved all of those. they deserved to have their shot. working together to deliver on the needs of places like emmonds speaks to our core human connection and to an aspiration for the greater good. that is what drove me into public service. it's not something i could help. i just had to -- i had to do it, to help people with everything that i have. every individual in every community like emmonds deserves to have public officials who will fight the big fights and the personal ones, the case work, extending a hand on those

personal challenges is incredibly meaningful work. our constituents face these heights with herculean courage but not always the resources to solve the problems in front of them. people like the 8-year-old who needed a bone marrow transplant, a procedure that in 1990 was considered experimental. our office intervened. we helped that boy get that transplant, and he's still with us today. as a senator, you take on those fights with the same vigor as any policy or ideological deba debate, and you are equally proud when you win and you equally hurt when you lose. when i came to west virginia 50 years ago, i was searching for a clear purpose for my life's work. i wanted the work to be really

hard, and what i got was an opportunity to work really hard, along with a real and utterly spiritual sense of mission. this work demands and deserves nothing less than everything that we have to give. i will miss the senate. some days i don't want to leave, but it's time. which brings me to some profoundly important notes of gratitude. to my colleagues, i say "thank you." i have mentioned some -- i could mention so many. you're dedicated, you're brilliant, and you're public servants. i love you for putting up, which have to, particularly with the way elections are these days. i respect you for it so much.

thank you for fighting alongside me. thank you for challenging me. to my staff, a senator is really nothing without his staff -- or her staff. and there is not a more committed, talented, and deeply passionate staff in the united states senate. to my starvetion you liv staff,r breathe your work every day. you inspire me with your endless capacity for addressing injustice and for fighting for people who need you and come to you in need. you never turned a single west virginian away. i glory in my gratitude to you. to my family who has sacrificed so much, i thank you. i have been selfish in my

devotion to my work, and i have been vastly inept in balancing family and work. public service is not encouraging of balance. sharon, you are everything, an extraordinary mother, a remarkable businesswoman, and you are a public servant. you have been a visionary in public broadcasting. our entire nation to indebted to your efforts to educate and inform us. the impact that you continue to make on public life is truly remarkable. any achievement i am proud of i share with you eternally. our children, john, valerie, charles and justin, have all

been very thoughtful and endlessly supportive in my absences, and my grandchildren bring me so much joy and i hope to see a whole lot more of them. and to west virginia, thank you for placing your faith in me. i know it was hard at first. and giving me the greatest reward: the chance to fight for meaningful and lasting opportunity for those who are too often forgotten but absolutelily -- absolutely deserve the best. my fellow west virginians, i am forever inspired by you and i am forever transformed by you. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor.

>> senate majority leader harry reid a tribute to senator rockefeller in remarks to from the senate floor and the senate floor and we talked about retiring senator carl levin of michigan who is leaving after more than 30 years in congress. this is 20 minutes -- the national labor relations board and ellen dudley williams to be a member of the department of energy. i'm happy to be here today to talk about a couple of my friends, i should say the senate's friends. i have received a lot of

friends, gifts while i have been here. my colleagues over the years have given me things while i have been here in the senate, but one gift stands out really strongly in my mind. into my desk not far from -- in my desk not far from here, i have a big painting. it's a very famous from the national portrait gallery of mark twain. mark twain, i tell people, was born in nevada, which was true. samuel clemmens wasn't. he was choans -- chosen as secretary of nevada and he told his younger brother samuel -- sorry, mr. president. he told his younger brother, come west and i'll find you a

job. he had been fighting, which he didn't like, in the civil war. so he came west with his brother. but his brother couldn't find him a job, so he bummed around for quite awhile. and without belaboring the story too long, the fact is, mr. president, that mark twain finally went up to virginia city, which was booming at the time, went to the territorial enterprise newspaper and got a job as a reporter. and that was his first writing that he had done. and that's where he started his fame. he would have stayed in nevada longer but someone challenged him to a dual for some of the things he wrote. being the smart man he was, he didn't want the dual, so he left to town, went to california where he wrote two books, his

experiences bumming around nevada until he found a job. these were bestsellers. these were great books. so, the point of the story, though, he went to virginia city as samuel clemmons and took the name mark twain. that's where the name came from. so this means a lot. it's a story that i tell many times. people come to my office. so carl levin, the wonderful, kind, thoughtful man that he is, said can i come and see you? i said sure. and he brought with me, i guess it's the most -- one of the rare double signatures of samuel

