new book "be right brothersdabv -- "the wright brothers." david: wilbur was a genius. horrible was very bright and clever mechanically but the-- o rville was very brave and clever mechanically but did not have the reach of mind that wilbur did. they love to music, they love books. hawthorne was orville's favorite writer. kathryn lopez are the catherine loved sir walter scott. here are the people living in this house in ohio with no running water or indoor plumbing or electricity and they are giving a bust of a great english

with rajoy and to her sister for her birthday present. there is a lot of hope-- literary figure two fair sister for her birthday present there is a lot of hope in that. we're going to achieve this big idea. and nothing was going to stop them. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a." >> in his weekly address president obama talked about his support for the usa freedom act. senator deb fischer has the republican address talking about the importance of authorization for defense programs. president obama: hello, everybody. as president and commander-in-chief my greatest responsibility is the safety of the american people. in the fight against terrorists,

we need to use every effective tool to defend security and protect the freedoms and civil liberties enshrined in the constitution. but tomorrow, sunday, at midnight, important tools will inspire because congress has not renewed them. want to be clear about what this means. today when investigating terrorist networks national security professionals can seek a court order to obtain business records. law enforcement officers can seek a roving wiretap to keep up with terrorists when they switch cell phones. we can seek a wiretap on so-called lone wolves, suspected terrorists not tied to a group. these tools are not controversial. since 9/11 they have been several times. the fbi director -- renewed

several times. the fbi director says that they are a central. if congress -- essential. if congress does not act by midnight mutuals away. the the tools go -- the tools go away. the u.s. freedom act also ends the metadata collection program" in place new reforms. the government will no longer hold the records. telephone providers will. it also provides more transparency to help build confidence among the american people that your privacy and civil liberties are being protected. if congress does not act by tomorrow at midnight, these reforms will be in jeopardy as well. it does not have to be this way. the u.s. freedom act reflects ideals from policy experts and national security experts. it passed the house of

representatives with overwhelming bipartisan support, republicans and democrats. that does not happen very often. a majority of the senate voted to move it forward. so what is the problem? a small group of senators is standing in the way. and unfortunately some folks trying to use the debate to score political points. this should not and cannot be about politics. this is a matter of national security. terrorists like national security and isil will not stop plotting against us tomorrow and we should not surrender mutuals that keep us safe. it would be irresponsible, it would be reckless. today i am calling on americans to join me with speaking in one voice to the senate. politics aside" national security first. pass -- put politics aside and put national security first.

past the u.s. freedom act. senator fischer: hello, i am senator deb fischer and i have the honor of representing the great state of nebraska in the u.s. senate. for generations the military has answered the call to protect freedom at home and interests around the world. these service members are men and women of uncommon courage. from the shores of normandy to the fields of korea and beyond, america's sons and daughters have never wavered in defense of liberty, both as a fighting force and as a force for good. because of their sacrifice, the 20th century was the american century. but our work is far from done. every generation faces evil in every generation has been called upon to stop -- eagle and every generation has been called upon to step forward and protect our way of life.

i believe the federal government has no higher priority than protecting the american people in an increasingly dangerous world. was this responsibility in mind, the senate will soon consider the annual bill to authorize funding and set policy for the military, known as the national defense authorization act or in the aa. i am honored to serve on the senate armed services committee and i was honored to contribute to this bipartisan legislation overwhelmingly approved earlier this month. this bill takes a commonsense approach. it cuts spending from programs that have been delayed or failed to perform and redirects the revenue to meet the critical needs of our war fighters. in all, this year's ndasa fines $10 millio -- finds $10

million. it also invests in the future of our defense, setting aside $400 million to ensure troops maintain superiority on the battlefield. we are also addressing issues like the growing bureaucracy at the pentagon. our military is getting smaller book on that unit should not bear these costs alone. this bill targets real reductions for headquarter and management staff as well. it would take steps for real reforms to the acquisitions systems. the way the military purchases weapons and equipment to prevent wasteful spending. it is no secret -- we live in a very dangerous world. as chairman of the subcommittee on emerging threats, i am deeply concerned by growing instability, particularly in the middle east, where violence

