mr. rangel: i'd like to yield one minute to mr. blumenauer, an outstanding advocate of prevention of global warming, it's my honor to yield a minute to him. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. blumenauer: for the last 2 1/2 years, i have had the privilege of working with the speaker's select committee on global warming driving home climate change. now we have an opportunity to rebuild and renew america while are protecting the planet. i want to thank the ways and means committee and the commerce committee for working with me to harness billions of dollars over the life of the bill to have transportation that reduces carbon foot painting and things that will make a difference for a country that emits more carbon with its transportation than china, india, and europe combined. we have an opportunity to protect the planet, but unless you're prepared to lead, china and india will continue to pa lute -- pollute more and more. s the first step in this leadership and i urge the courage to vote yes on th

mr. rangel: i yield to the gentleman. mr. barton: i'd like to yield to the gentleman from new york one minute, mr. lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. barton: and i'd like to thank mr. rangel for his courtesy. mr. lee: i like to thank the gentleman for yielding. my community knows too well that washington typically overregulates and hides the costs to taxpayer. this bill is being over 1,100 pages in length and 50 pages dedicating to regulating light bulbs. in order to garner enough votes, the majority has tried to shift the most punitive costs of this bill to later years so they can get it passed. early on it will be the government footing this enormous bill with your tax dollars. and then down the road the subsidy will shift to consumers will pay directly to sustain this program through higher job-killing energy prices. either way, it's the taxpayer who bears the burden. this bill is truly a pipe dream. we need to focus on an energy solution that rewards innovation using american-mad

mr. rangel and others who have attempted to forge a consensus on this legislation. the bottom line to this legislation is that it will make america less dependent on foreign oil. despite the criticism from the other side, some project the concept of climate change in global warming from that side. it is very difficult to find middle gaunt -- ground. we must make difficult decisions and tough choices. this climate change bill before us today makes those tough choices for our future and our children's future. it is in the interest of america and the world. america leads the way. this is an opportunity for us to reclaim that leadership. this legislation will lead our consumers and small businesses towards smarter and cleaner and more efficient energy use. the american business community will not be disadvantaged by importers who skirt the rules. this legislation is a vote for innovation and environmental stewardship. i would be remiss if i did not mention this as well. for the previous eight years, the administration rejected the idea of global warming -- to grudgingly

mr. rangel, who has attempted to forge a consensus on this legislation. the bottom line to this legislation is that it will make american less dependent on foreign oil. despite protests from our friends on the other side, there is an element on the other side that rejects the concept of climate change and global warming. it is very difficult to find middle ground there as a side that simply projects the size of our times. a part of our job in government is to make some difficult decisions and some very tough choices. this climate change bill makes those tough choices for our future and our children's future. it is in the interest of america, but it is also in the interest of the world. america leads the way. this is an opportunity for us to reclaim that leadership. this legislation will lead our consumers, our businesses and communities towards smaller, cleaner and more efficient energy use. it will not be alone. strong trade enforcement mechanisms mean that it will not be disadvantaged by importers that skirt the rules. i would be remiss if i did not men

mr. rangel, speaker pelosi, and leader hoyer, will listen to our leader, john boehner. the republican task force has worked diligently over the last three months trying to come up with alternatives so that we can work together for the good of thank you for joining us. >> @ noon, the u.s. house devils in four legislative business. on the agenda, a bill that provides federal rebates for purchases of fuel-efficient vehicles. we spoke yesterday with the capital and reporter for the view of today's debate. >> joining us on the telephone is just aoshj. cash for clunkers, how would it work? >> it would offer americans up to $4.5000 to trade in a gas guzzler for new vehicle. there is a discrepancy on the threshold. the house proposal, which came out of the energy and commerce committee, was issued, the threshold for older vehicles would be 15 miles a gallon. to qualify for the credit, i think it is " 0.5 mile an hour for cars. one or two miles a gallon for trucks, depending on the size. >> the house is set to consider a bill on tuesday. will it to get two-thirds support require

