>> what do y think a tree can be? n it be stroer than steel? n a tree the plastue -- plaster, fuel for our cars or clothing? or medicine that fightcancer? withur trade cell technology, we think it can -- weyerhaeur, growing ids. >> i move to report the bill as amended. >> this week, as senate demoats moved the presidt's heal care package forward,

publicans prepare to fight. >> let me point out that this legiation has not one single provision that is aimed at reducing the cost of health care. >> youhink you have a tempe that probl? >>o, sir. i believe that my reputation such that i ask the ha question but i do it evenly for both ses. >> supreme crt nominee sonia sotomayor ays it cool. >> basical >> people used the cia as a whippingoy. >> why is congress leaning on the cia? >> yes, it was 40 years ago that american firs set foot on the moon. >> at's one sll step for man, one gian leap for mankind.

republins have been saying that the president's heth-care plans drafted -- as drafted what rate the bank and this week the ad of the congressial buet office seemed to buttress the argument. the president sayseducing heth-ce costs is eential but dolas elmendorf says the legislation and the sena will do just the opposite. on e contrary the legislation signicantly expands the fedal responsility for health care cost >> but the president says doi nothing about health care i not an option. >>he price of dogothing abou health cares a price at every taxpayer and every business and every family will have to pay. >> health care reform not a democrat or republicssue, it is a american issue. buat the start of the health- care debate, democts were coletely satisfied in the process. >> republicanenator orr hatch. i know i asd this wk after week. how are we goi to pay?

one house solution, taxealthy amicans, anotr, to which the white houses opposed to tax simply providebenefits. doe want to tax policeand firefiter benefits? and the democratic party has ads targeting democrats, o tarting senator kent conrad, though not by name. where is this debate going? >> this going dectly to the ite house. i think wt we're seeinright now is the empty pce against the s that iseft byed kenne's absence. he was the guy who wasoing to forge the compromise is and work consensus and he knows th subject bett than abody and is missed. that in deferen to everye else iolved. but the president understds that his administratio will rise or fall on the passage of e serious reform of national health care. if they don't do it, docrats in 2010, for gett.

they will bessociated and identified with a failed admistration. >> colby? >> i don' see it quite that way. the ec the first that tan by committee th authorizes this thin and the kennedy committee -- now shed by chris dodd -- are the ones that pullut the benefs. the tougst job will come from theinance committee ere they haveo figure out how to pay or this thing and that is ere the ruer will really hit the road. everybody knows it will hapn. it will happenn t senate, the house th the main -- ways and means committee. when the bills -- the esident willome in when the bls passed bo bods and it has to be worked out. >> if is thing fails, whi i think it now mighti think peop will trace it in a moment in the clip youhowed, th peror with no cthes moment. he had a contdiction.

he says correctthat the expense of health care, how much are spending is deroying our economand that has to stop. that itrue. thee get these proposals out of congress, all o whichas the headf thebo is saying, raises the curb rather than lowering it. you cann cure over spending on health carey imposing expanon -- expansion and a hugnew entitlent. this wasn answer to a question asked by a democrat chaired by benham -- democrats. it was a re seven of the moment. >> me now? >>ouay for it, and there is no free lunch, you pay for it by taxing benefit over a certain amount, rich people who have benefited anonymously bthe bush tax cuts. but the other wayou y for it and make it work is by havin some al control on the way healthare is apportions, spence, treated in is country. and that isompletely missing at the moment.

it is only pilot pgrams in this bill. there is noteally any control fromthe department of health and human services. and the president understands that, but i's got to do something. he can't just s and wait for it to happen. >> he wand done by all this research -- recess. how? >> he is right tonsist. i think h has pyed a useful and produce -- who has pyed a producve role is elmendf b layingown the garden -- or let and sang this is a very expensive bill. now e problem is how you pay for this thing. this is what th're going t have to . the fac you have senat grsley, ranking republican come still at the table trying to work othis thinguggests to mthat it is not close to failure. it is that thateal critical moment where real comprise will have to be worked out and republicans will have to come in on this deal >> crunch time, mark?

