you think that would be uncontroversial. i hope, at the end of the day, it is not controversial. nobody wants their health care rationed by somebody in washington d.c. comparative effectiveness research could not account for preferences by patients and their response to personalize the medicine. the breakdown of genes in the body to all of the different elements which make as unique as individuals. what the research focuses on is what exactly is it in your human gene composition, the human genome that might be different than someone else's? impersonalize treatment might work for you, but it might not work for someone else. they are finding that they can tailor specific drugs to treat specific genes in such a way that if they know you're human composition, they can find a way to treat your condition, say cancer, slightly differently than they would treat somebody else's cancer. whether it is in the dosage of the medicine or in the specific kind of medicine. the point being that not everybody is the same. we are all unique. at one of the things that medicine must recognize is our u

now, you would think that that would be uncontroversial and i'm hoping at the end of the day that itnot controversial. nobody wants their healthcare rationed by somebody here in washington dc. it would also require that comparative effectiveness research account for differences in the preference of patients and their treatment response to personalize medicine and something called genomics. genomics is the breakdown of the genes in the body into all of the difference elements, which make as unique as individuals and what genomics research focuses on is what exactly is it in your gene composition, the human genome that might be different from someone else's. that means a person lies treatment would work for you where is it might not work for someone else and they are actually finding that they can tailor specific drugs to treat specific genes in such a way that, if they know your human composition they can find a way to treat your condition, say a cancer, potentially slightly differently than they would treat somebody else is cancer, whether the dosage of the medicine or in a specific

solicited a second opinion from the solicitor general's office after it was found the dc act was uncontroversial. and questioning the constitutionality and you said -- you declined to make that memorandum public saying that it was not final and so i want to ask you about that. what is there that remains to be done before that opinion will be final? >> well, i guess, no decision has actually been made by the administration with regard to the position it's going to take concerning the constitutionality of the statute so that process is still ongoing and as long as that is ongoing and also the concern i think i expressed was it reflected -- i was concerned about releasing documents that reflected internal deliberations in the justice department. so those were the two concerns that -- if i didn't express both those are the concerns i have with the releasing of the documents. >> given the fact that it was not released what sense is the memorandum not nine is because the administration will now make a decision whether or not it disagrees with the office of legal counsel or not? >> yeah, the determinat