an american ship run by a captain engaged a british ship, the mighty british navy, and the american ship was outgunned and it was outmanned, and as they came together in mortal combat, the dead and dying all around and the british captain said do you surrender, and that captain, that captain john paul jones said "i have not yet begun to fight." i tell the american people we're going to go around this country, we're going to the town halls, we're going to the senior centers, we're going to the rotary clubs, we're going to carry this message. we will not do this. we will not commit generational theft on future generations of americans. we won't give them another another $2.5 trillion of debt. we won't give them an unfair policy where deals are done in back rooms, and we, we, all of us on this side of the aisle will stand up for the american people and we have just begun to fight. mr. harkin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa is recognized. mr. harkin: mr. president, you know, for the last several weeks, all we have heard from the other side is attack, attack, atta

thriving on the american right. but it also appears to me that conservatives spend much of their time in current parlance, lee mentioned this himself in the introduction, cokinding with one another and that in this age of the internet too much conservative advocacy has been reduced to sound byte certitudes and sterile cliches. what do conservatives want? limited government, they answer. free enterprise. strict construction of the constitution. fiscal responsibility. patriotism. traditional values and respect for the sanctity of human life. no doubt. but i wonder, how much are these traditional formulations and abstractions inspiring the rising generation, present company accepted? how much are they resonating with america's new immigrants and dominant professional classes, particularly those in the more secularized, urbanized and globalized regions of the country? it is not a new problem. in fact, it is a perennial problem. the essence of which whitaker chambers captured long ago, each age, he wrote, finds its own l

for the american people. that's what we're going to vote on in a few minutes. i appreciate the questions from the senator from alaska. mr. begich: thank you, mr. president, thank you to the senator from north dakota for the clarification on the questions and how important this is to those in alaska. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. the senator from montana. mr. baucus: mr. president, i just ask -- just a parliamentary inquiry here. the -- the order just entered provided for two minutes equally divided before i suppose each of the amendments. is that in addition to or is that a part of -- of the time that's been allocated to senators? the presiding officer: in addition to. mr. baucus: thank you. the presiding officer: the senator from montana has five minutes remaining. mr. baucus: so if the senator from montana wishes to speak on his amendment, he has five minutes plus two minutes? the presiding officer: five minutes plus one minute. mr. baucus: excuse me equally divided. thank you. mr.

the american consumer is told the american consumer is told >> what's the difference? the price.hey were told, that's what you get to do. you get to pay almost triple. why? and it's not just the american consumer. if i can just hold up a chart that shows two drugs. i think if i can find it. one is nexium. it is advertised substantially. i al have one on lipitor. do you think they are losing money? europe? i don't think so. they charge $424. it is the pricing policy. >> wouldn't pharmaceutical companies say because we have to absorb the cost of all of the research that went into developing nexium. >> that is also always raised. if you don't allow us to charge the american consumer the highest prices in the world, we don't get to do the research and development. but you know what? most of the recent studies have shown that those studies, the pharmaceutical spends more money on promotion, marketing, and advertising than they do on research. i want them to do research. there's one on piece, the congress gave without my support the proposal with the american money bring it back and le

the american market. one government data base suggested 6,760. another says about 3,000. and with the explosion of drugs coming in from nations like india and china as reported in "the washington post," the f.d.a.'s budget for foreign inspection has not kept pace. as a result, the 2007 foreign drug and drug ingredient makers are inspected once every 12 years, while american-based manufacturers must be inspected at least once every two years. the article also reported that china itself has more than 700 plants. but the f.d.a. only has the resources to conduct about 20 inspections a year there. so let me just indicate on this chart again, madam president, we, under this amendment that is pending before the senate, would allow drugs to be imported from those countries designated in blue. the countries that are designated and reflected in red are those countries where we currently manufacture the ingredients of the final product. we're not suggest that go drugs be imported from these nation. and yet our leg

stop coming out here saying the american people want this. the american people don't want this. you want it but the american people don't want it. leaders of your own party don't want it, the labor union doesn't want this, and most will small business doesn't want this. i've listened to anecdote after anecdote after anecdote from the other side and there's very touching stories and everybody is sympathetic with that, but you don't legislate using anecdotes because you're only here in one side of the store, you are not hearing of the fact that have to with anecdotes and say this will solve that. that is not the way you legislate and is certainly not with you argue a point. i've heard them come out, the other side say when we pass this 94% of american people will have insurance. will be covered by health insurance. you know, in court they say you have to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and that is exactly why. you can't say 94% of the people are going to be covered. people say what a wonderful bill, it recover 94% of the american people. it cost $2.5 tril

americans need to knowp, what' going on.americans need to learn as much as they can and we can as the process moves forward.ñr do you plan toÑi use any otho=# tactic to make sure this bill does not pass before christmas. >> the important thing is for americans to understand that they are being jammed. nobody will notice. this issue isÑi pretty darn big. this is not a post office bill. this is healthcare. >> they are hoping you will yield back some time. i think the people are rightly out raged >> what would magically happen if democrats went home for a week and came back to vote. we'd be happy to go home tomorrow and deal with this bill next year. we are still analyzing it but the err notify indication as i said. you know, the bill is still being read for the first time by most. senators have had a chance to look at it. i can't give you the final take on it. i give you earlier whatÑi the early cakeses are that the adequate. >> talking about how the gop was outraged. you were debating a decoy bill. there was a move on the flo