clemmons. there may be others, i never heard of one. this was at a club in hannibal, missouri. mark twain in 1902 knew how famous he was so he signed samuel clemmons, mark twain. he didn't want anybody else's name there. he wanted his. so that's the gift that he gave me. and that was so fitting. it fits my office perfectly and it means a lot to me. carl levin brought a handwritten note. i got this at an auction ten years ago not knowing why. it just dawned on me. best new year, carl. that was so nice of him to do

that. i just -- it's hard for me to explain my appreciation but i'm trying to do that by outlining here what a wonderful human being carl levin is. what he did for me is an example of who carl levin is, how he thinks of people. he remembered the story that i told him about mark twain, and he said, i'm sure to himself, i got this thing i got ten years ago. i'll just give it to the senator as a friend. so he gave me that plaque just because that's how he is. he's always been attentive to the interests of the people of michigan and our country. he's the longest-serving senator in the history of the state of michigan. 36 years. his legislative accomplishments

are significant. i would say they're unmatched by almost anyone he stood his glownd on controversial issues, and that is an understatement. he fought to give americans, average americans a fair shot at what's going on in the world. he's always spoken with a clear voice, speaking for justice, equality and fairness. mr. president, if you want something done that is foolproof, the presiding officer is a lawyer, i'm a lawyer, but i'm not sure i would be the best person if you gave me a document to look it over to make sure that there were -- in that document, in that was what you wanted in it, but carl levin, that's who you'd want. i call him my nit-picker. he is so good at making sure everything is right, every i is dotted, every t is crossed. bring in carl levin if you have something that you really need someone to look at and think it

through. he was a prominent lawyer as was his dad in michigan. his dad served as a member of the michigan corrections commission. after graduating from high school, his father worked in new york. carl levin knew how to work with his hands but followed in his father's footsteps. he attended college at swargt more, got a bachelor of arts degree there and attended harvard law school and received his juris doctorate at harvard. he practiced in the private sector for awhile. he began his public career as the first general counsel for the michigan civil rights commison. he was elected in 1968, the

detroit city council, and he served there until 1977. he was elected to the senate in 1978. he has functioned in this body as a level-headed mediator who's guided the protection of the people of michigan and our country. in the past 36 years carl has cast over 12,000 votes. some of those votes were hard and not always popular, but they were carl levin votes. he did what he thought was right. when general motors and chrysler in the last few years faced potential collapse, he recognized that their bankruptcies would devastate the people of michigan and have a detrimental effect -- and that is a gross understatement -- to this country. he pressed the incoming obama administration to support the companies with loans. the hew and cry of people that opposed that, saying that is the wrong thing to do, levin is wrong, obama is wrong, but,

mr. president, they were right. look what it has done to energize, revitalize the state of michigan. the whole detroit metropolitan area and our country. tens of thousands of new jobs as a result of his advocacy. as i said, it wasn't a popular position at the time, but carl knew what was good for michigan and good for our country, and he's been vindicated 100 times over. carl's been chairman of the senate permanent subcommittee on investigations for ten years. during that period of time, he's done some unusually important things for our country through this committee. corporate money laundering, 1999. he delved into that very deeply. carl levin is not a headline hunter. carl levin is a substantive

legislator. he could have held a lot more hearings but he held them about every six months because he wanted his hearings to be carl levin hearings whereas i repeat, every i was dotted, every t was crossed, they were very, very powerful hearings. gasoline price manipulation, enron scandal, he delved into that very deeply. misconduct in the united nations oil program, tax haven banks and offshore corporate tax evasion. he's talked about that and talked about that. notable legislation as a result of the work he's done: wall street reform, consumer protection act, credit card act, patriot act. carl levin is really a very fine legislator. he fought for wall street reform when others were afraid to do so and helped restore the broken financial system and held powerful institutions accountable for their actions. carl's persistence earned him a slot in "time" magazine's best

legislators, best united states senators. they called him the bird doger. mr. president, that's what he is. put him on an issue, and he will come back with the prey. he is very good. he never stops. he's a sharp overseer of the united states defense policy. he has spent his entire career promoting defense policy that protects america's interests home and abroad while safeguarding the men and women who serve. he's the chair of the senate defense committee, and during the nation's most trying diplomatic times, he has done a remarkable job to make sure that the military is protected. but even though he was chair of this big, powerful committee, defense committee, he felt so strongly and he foresaw what aferlt us didn't see, mr. president -- what a lot of us didn't see, mr. president.