continues to consume iraq and syria. from iran's nuclear ambitions to china's territorial expansion rupture's belligerence, and the growing -- russia's deliverance and the growing threat of the islamic state. this underscores the importance of providing for our military a strong and capable defense. president reagan said it best with his principle of peace through strength. it remains as true today as it was 35 years ago. but as we all know, sometimes deterrence is not enough and americans are called to act. providing the men and women of our military with the training and resources that they need. increases their ability to complete the assigned mission and safely return home.

unfortunately, too many of our service members pay the ultimate sacrifice. from natural disasters to war-torn nations, the united states has rapidly deployed to help those facing danger. this past month, one of our own nebraskans gave his life while searching for victims of the massive earthquake in nepal. captain dustin of wilcox nebraska was a marine corps helicopter pilot who flew that helicopter that disappeared during the disaster relief effort following the earthquake. by forging into danger to rescue strangers in a distant land, the captain and his fellow marines represented the ideals of our nation personified our mission as a force for good in the world.

there are countless stories like this from americans all across our country, brave men and women that serve the nation every day over the world. our men and women in uniform inspire me. because of their courage and sacrifice, i believe in a brighter future for our children and our grandchildren. there can be another american century. with the right leadership in the proper resources,-- and the proper resources, the united states military will continue to lead the way. may god bless our troops, their families, and our great nation. thank you for listening. >> the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress with color photos of every senate and house member close contact --. information and twitter hand les.

a look at congressional committees, the cabinet and donors. order your copy today. it is $13.95 plus shipping and handling through the c-span store at c-span.org. >> certain provisions of the patriot act expire sunday at midnight including authorization of the nsa data collection program. the senate meets tomorrow to resume debate on the house passed usa freedom act which extends some provisions while making changes to the access to phone data. the bill was voted on in the senate last week but fell three votes short. jeff sessions was among those that voted against the measure. this is what he had to say from the senate floor. senator sessions: mr. president we will be talking about the patriot act, the u.s. freedom act which has been offered.

i think it is an important issue. i believe the patriot act provides a critical tool that has helped protect america. i believe it does so without any infringement on constitutional rights. have to compromise rights or balance rights against the threats. maybe sometimes we would have to do that. but when we wrote the patriot act in the judiciary committee of which i'm a member, senator leahy is a strong libertarian senator hatch is a strong libertarian. senator hatch was chairman, senator leahy was ranking member. i've been a federal prosecutor for 15 years. people like jon kyl and dianne feinstein and so many others worked on it for months. it wasn't passed in a few days without thought. people talked about it. it was on the radio and television. we got letters. we had hearings with professors

and constitutional scholars and law enforcement officers, some public and some classified briefings. and we tried to write a bill, and i believe did that provided the federal government an expedited method to access phone call data, metadata as it's called under section 215 of the act. and this data has no content no phone communications at all. it's just phone numbers even less than you get on your telephone bill when it comes to you in the mail every month. that data is maintained at the telephone companies maintained in their records. and everybody that makes a phone call should know that, does know that if they're alert to the world. and so that record is not your personal record.

that record is the telephone company's record. now, if you have documents at home, if you have records in your desk, if you have records anywhere in your house, if you have a gun or drugs that are illegal in your house nobody can come in that house can't go into your car can't go into your glove compartment or trunk without a court order because that's in your custody and you have a right under the fourth amendment to have privacy in that. and the law enforcement officer has to get a court order backed up by facts before they can breach that fourth amendment. of course the fourth amendment simply says that your right to private property is -- your right is against unreasonable search and seizures. it doesn't say the government can never conduct a search. it's unreasonable search and

seizure is what the constitution says. and i would suggest first and foremost that it's reasonable that the government be able to identify certain matters of evidence that could prevent a 9/11 attack on america that could cause the death of thousands of americans. so what is it that is provided for under this act? and i'm raising this because i think my colleagues have misunderstood it, and they're more worried about it than they should be. and in fact, i think many of their worries are based on false understanding of how the system works and a false understanding of the law and the false understanding of how law enforcement is conducted in america every day. so this system ...