mr. rangel for his courtesy. >> the people in my district note to well that when washington applies itself to a problem, it over regulates and hides the true cost to the taxpayer. with it being over 1100 pages in length and 50 pages dedicated to regulating light bulbs, in order to garner enough votes, the majority is trying to shift the most punitive costs to laborers so they can get it passed. early on, it will be the government putting this enormous bill with your tax dollars, and down the road, the subsidy will shift to consumers who will pay directly to sustain this program to hire, job killing enterprises. either way, is the taxpayer that bears the burden. we need to focus on an energy solution that rewards innovation using american made energy, not trying to find a way to tax our way to prosperity and continue this terrific job loss. that is why i urge my colleagues to oppose this bill. >> the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from texas. >> i want to yield one minute to the distinguished congresswoman from the science committee. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. i

mr. rangel has had discussions with mr. camp. and i know that mr. waxman has sought and indicates to me and i wasn't there but he's had discussions with his ranking member as well, mr. barton. so let me assure the gentleman that we welcome bipartisan participation. i told that to mr. blunt. mr. blunt and i think i think as you know have a history of working together successfully on behalf of legislation in this body and i have great respect for him. he heads up your health task force and we have had discussions. i've asked him to provide me with any suggestions that his task force has that he believes would be useful for us to discuss further. and i'm very hopeful that he will do so. as you know we put a discussion draft on the table today for discussion. your side has put some principles out as well. i'm hopeful, i know the president is hopeful that we can discuss those. we did have an unfortunate experience, as the gentleman recalls, when the president said he wanted to sit down and talk about the stimulus and he was coming down to meet with your

mr. rangel, speaker pelosi, and leader hoyer, will listen to our leader, john boehner. the republican task force has worked diligently over the last three months trying to come up with alternatives so that we can work together for the good of all americans, especially those who, through no fault of their own, are out there with no health insurance coverage. host: congressman phil gingrey, thank you very much for joining us. joining us in just a few minutes, senator bernie sanders, independent from the state of vermont. we will also turn our attention to foreign policy, the situation in the middle east, the elections in lebanon, and also shibley telhami will join us from the year sever city of maryland -- from the university of maryland. it is tuesday morning. "washington journal" continues in just a moment. >> harvard law professor elizabeth warren heads to the congressional oversight panel which monitors the spending of the $700 billion troubled asset relief program. she will testify this morning before the joint economic committee on the recent bank stress tests. we w

mr. rangel said it would never be part of their plan, and now it may be. i do not think it is necessary to tax that benefit. i think is helpful to give employees more input as to how that benefit is used. that one thing helps create a more competitive marketplace. we have a marketplace now, but it is not the kind of competitive marketplace that really improves cost. 61% of the american people under 65 get their insurance from work. their employer is only talking to a couple of people about whether or not you continue with them or go to somebody else on an annual or triannual basis. they're only talking to a couple of people. i can see a much larger marketplace than that. it makes people who offer policy at work want to be more competitive with the policy that is offered at work. if you're a big entrance company, and you're offering a policy through general electric or anybody else, you will want people to stay with that policy. the competitive dynamic is substantially different than it is today. competition, savings and the system itself, new technologies,

mr. rangel and the rangel rule. we have talked issues about other members of this congress. ms. waters, mollohan, murtha, all these guys. i have talked about those issues. i said i have no -- i don't know whether these accusations are true or not but somebody needs to resolve them. if we are draining the swamp, somebody needs to resolve those issues. if there is a lie going to the congress and we are draining the swamp, somebody needs to drain that part of the swamp that has to do with this lie. that's what this is about. that's all i'm trying to do. i'm raising the question for you, members of this house, and for the american public to think about. what about this culture of corruption? it obviously seems to be here. what about this issue of lying? it needs to be resolved. the security of our nation is at stake. i'm not here by myself and i have been talking way too long without recognizing a really good friend who has come down here just have a friendly vision it about some of these issues -- visit about some of these issues that aren't resolved, my friend phil gingrey of geor