crunch time. nobody know questions of the intellect or the temperament of barackbama. e question is about the sel and thspine. and this is the time f the steel andhe spine. the rlity is this -- house democrats, who are not a terribly popular sympathec group, they already cast one potentially lor vote f climate chge. now you are going to a them to rais taxes, a difficulthing, $554 billion, even if it is on e wealthy -- that is a top load. they still don't know what the place of no rern is and non- negotiable items for the white house. they are stillaiting for the senate to cast any type of a tough vote. this is where t presidenthas to ce in and play the rol of ted knedy, the role lyndon hnson did,reat presidents do when their agendais on the line. >> one person who has not distinguished herself is the leader of thehouse, nancy

pelosi because the have no erious proposal for handling the corol costs. the answer on the issue was, well we will have to lk at the waist to fraud and abuse issues,which of course, and insults tour intelligence. and looking at prevention issues there is studafter study that shows prevention is nice, it saves you a life, it produces -- reces morbity and pain but it does not save money. it increases iexpenses. they haveo serious answeron how to controlosts and that is why they hav end up with huge increases. >> the are serious answersut they are not biti theullet. >> you don' have some of my dan roenkowski fm ways and means orills, who pushed these issues. and it doesn't ve tom dahle, ther. >> needo put rds on it -- we live in a free lunch.

. taincreases of any kind to be avoided th reality is they are going to have to be, d across e board. >> we he a problem with mey for heal care. but let m point out, ldman sachsad its best quarter ever. we put10 billion in to what, we taxpaye. does it me wget sometng back? >> just thi about the political dynate. we have a financial andconomic crisis in is country, created large part byhe excesses', the greed, d probably crinality of those in positions of influence and importance in thfinancial world, particularly in wl street. and the country is suffering. unemployment going into doub digits. kahl acrs akr, toledo, the middle of theountry, pele are in pain and we find at thesefolks, these architects who were bailed out by the people in akron and toledo, are paying themselves, returning to

the hamptons and buying their condos. is made into a pularevolt in 2010. >> does goldman sachsayback the 0 billion? i assume. >> yes. then a is the one th gets . they wereellingtuff they didn't ha. >> nmally you go tojail for that, right? >> i think so. >> in wall street, you get a bailout. >> didn't bernie mann of the cells of? >> hankpaulson was on thhill this week trying to explain this bank of america dl when he pressured that nk to buy. he said, look, ife have not done somand we would be in rse shape. at the time somof us id they were made to pay, ty were made today, i fact, we we made to pay. not just golan sachs. citigrp of the grt prophets,

moan, great profits, even bankamerica,reat profits nd where is the rest of the country? holding the bag wh nothing. >> i risen defense of scrooge. >> let him finish. >> i respect the populism of my iends here and may even support a mark shieldsoldman sachs t, however -- d the injuice is palpabl however, the reasonwe have gh unemploent and the reason the country is in a rut and our rrency ishaking is because last year we had a collapse of our nancial syst. th the republicaand docratic administratn pumped ndreds of billio in our money into that system, recognizing that uess it is saved, we all go down. so the injusticeis absutely there d perhaps whatou want to do is taxed away the profi with apecialax. however, weant to see health

and goldman and citigroup and bank of america. >> absolutely. >> because if we do not havet. >> you should have let me go first, charles, because having me make that point would be much re powerful. >> we will be a judge of that. >>erhaps less articulate. >> maybe. no other wayo do this. as mu ai hate toadmit it, if we don' have hlth banks we won't have a healthy coury. what w can do come at the moment trying to negotiate unbeliably low rates for paying ba stuff. we do not have t do them any more big fors. they ought toen their own now. >> let' look at the banks individlly get how did they get the profits? in the case of citi, the big charg -- scal is what you ca it. >> secretaraulson said i need

money to buy the toxic assets went instead to eight big banks, that where and when, and they are wl now we still ve toxic assets. >> judge sonia sotomayor soon- to-be justice somayor. >> c you give your opinion whether n in this country and i personallyas an individual citizen have a right to self- defense. >> as i said, i don't know i don' knowif that legal questionas been ever esented. >> now, unless you have a complete meltdownou are going get confirmed. >> members of the senate judiciary commite tried pin down judd sonia sotomayor. you just saw one. they failed. if ldsey graham is right an this thing is over, whats t point of four endless ds to tk about latinoisdom? >> they didn't haveuch else. and republicans wanted extd a hand to their coerts -- conservative conituencies.