so these telephone companies all maintain these records and they are accessible by law enforcement, and it does not take a court order colleagues. it takes a subpoena. and a subpoena is a document, an arrested for production issued -- an order for production issued by an entity empowered to issue subpoenas. and the basic standard for a drug enforcement administration federal agent to get people's telephone records that are in the possession of a telephone company is the administrative subpoena. they don't have to go to a judge. they don't have to go to the united states attorney or any federal prosecutor.

they're empowered if the documents are relevant to an investigation they're conducting. because, you see they're not an individual's records. they are the phone company's records. and this is done every day. now, oddly the f.b.i. doesn't have that power. the f.b.i. is the agency charged with the responsibility of investigating and stopping terrorist attacks. but they've never been given this power. they have to issue their subpoenas simply by calling the federal prosecutor, the u.s. attorney's office -- i was united states attorney 12 years assistant united states attorney for 2 1/2. i approved hundreds and hundreds and thousands of subpoenas. in almost every major investigation, you want telephone toll records so you're investigating a drug dealer and you capture somebody, and he starts providing evidence.

he said i talked to the main drug dealer. how many times? hundreds. did you use a phone? yes. so you immediately subpoena the telephone records. and they come right in, and it says he can prove that he's telling you the truth. he's made 50, 100 phone calls to the main drug dealer. that corroborates his testimony and builds truth and power in the prosecution's case that this person is indeed a drug dealer and this witness is telling the truth. now, there are all sorts of reasons for getting documents. that's just one of them. but it's done every day by a subpoena. and as i said, a subpoena does not require a judge's approval. so this all got stirred up in the patriot act and we set out this procedure with judicial oversight, the metadata where the phone company's phone data is just simply put in one secure

system that is easily accessible by the federal government. i don't believe that violates any constitutional rights. i don't even think it requires -- it's just a mechanism by which to further the system. and before you can access it, the f.b.i., the national security agency has to have more proof and put out more evidence and go through additional hoops than the drug enforcement agent does to get your telephone records. and these records have no names. they have nothing but a telephone number, the date the number was called and how long the conversation was. and nobody's accessing those records for personal gain. only 30-something people in the united states have the ability to access this system.

and we do that -- that's the way it works. so i just believe colleagues, that this does not in any way impact the integrity of the constitutional right of privacy under the constitution. well somebody said, well, they could have used that. well, they could have -- they could abuse it. but i've been out to this system. i've seen the people who operate it. they're not out there trying to corruptly spy on politicians. i don't know how they can use the system anyway to do that. anyone who works at the telephone company can access your telephone toll records. so how much security do you have in your telephone toll records pray tell? but these people aren't doing

that. they're intentionally focused. if they have information on a phone number and they can see who other people have called that number and they can do some preliminary investigations and if it lights up and is a hit and has some information that coincides with other data they have they may be able to investigate it. and that may lead to other information. it may stop an attack on the united states of america. they're not after drug dealers. they're not after bank cheats, fraudsters, armed robbers. they're after terrorists. that's all they're authorized to use the system for. all right. i just have difficulty having the words to express how i feel about this. so this system can save this country from massive attacks.