and these are some of the reasons that aarp, the american association for the advancement of -- american association of retired people, not the naacp -- i'm sorry about that, mr. president. these are some of the reasons that aarp and 4 million americans are supporting this bill. premiums are reduced for this, mr. president, by 93% of people who will have reduced premiums. this strengthens our fump by cutting our deficit by as much as $1.3 trillion over the next two deck it's a. that's trillion with a t we want to help shape the deliver resystem in our count try. that right in america has 750,000 bankruptcy as year. and it advances the first time in the country that good health will not depend on great wealth. good health should not depend on how much money you have. it acknowledges finally the health care is a fundamental right, that my friend, senator harkin spoke about so clearly. not just a privilege for the most fortunate. president johnson, formerly majority of the united states senate, signed meca

it is an american issue. unfortunately, the majority's arrogance of power has forced us down a path where ideology has trumped policy and big government has trumped american families. town hall after town hall and poll after poll tells us that americans want us to step back, start over, and reform our health care system in a step-by-step, fiscally responsible manner. this is a moment for courage and leadership. all we need is one democrat to listen to a growing chorus of concerns from americans across this great nation and stand up against this bill. i'm going to do everything possible to make sure that the voice of utahans and americans everywhere will be heard loud and clear in the senate chamber. a vote to move this bill forward will be one of the most important votes this body has ever taken. a vote that is bigger than our parties or our ideologies. a vote that will fundamentally change the american landscape for generations to come and restructure 1/6 of our american economy. a vote that will determine i

now the american hospital association, the american medical association, and the federation of american hospitals are finally taking the -- finally taking notice of the advice they're receiving from the state and local hospital associations and doctors and they finally have seen light and come out in opposition to this deal at least. i urge my friends across the aisle to resist this latest misguided attempt at deal making. the consequences are just too dangerous. you know, there's an awful lot of kactus in this -- cactus in this health care world, i just don't think that we have to sit on each and every one of them. before i yield back my time, i truly want to thank the distinguished senator from connecticut and thank him for his comity in allowing me to make these debate comments and also thank the acting presiding officer in his effort to be bipartisan. and i think we will have a sad day in this body if one side or the other gets into a situation where we do not even allow people to make remarks on not only the pending bills, but on the general issue of health care. thank you, sir. a

the american people and the american economy cannot afford for us to wait for the next time. because, you see, mr. president, there may not be a next time. nearly 65 years ago, harry truman condemned a system that condemned its citizens to the devastating economic side effects of sickness. nearly 65 years later we still suffer from the same. just months after world war ii came to crease, president harry s. truman wrote in a letter to congress to this body and i quote -- "we should resolve now that the health of this nation is a national concern, that financial barriers and the way of attaining health shall be removed. that the health of all of its citizens deserves the help of all of the nation." decades have passed and these financial barriers have grown taller, but we will never solve the problem unless we find the resolve, which we haven't found, until, mr. president, today. this is how long we've waited. think of those who are just 1-year-old in 194 a 5 -- 1945. there are far too many who have lived their lives have not had any type of health care. any type of health care

it is in the american frame of mind to do things on the basis of american decisionmaking, american resources american self-reliance with other partners being very welcome to add things where they can but is mainly being an american enterprise -- >> if i could interrupt you. when the british government took the decision in different military options it was presented with to go for the largest, including a division level land force, a strong part of the argumentation was that this would give us a significant influence over the way the operation was conducted. do you think that london failed to appreciate that despite that decision that we were a low- quantity partner, did you think we re -- did they think that we were a high-quantity part because of that? >> no, they would have to rely on good american decisionmaking and resource allocation to get this thing done well. in british terms, it was an enormous expedition, military expeditionary force to be sent to iraq to win one part of the country and hold that part of the country and if you look at the record of what we did in the southeast, we

americans. [inaudible] >> senator conrad said then that a gang of six negotiations behind closed doors you all considered a medicare by an? is that true? >> it was discussed for an hour or two but no.com. but lemay also -- lets me ask you look up the number of republicans that voted for medicare and 1965 and go ask the democrats how come they say republicans were against medicare? because obviously if the republicans voted for medicare in 1966. [inaudible] are you interested in what they're talking about. >> first of all, water you referring to? obviously we do not know what they are doing for i have tried to get details. the democratic balks to have worked on this said we cannot give you any details so i go to my democratic friends and they say we don't know either. and there is some discussion of the fact there is a trigger that will take us to a public plan very soon after the enactment of the bill. is that true? one report was no but the next day one article in the newspaper saying absolute

this is not gooder for the american people. -- this is not good for the american people. at a time when we need to be creating jobs not destroying jobs. again, the president wanted to create jobs with the stimulus. he's created no jobs with it. this is going to destroy even more jobs. this is the wrong direction to be going. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentleman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield three minutes to my distinguished friend from texas, mr. gohmert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. i do agree with my friend from colorado. we all should be paying our fair share. however this congress says -- has said in the past, maybe 39% should not pay their fair share. they won't pay any income tax. and this administration apparently has indicated he wants to take that at least to 44% of americans not paying their fair share. but what the death tax does is go after people who have paid at the highest levels