there is no blood there. particully no blood because she obviously studied an memorize theranscript of the alito and rerts earrings and literally used the same vbal formation. the ly one sheidn't use fro roberts was, i have no quarrel with that that is the one she stayed aw fro. but other than that, she stuck to their script and e republicanwere just as frustrated as the democrats were a few years ago. >> what do y know about this judge, mark? >> a lot ls than we ew monday. opinion-free, controversy-free. have been told she blew away the president in the interview. she absolutely -- wh sheent in, she was not a the top the list but waso impressed. whatever she did in that terview, she kept under wraps. >> we know he didn't ask about abortion here in >> tt's righ the reality is is. bob bork, who was

intellectually combative d engageand controversial gave inteectual combativeness and engagement in ba name and cents and then everybody does the wrote the dope. that is what we had. >> what if you tookthe cameras ay? get over and a half a day? >> yes, no audience to py too. i think she demonstrated legal competence. she reected years on the bench as jurist. no question she may know the law. i gss one of the panelists, is senator was reduced to levise the pele thought that she was mean, that was sortf an irrelent part ofhe hearing and he stayed on a for a while. wh men, it is asserted and with women,t is gressive. i don't know why they picked on that issue. >> that's righ >>'m really mean. >>harles? >> i tught the fr days was

sort of ttament to the triumph of conservate the judicial philophy. shended up saying, giving exactlyhat john roberts cringe, which is insisting it it shows that even if you have a popular president, incredibly rong majority in the congress, you have to pretend you are a liberal that you are not in liral in judicial plosophy because the vas majority ofhe american people e conservative in looking at the law. but in the end, it ende up, day after dayof disgenuousness to the pointof oer and where i would say, it ever want to make khalid shaikhohammed taughthe value macon watched those hrings and leslie. he will say anything. -- tk, make him what those hearings enlesy. he w anytng. she will be the reverse of e

court -- n like anybody who was there testifying. th i think she is more consvative on some issues than you aicipate and you will see right away. althou most justices, you d't get a real good feeling until they are on the supreme court a few years. but we had this case ts year that was 5-4 that said you can't just set met forenc report, you ha to have the personho did it. them of the lab technician. >> 4. justice scalia wte it, one of odd alition of liberals and conservatives. think there ia good chance that decision will be reversed and tally undercut and she will be the fifth at replacing super the othe way. >> this is a woman who snt 12 years at the spash -- spanic legalefense fund in which she struggled mighty for all kinds of liberal causes. for which i commend he the idea that somehow as sending

on to the ghest court in ich you esntially make long, she will- make law that she will relinquish, n ahance. >> think probably that was th worst moment, to sathat she was on t board of the fu but had no read the gal briefs hat the fund generated. >> i actually talkedto other board members who said they made aoint ofhisecause if they were confirmed they wod have confli. >> so much of the foays was a scripted kabuki dancebout aboron. 've got to tell you. >> and n rights. >> but that is seconry. that is the 800 und gilla in throom or elephant. me know,he's pro-choice, and know that alito and berts were pro-life. what itroves once again is th

political ocessf to be lowed to work. we were headetowardesolving abortion polically and leslatively in this country. itas short cirit by the court and years latert is still frt and cter. >> i agree entirely. absolutelyight. ithouldave been allowedand ruthader ginsbg said that efore she ascended tohe court. >> you could say e same about race. >> privacy is in the constitutionomewhere. >>here is it? >> i will find it. then i will bring imy copy late >> is congress about to investigate the cia? >> havg a massive program coealed from the leaders of congress is not only approprie, it could be illegal. >> i think we oughto look forward and not backward >> a pr of the cia had a plan to kl cia operatives on the ound. the agency spends the money on this, hence the tra for it, sed on a 2001 presidentia finding that authorized it

but the neseat -- whethe new cia chief hear about i he canceled it and told congress and they are making nois about investigating. aside from at congress knew or di't know, why iit acceptableo take out al qaeda- types in the air with an armed drones, riski civilians, but not acceptable for hundred yards from a sniper, colby? >> this is coming up and leads -- but this was not just a matter of killing outside our princes in the battlefie with dres in places like yemen but also seeking out and telling them in foreign countries -- places like stockholm, or bangkok, war lagos. and traing aassins to do it. and this is what causedongress toet up in arms because the have not hrd about this. itaises a lot of qstions, not st theperation itself but the extent congress ought to