we know health care reforms and our officials -- we know, and our officials are telling us there are more threats out there than before. a lot of people watch these television programs, "c.s.a." and things and they get a false impression of the power of the american government to conduct surveillance. and the extent to which it's limited. i work with f.b.i. agents, d.e.a. agents, i.r.s. agents. they're not risking their career they're not signing false statements. you see that sometimes on television. even the heroes do things that violate the rules. in my experience, none of the federal officers i dealt with violated the rules. if a criminal they walked. even though they desperately needed some information. they don't lie from defraud

cheat. these people at n.s.a. aren't doing that either. they're patriots. they are the best kind of people you love to have serving in america. so i just think this is an exaggerated thing. so i hope, colleagues, that we'll spend more time identifying and looking through the challenges that we face, the threats that we face in america that we'll examine this program and be sure we fully understand what's at stake the advantages that come -- and the president has told us examples of what will happen. director comey of the f.b.i. said that losing these authorities would be a big problem as the agency uses section 215 the key section in about 200 cases a year to get records through the foreign intelligence surveillance court. have to go under the authority of the court.

by the way colleagues, the internal revenue service can issue an administrative subpoena to get your bank records. i think they have the power to issue telephone toll records too. but, no, not here in this system. you have to go through the court process. and mr. comey makes a point that this is important. and we're talking about the roving wiretap authority that's in section 215. that's used in counter espionage and counterterrorism investigators and it allows the f.b.i. to conduct surveillance on a person who may be using a burner phone. burner b-u-r-n. in other words rs using -- in other words using a telephone and throwing it away and using a

new phone to maintain their ability to communicate without intercepting. this is important when you actually do get a warrant that allows a title 3 wiretap of a terrorist phone. and so you get this ability and you go to court and the affidavits i've seen in 12 years as u.s. attorney, i think i had one or two wiretaps approved. they were hundreds of pages of affidavits. you have to monitor it all. it takes tremendous time. but if you're after a terrorist a wiretap can be a decisive and important matter. then you face the problem you've got a wiretap and it names the phone and the number of it, but he throws that phone down and picks up another one. how do you deal with it? so this allows a roving wiretap and it provides a mechanism for when a person changes phones. and it's consistent with the fundamental principles we use in drug cases and organized crime

cases. "the washington times" in an article published today the president of the law enforcement defense fund and former assistant director of the f.b.i. ron hosco said isis is a singing siren's song calling people to their deaths to crash on the rocks, and it's the rocks that isis will take credit for. they are looking for those who are disaffected disconnected and willing to commit murder. so if we're willing to take away tools, okay, congressmen stand behind it and take the credit for putting the f.b.i. in the dark. close quote. in other words we need to be sure we'll be taking credit for shutting off the ability of our investigators to protect america. president obama said it is indeed helping protect america. last year he said -- quote -- "the program grew out of a

desire to address a gap identified after 9/11. one of the hijackers khalid mendhar made a phone call from san diego to yemen. n.s.a. a national security agent saw that call but he could not see that call was coming from an individual already in the united states. they didn't have that legal ability or the system at that time that could do it. the president went on to say the telephone metadata program was designed to map the communication of terrorists so that we could see who they may be in contact with as quickly as possible. speed is critical, colleagues. the president went on to say -- quote -- "this capability could also provide valuable information in a crisis. for example, in a bomb goes off in one of our cities and law enforcement is racing to

determine whether a network is poised to conduct additional attacks. time is of the essence. being able to quickly review telephone connections to assess whether a network exists is critical to that effort. close quote. and i think the president is right about that. we don't have super human abilities in this country. we don't monitor everybody's phone calls. there's no way humanly possible federal agents can be doing that. but once you identify someone who is being connected to a terrorist group, you could at least follow their phone numbers, who they may be calling. so passing the house bill, i believe is not the right thing. that bill would eliminate entirely the data base through which our intelligence analysts are able to quickly access information to connect the dots.