he saw the disaster that would accompany an invasion in iraq. accordingly he talked about how bad it would be and voted against it. carl levin was right and a lot of us were wrong. i said before on this senate floor, of all the votes that i cast during the time that i've been in government, the worst was voting for that iraq war. but i did. carl levin didn't. for all of his accomplishments in congress, his greatest achievements reside in his home. carl and his wife of over 50 years, barbara, have three beautiful drawrts, -- daughters: kate, laura and erica. as carl retires from the senate, i know he's going to cherish the time he's going to spend with his family. but also carl and i have had a

long, long ongoing conversation. he and his brother sandy own about 100 acres. they have had it for a long, long time. carl levin is not a man of wealth but he and his brother bought this 100 acres. it has nothing on it but trees. he calls it his tree farm, and he's shown me pictures of this. i have had -- i haven't seen it lately, but i have had for 20 years -- 15, 20 years, a hat he gave me, green, baseball type cap that says tree farm on it. i used to tell him i still have that cap, and i have still got that cap, carl. he'll be missed here in washington. he'll be missed in the senate. by all of us, but he'll be missed more by his older brother sandy, who is a ranking member on the ways and means committee in the house. they have served together in congress for 32 years.

i've said this on the floor before, i'll say it again -- i remember carl levin for a lot of things. i was in the house. i came over to visit with him. i was thinking about running for the senate. i said carl, you know, i came to the house with your brother sandy. he looked up at me. he said sandy, you know, is not only my brother, he's my best friend. that speaks well of the person that carl levin is. it's really been a privilege and honor to serve with carl. i'll miss him so very, very much. i'll miss having somebody to take the difficult issues to him to get his view as to what we should do, how we should handle it. his voice will be missed here in the senate. i congratulate him on his comparable career in the senate senate -- incomparable career in the senate. i wish him the very best. mr. president, i'd like to say a

few other words here. i know there are others who want to speak, but i want to make sure that there is a separate place in the record for what i'm going to say now. i ask consent that be the case. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, it's said that you don't choose your family, and that's true. we are born into our family. we have no way to determine the family we are born into. yet, as a 27-year-old, jay rockefeller chose to make the people of west virginia his family. how did that happen? how did jay rockefeller, born in new york to one of the most famous american families, one of the great dynasties in the history of this country, end up in west virginia? he was a student at harvard, undergraduate. and he decided that he didn't like some of the things harvard

was doing, and so he left. he dropped out of school and went to japan. he spent three years in japan. he became an interpreter. he knows japanese -- the japanese language extremely well. he loves the japanese people today. he started out at harvard, came back, as i indicated. after his junior year, he left for japan. he was there three years. he came home, returned to harvard, finished his degree. jay rockefeller as a 27-year-old could have done anything, gone anyplace, gotten any education, started any business, or he could have sat around at a home on one of the beaches around the world and just done nothing, but that is not jay rockefeller. he wanted to do something.

he didn't know what he wanted to do. this rockefeller wanted to do something that was different. a friend of his published here for many years a magazine called "the washington monthly," a guy named pete peters. he was a man about town. everybody liked him very, very much. but he was very close to jay rockefeller. so jay talked to him one day, trying to find what he should do in life. here he was, one of the wealthiest men in america, a harvard degree. what should i do? and pete peters told him what you should do is go someplace and work with poor people. where should i go? why not west virginia? west virginia? west virginia. so he joined americorps as a

vista volunteer. he moved to a small mining community of emmons, west virginia. that was in 1964. this man of means, this man of stature, this man of notoriety went to this small little town in west virginia. it wasn't easy for jay rockefeller to suddenly find himself in a setting that he had never imagined. the first six months he was there, he could hardly get anyone to talk to him. he is kind of an intimidating man. his name is rockefeller, and he is 6'7". but eventually, his goodness came through. the people in emmons, west virginia, started talking to him, and they really liked the man. but from 1964 when he moved there, he knew that he wanted to

identify with poor people, and that's what he's done since 1964. in 1966, he was elected to the west virginia house of delegates assembly. in 1968, he was chosen to serve as secretary of state for the state of west virginia. he then became president of a university in west virginia, westland college. served there for three years. he then was twice elected governor of the state of west virginia. he served from 1976-1984. governor rockefeller became senator rockefeller in 1985. from the time he first stepped into -- onto the senate floor, he made it clear he was here for one reason -- to fight for the people of west virginia. senator rockefeller fought to provide his constituents with health care. he was an architect of chip, child health program.