be directly involved with eve idea, every plantthat the central intligence agency is coming up with. i thinke are on really shaky ground. not only e question of what the cia wil d but how other intelligence ageies around the world that work with the ceral intelligce agency will cooperate with us if whenever they are talking aut planning gets up on the hill and then becomes the subject of front- page stories. >> these are too oen, when we ar about them, black and white questions. there is a difference about -- from tellingvery plant and a plan that has go on for essentially seven yes. >> but it s neverimplemented. >> apparently it had startedo be implemented. >> that is not the poin whe you are still doing somethingand i am notaying the idea is aad one, but if you are doinomething this serious that couldimplicate all kinds of questions and you don'

tell congres at someoint yes into the planning, you are asking ftrouble. >> do we need to be debatin this in public? >> we would have to if th told them about it. >> look, thecandal is for eight years weid not have a program of targeted assassination for qaeda. if al qaeda is in afghastan hit themith a drum but as u sa it is not discriminating, it kills women and children. if the guy is in stockhm, i would shoot or capture him there. a prator cannot capture b len, only kill him. eathically, it i problematic to do it from the sky with a edator. as for information, there wano program. we saw from the ip it was a massive program. it waseaching the stage of perhapsimplementing t aining, and that is why petta raised it and up until there it had n even reached the training level. there was nothing in there,

scand at all. aoncoction, it would to protect pelosi retroactively because of her accusations out cia li. >> we're not talking about t speaker of the house. the burden is the law this ithe law, you -- or break it. it quires you tinform the appropriate commites. dian feinsteis n a liberal e worlder, she is tough minded a she was told excluded. w many times do you break th law andhe public trust d destroyeconfidence in your government? >> at what point doou have to te them? when you are sitting -- >> it saysyou have to inform significantperations. thisas not opetional. it dn't even exist, was a idea. >> the decision was made by the vice-preside of the united states.

the report proving this from john yu the justice departme byhis superiors,he white house, direct to the vice-president saying don' inform the congres that is serious. >> it was not a operation, only andea. >> al qaeda. e moon landing revisited. >> he eagle has landed. >> neil armsong climbed down the ladder and became the first hun beingn history to set foot on the moon. >> tha's one small step for man, one giant leapor mankind. y've got the flag of,ou can see the stars and strip. >> beautiful, just beaiful. >> a that was 40 years ago. ifou want to read a good comn about the challgesf space exploration readt charles krthammer this week. with all theconomic problems facing us at the moment, can we affordto meet the challenge? slow, soft, right over the plate, chaes. >>stimulus is spending 100

civilians on junk. the one thing that will hapn as a rest of oeglect of spacby september of next year we will lose the ality tout anybodin space. we will ha hitch a ride with the russians a chines indefinily. is that where america ought to be0 years after this unlievableachievement of landing on the moon in th spirit of john kenne? i think not. >> colby? >> i wish we could have talked about this landmark achiement without tting into the stimulus pacge. i d't see the connection. we needed the smulus pkage and welso need to keep them the moon eloration goings wel ihink we n find a y to do both. simply becaus e present of the united stas has not said he is going to do something with the moon walk -- moon's face exploration isot necessarily saying all along and amera will end the way we know and

love it. >> are we going to get to mars? >>ook, evebody remembers where they were when kennedyas shot and when landed on t moon and would mu better remember the landing on th moon. i havebeen at one blaoff, and it w inedibly impressive. >> you witneed one. [laughter] >> were youthere? >> i was incredibly -- >> a couple of this show. it wasincredibly exciting and impressive but ieally can't figure out why we ould do it. >> washe great national moment. and i think the desire to recapture that, that sense of national purpose a missi, tting high standards and doi that is something all amecans are in for. >> thank you. last word. see you xt week. for a transcript, log onto insidewaington.tv.

jim stavrakis is a proud veteran

my j was aerial photography, d i'd go up on combat flight but he was also drawn the people. i've always had curiosity of ople. and public tanswers your curiosity life. jim included h public television ation in his will. consider joini the community of peoplwho want public television to span generatio.