the bill ends these programs. it just does. it ends the meta data program replacing it with a nonexistent untested system. it relies on the hope that private telephone companies will agree to retain the data. but these companies have made it clear they will not and flatly refuse to commit to retain this telephone data in their computer systems for any period of time as contemplated by the house-passed bill unless they are legally required to do so. and the bill does not require them to do so. one provider said the following -- quote -- "we are not prepared to commit to voluntarily retain documents for any particular period of time pursuant to the proposed house bill if not otherwise required by law," and the house has refused to put that in it. well colleagues, when i was prosecuting phone companies

kept the data often three years. some phone companies more. one rural phone company never got rid of this irdata. it was amazing -- rid of their data. it was amazing how older phone calls helped improve the dots, helped improve the facts that were critical in a prosecution. for example somebody says, "i never called john jones." and then you find 50 phone calls from their phone document to john jones. these things have tremendous importance. and when you're looking to prevent an attack on america trying to produce intelligence to prevent enemy attacks on this country, just the fact that one individual is calling another individual who's known to be a terrorist is exceedingly valuable information. my goodness. maybe it's an innocent call but

it's worthy of looking at and investigating. that's how investigators work. that's how crimes are solved. that's how attacks are stopped. one shred of evidence one bit can lead to new bits that lead to more and more evidence that reveals an entire organization poised to attack our country. so let me repeat, i don't believe we have a violation of the constitution. i am absolutely convinced that the procedures utilized in this process are utterly consistent with the long policies approved by thousands of court cases nationwide that law enforcement uses on a daily basis to investigate tax cheats drug people. and we can't use these same tactics against terrorists who are enemies of the united states and seek to perhaps blow up and

kill thousands of people? i think this is a mistake. i urge my colleagues to be careful about it. we have another letter from the sergeants benevolent association that pleads with us to do a short-term extension of the program, congress do your duty, dig into this program and see if you can't be sure that it's not ended, that we do it in a way that's persistent with our laws. i think we're doing that now. that's my opinion and i was present when the law was drafted and we tried to be sure we did that and i believe we did. but it just -- some of the concerns are real. a lot of good people are concerned about it so i think it's time for us to slow down, go back to the bases lay out this program, see what the complaints are and to see if they're jefd.

-- they're justified. if they are the program will have to end but i don't believe it needs to end. right now we're heading on a path that will end it. i would thank the president and would yield the floor and note >> as always you can watch the senate when it meets to consider the u.s. freedom act on c-span2. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern we will look into the personal lives of three first ladies. sarah polk at a strong believer in politics and helped her husband. margaret taylor was opposed to her husband's nomination for president and zachary taylor enjoyed telling people she was praying for her opponent to win. as a teacher, abigail fillmore was the first presidential first

lady to have a profession. this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the c-span original series "first ladies," examining the public and private lives of the women that filled the position of first ladies. from martha washington do michelle obama. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. as a compliment, c-span's new book, "first ladies." it is available as a hardcover or an e-book for your favorite bookstore or online books caps on -- bookseller. >> this week on "q&a," our justice department:. he shared stories about his new book "the wright brothersd."

david: they did not graduate from high school because their father said if they had an interesting project they should stay home. wilbur without any question was a genius. orville was bright and inventive, clever mechanically but he did not have the reach of mind that wilbur did. they loved music, they loved books. nathaniel hawthorne was orville' s favorite writer. catherine loved sure walter scott. for one of her birthdays, her brothers gave her a bust of sir walter scott. these people living in a house in rural ohio with no running water or electricity and they are giving a bust of an english literary giant to their sister for a birthday present. there is a lot of hope in that.

i think what i would like to get to know even know about -- more about is the sense of purpose that they have. it sounds like a bad pond but high purpose00 -- pun, but high purpose. we are going to achieve this big idea. >> sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> here on c-span, "the communicators" is next with a look at the proposed merger of charter communications with time warner and bright house networks. and then be campaign announcement from martin o'malley. at 8:00, commencement speeches from colleges around the country beginning with former president george w. bush at southern methodist university. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or

satellite provider. host: this week two guests joining us. we are joined by gene kimmelman and harold furchtgott-roth. he served from 1997 to 2001. that afternoon to you gentlemen. also joining us from the wall street journal, the technology policy reporter. we are here to talk about a proposed cable deal that was announced this week. wrap it up for us. >> charter communications proposed acquiring time warner communications -- time warner cable. this is a deal largely about cable and broadband industry which has become the major business for cable operators. charter would also merge with bright house network.