it's an insurance program that is so important. children's health insurance program, one of the most important health initiatives in american history for kids. he fought for medicaid for half a million west virginians but millions and millions of americans. a senior member of the committee on finance and chairman of the commerce committee, chair of the intelligence committee. i mean, what a remarkable career he's had. he has fought very hard to protect the american people from president bush's efforts to privatize social security. he's protected retirement disability benefits by doing that for millions and millions of americans. his efforts to help west virginia haven't been confined to this building. as the senior senator from west virginia, this big man of, i

repeat, 6'7", with a very long reach, has used that reach to bring jobs to his home state, as governor and as senator. because of his recruiting, there are thousands and thousands of jobs in west virginia employed at the toyota factory, and the kureha plant in a town called bell. thousands and thousands of jobs. die monday electric, nipon thermostat, n.g.k. spark plugs, all companies senator rockefeller helped bring to west virginia. the people of west virginia have been blessed, mr. president, to have senator jay rockefeller as a family member for the last 50 years. they have been blessed to to haa person of his integrity and tenacity looking out for them in the senate. my respect for jay rockefeller is unlimited. he has been my colleague for the entire time i have been in the

congress, 32 years. now as his time in the senate comes to an end, he will be sorely missed. i'm sure jay's looking forward to spending more time with sharon, this wonderful, wonderful woman. by the way, whose father was a united states senator. his children, john, valerie, charles and justin. he has six grandchildren. i so admire this good man. i congratulate him on a very distinguished career, including five terms in the united states senate, two terms as a governor. i wish him the very best in >> republican senator tom coburn is leaving the senate and the middle of his second term after being diagnosed with prostate cancer for the second time. he came to congress in 1995 to serve the oklahoma second

conditional district and to be a campaign prize to serve no more than three consecutive terms. he was later elected to the senate in 2004. his farewell address is followed by tributes from his colleagues. >> i will try to put in context some of my feelings and thoughts that the great privilege has been granted to me by the people

of oklahoma. we hear a lot of speeches in this place elected,mbers who are it gets reflected on us. nothing could be further from the truth. because the thing that really makes this place operate is the people that worked with us, the people that support us, the people that help guide us. >> would you please take your conversations outside. [gavel] the senate will come to order. >> the people behind the scenes who are both brilliant and committed and dedicated to the founding principles of this country. them working for us. and yet they are really recognized.

whether our a compass mr. big or small, those accomplishments come through the work efforts and labors of those that join with us as we come here to try to make a difference. i first wanted to say that there are a lot of people i need to say thank you to. from our parliamentarian, elizabeth, to all the staff that works here in the senate people who worked gao.wonderful people.

crf's, the ig's ledge council, they have written thousands i mean literally thousands of amendments for me. they are probably going to have some really mixed feelings. about my departure. and then i have personal staff. one of which i found to be a brilliant person.

his name is roland foster. there is not anything he has ever forgotten. you can ask him anything. he will find it. he knows it. and so i mention him -- i have hundreds of others who equally i could speak about from my former chief of staff, mike schwartz, who passed away from lou to those in mye office and staff that each no what a difference. they made and it did.

we are only able to function because of all the people that enable us to do that. with those thank you's, i actually wanted to move to really a different topic. uh - is believing in our country. people wherever i go we do not have one problem we cannot solve.

there is nothing too big for us, they are all solvable. that is mye carpern, tom carver -- with online security. he has been a phenomenal chairman. he is not in my party. we don't agree on everything. on the one thing we agreed was we were going to work together to solve problems. and we have. we did not solve them all. but i would suggest if you look at what has come through this place even and this dysfunctional place at this time, you will see more coming out of his leadership than any

other pieces of legislation. and why is that? it's because it was not about him. it was not about me. it was about solving the problems our country. through theyou years who i have offended i truly apologize. and i think none of that was intended. because i actually see things different. see,

founders were , farutely brilliant smarter than us. i believe the enumerated powers meant something. they were meant to protect us against what history says always happens to a republic. they have all died. they have all died. is, we what will happen with us?

can we cheat history? better thanmething has been done in the past? i honestly believe we can. but i don't believe we can if we continue to ignore the wisdom of our founding documents. so, when i have offended, i believe it's been on the basis of my belief in article one, section a, i think we can stuff that genie back into the bottle. e pluribus unum out of many, one.

one unless you have guaranteed the liberty of the many. and when we ignore what the constitution gave us as a guideline, to protect the individual liberties, to limit the size and scope of the federal government so that the benefit of freedom and liberty can be expressed all across this , that's when we get back to solving our problems. i think about my father. he had a fifth-grade education.