mr. rangel said it was not be part of their plan and now i think it is. i don't think it is necessary to tax that benefit. i think it is helpful to give employees more knowledge of how it is used. we have a marketplace now but it is not the kind of competitive marketplace that really controls cost. a marketplace where 61% of the american people under 65 get their health insurance at work and normally their employer is only talking to a couple of people about whether you continue with them or go to somebody else on an annual or triannual basis. i can see a much larger market mace with that, than that, if the employee also has some options beyond what is offered at work. that makes people who offer a policy at work want to be more competitive with the policy that is offered at work. if you are if you are a big insurance company and offering a policy through general electric or anybody else you want people to stay with the policy. so suddenly the competitive dynamic is substantially different than it is today. so, competition, savings in the system itself, n

mr. rangel and obviously speaker pelosi and will listen to our leader john boehner, the doctors caucus, the 15 of us of the republic and doctors caucus, the republican task force has worked diligently over the past months to come of with alternatives so that we can work together for the good of all americans especially those few to no fault of their own air out there with no health insurance coverage. >> congressman mr. gingrey of virginia, thank you. >> we continue our discussion on health care system, vermonts center bernie sanders launched, join us on "washington journal" for 30 minutes. >> host: i want to introduce bernie sanders, thank you for being with us. your single payer plan, how what were? >> guest: it begins to do the major problems that exist in our current health care system and i think understands that the current system is disintegrating with 46 million without any health insurance, more who are underinsured and at the end of the day off we end up spending despite those results far more money per capita almost twice as much as any other country and our health care outcomes

mr. obama said he would never go there, and he apparently is there now. charlie rangel said it would never be part of their plan, and now it may be. i think it is helpful to give employees more input into how the benefit is used. that one thing helps create a more competitive marketplace. the marketplace does not control costs, or people under 65 get their health insurance at work. normally, their employer is only talking to a couple people about whether they continue with them or go to somebody else on an annual basis or whatever basis they look at their health care. i could see a much larger marketplace than that if the employee also has options beyond what is offered at work. that makes people who offer a policy at work want to be more competitive with the policy offered at work. if you are a big insurance company, offering a policy through general electric, or anybody else, you want people to sit with that policy. suddenly, the competitive dynamic is substantially different than today. competition, savings in the system itself, new technology, new transparency are a

ranking member ros-lehtinen and chairman rangel for supporting this very commonsense piece of legislation. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from washington. mr. larsen: thank you, mr. chairman. i'd again ask my colleagues to support this important amendment to h.r. 2410 and appreciate everyone's support and making it happen and bringing it to the floor today and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. mr. larsen: mr. chairman, i ask for the yeas and nays. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington will be postponed. it's now in order to consider amendment number 8 printed in part c of house report 111-143. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. sessions: thank you, mr. chairman. i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 8 printed in p

explaining this issue to both chairman charl rangel and ranking member david kemp and i hope they will join me in supporting our military families. with that, mr. speaker, before i close, as i always do on the floor of the house, because we have young men understand and women in afghanistan and iraq -- men and women in afghanistan in iraq, we have young men and women dying for this country and young men and women who are losing limbs in those fights in afghanistan and iraq, so i ask god to please bless our men and women in uniform, i ask god to please bless the families of our men and women in uniform and i ask god in his loving arms to hold the families who have given a child dying for freedom in afghanistan and iraq. and three times, mr. speaker, i ask god to please bless america, i ask god to please bless america and again i ask god to please bless this great nation known as america. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. ms. berkley of nevada. for what purpose does the gentlelady rise? ms. berkley: i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for five

, down here charlie rangel, the distinguished chairman of the ways and means committee, here a former colleague of ours, rahm emanuel, president obama's chief of of staff, up here mr. or zag -- orr zag, the -- orzag, the o.m.b. bean counter. senator dodd from connecticut. in the upper corner ms. pelosi, the distinguished speaker of the house of representatives. and mr. harry reid, the distinguished majority leader over in the united states senate. so we have narrowed it down to one of these folks. the question mark down there is sadly, and this is really a disappointment to me, sadly some are just saying that it was some staffer that put the thing in. the question mark is this staffer who apparently has the power to change law and make law. i really don't think it was -- it may have been a staffer who was using the pen. clearly a staffer had to be directed by somebody to do that. we thought originally that senator dodd, the chairman. banking committee, might be the person we should focus in on. he's made some public statements. the public statements now have gone back and forth. his office says that they put it into the bill at the request of the treasury. the tre