believer in our country. he would not recognize it today. the loss of freedom, by the have imposed arrogance of an all too powerful central government ignoring the wisdom and writings of our founders that said above all we must protect the liberty of the individual and recognize that liberty is a god-given right. my criticism is not directed personally. believeause i truly

thanfreedom gains us more anything we can plan a peer. i know not everybody agrees with me but the one thing i do know is our founders agreed with me. they had studied this process before. they knew what happens when you dominate from a central government. it does not mean intentions are bad. the intentions are great. the motivations of people in this body are wonderful. but the perspective on how we do it and what the long-term consequences of our we do it really do matter. today we see ourselves with a president we need to be supporting and praying for with an economy that is not doing

what it could be doing and we ,eed to be asking the question why? is there a fundamental reason? and there is. involved in the decision-making in the economy in this country that inhibits the flow of capital to the best return which inhibits the growth of wealth which leaves us at a standard of living the same as what we had in 1988. that's where we are. and yet it does not have to be that way. i'm going to read you some things you have all heard before. but they are were three reading. with all these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable than among of us

these are life, liberty, liberty -- and the pursuit of happiness. sayok at legislation and how does that have an impact on those things? too often, it has a negative impact. to secure these rights governments are instituted among men driving the just powers from the consent of the government. that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. know where we are on that continuum but i know we are not where we were intending to be in the vision of our founders. and we are suffering the matter where you are in this country as a consequence of it. we established a constitution to try to protect those rights. and delineate those rights.

their the in limitation of the government and outline the rights of the to do -- of each individual citizen upon which the government shall not infringe. what comes out of this body and this congress every day to my chagrin infringes those guaranteed rights. senate takesof the the same of. sameoath and this is where i defer to some of my colleagues. let me read it to you. i think it is part of our problem. i do solemnly swear and affirm that i will support and defend the constitution of united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that i will bear true faith

same, thatnce to the i take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and i will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office of which i'm about to enter, so help me god. your state is not mentioned one time in that oath. protectle goal is to the united states of america, its constitution, and is liberties. benefits to provide for your state. that is where we differ. that's where my conflict with my college has come. it is nice to be able to do things for your state but that is not our charge. our charges protect the future of our country by upholding the constitution and insuring the liberties are guaranteed and

preserve. the magic number in the senate is not 60. the number of senators needed and it's not 51. a majority. the most important number in the senate is. one one senator. that's how it was set up. that's how our founders designed it. with endless amounts of responsibility. because the senate has a set of rules or at least did that gives these individual member the power needed to advance, change, or stop legislation. and that's a tool that has to be meant toward -- mentored and refined and wise in its

application. passed the bills that the senate never receive a vote. we all know that. a vast majority of the bills. approved by unanimous consent. it just takes a single senator to withhold consent to stop most legislation. there are many other rules and procedures a member can use. asy are often referred to arcane because they are rarely is that they are not arcane. they were there to secure liberty and we do follow history and don't fail. every senator has the power to introduce legislation and, until

recently, offer amendments. noticing the senator should be allowed to decide what the rights of another senator should be. that is tyranny. it has nothing to do with the history and classics of the senate. to exercise the rights we have been entrusted with, we must respect the rights of others. true power of our constitution. that's also the true power of the senate. it's what binds our nation. together and it's what's needed to make the senate work properly again. the senate was designed uniquely to force compromise. not to force gridlock.

to force compromise. senator had the power to stop everything for the first hundred years. but it didn't. because compromise was a goal. our founders understood that there were many differences between the states, both in size, geography, economy, and opinions. they united the states as one country based upon the premise that the many are more powerful than the one. as senators, we have to follow this example. i have not always done that, i admit that freely to you. i should have. as senators, we must follow the examples, stamp or principles that working to find areas of

agreement were compromise can be found to unite and move our country forward. carperague, senator has my admiration because he has worked tirelessly the last two years to try to a compass that. death to try to accomplish that. not all the powers of the senators are exercised on the senate floor for each member of the senate has a unique role to participate and practice oversight to hold the government accountable. that's part of our duties. except most often, that is the part of our duties that is most ignored. to know how to reach a destination, you must first know where you are. without oversight, effective, vigorous, oversight, you will

never solve anything. cannot write a bill to fix an agency. unless you have an understanding of the problem. you can only know this by conducting oversight, asking the tough questions, holding the bureaucrats accountable, find out what works and what does effective oversight is an effective tool to expose overreach and wasteful spending, but it also markedly exposes where we lose our liberty. and our essential freedoms. now, i have had some time through the years, taken some criticism, and it is opinion, i agree.