today 50 million americans are not. 50 million americans are uninsured. this bill will provide insurance for 30 million more, meaning 94% of americans will have coverage. the highest percentage in the history of our country. and the senator from arizona says it doesn't go far enough and include more people. we have waited patiently now for 21 days during the course of this debate on health care reform for the republican plan for reforming health care. it's never been produced. promised, but never produced. and i think the reason's obvious. it's doesn't exist. several times they've said on the floor, oh, we have a plan and they'll wave a bill at us. when the republicans had a chance over a three-week period of time to offer their substitute, they never did. in fact, over 20 days of active debate on the floor, there were exactly four republican amendments on the floor, four in 20 days. one every five days. at that rate, how long would be the republicans have us stay on the floor waiting for the next amendment? i mean, that is the reality. they offered six m

take a look at it and you'll see the american eagle and you'll see that the american eagle is holding arrows on the right in its claw, an olive branch on the left. this has deep symbolism to our founding fathers, the seal was adopted before the constitution itself was ratified. and the gentleman who had to explain and support the adoption of this symbol as our country's great seal said that he had the eagle holding arrows and an olive branch to symbolize war and peace. specifically what he said was that with regard to that olive branch he wanted to illustrate the power of peace. he said the power of peace, not a phrase we hear very often, we hear a great deal of the power of war, but we don't hear much of the power of peace, and you will note that that eagle is not looking toward the arrows, that eagle is looking toward the olive branch. and the reason why the american eagle was placed by our founding fathers with an olive branch is because they always wanted america to be looking for peace and i'm sad to say that we have forgotten that. this message from our founding fathers from ove

you don't think the american people are concerned? you don't think the american people are borate?ed? small-scale experiments? is this where we are taking health care? i don't th;ñink the american people want that. they want their stores to be part of a solution. they want their experiences to be part of the solution. they do not want a government to experiment. t their health care. the real story is not just about left-wing ideology or some frankensteinish experiments on our healthcare system. the real story is about a party that is consumed by their own monopoly of power in town. democrats control house, senate, white house. they have the lever of power in their hands and get at every turn they look at others to blame. they look at others to call out , to embarrass, instead of addressing in an honest way what the american people want addressed. they believe they can trample the system of checks and balances. and that they have protected themselves so their rhetoric and a shield they throw up, calling people out of touch, calling people un-american, calling people different. the a

many americans are uninsured. millions more fear losing their insurance in a weak economy and -- because of preexisting conditions. doctors are ready to close their doors over high malpractice costs and lower government reimbursement and we don't do anything in this bill about high malpractice costs. something has to be done. everyone seems to agree. but tomorrow the senate will vote on a bill that makes a bad situation worse. it's unfortunate that we're voting on a bill that a significant majority, 61% of americans oppose. the american people, providers, advocacy groups, as well, are reacting to the fact that this bill slipped down the slippery slope to more and more government control of health care. it contains the biggest expansion of medicaid since 1965. it creates a long-term care insurance program called the class act that the c.m.s. actuary says runs a significant risk of being unsustainable and one of the most significant members of this body referred to it as a ponzi scheme similar to the madoff, what he

american." the letter continues: "the legislative text and complete budget scores from the congressional budget office of the health care legislation considered on the senate floor should be made available on the web site the public can access for at least 72 hours prior to the first vote to proceed to the legislation. likewise, the legislative text and complete c.b.o. scores of the health care legislation, as amended, should be made available to the public for 72 hours prior to the vote on final passage of the bill in the senate. further, the legislative sex of allegislative textshould be pube senate floor prior to debate on the amendment. finally, an agreement between the house of representatives and the senate, a formal conference report detailing the agreement and complete c.b.o. scores of the agreement should be made available to the public for 72 hours prior to the vote on final passage of the conference report in the senate. mr. president, that is wise advice from senator lincoln and sena

americans want the federal government to help them, not support them. let me tell the other side of this. in a recent gallup poll, independents around the country oppose this bill 53-37. these are independents, so it would be wise for my democratic friends to realize that america is not behind them, not behind this bill, and it is time for them to listen to what the majority of americans want and that is not this bill. i cannot tell you the kind of opposition that i've seen in my state to this bill. it is almost unprecedented. i hear it in the letters, on calls, in airports, in grocery store aisles and on the streets. people stop me and say, "don't let that thing pass." absolute power corrupts and that is what we are seeing in washington today. democrats control the white house, the house, they have a filibuster-proof senate, they have used this absolute power to rowber stamp this add -- to rubber stamp this administration's big-government agenda and have tripled our deficit within one year. one year. we will run deficits of at least $1 trillion a year

kill the bill, my fellow americans. kill the bill. bill, my fellow americans.chanting "kill the bill"] and one last thing -- one last -- one last thing. one last thing. if these senators think that they are in safe states that they can do this, all i ask them to look to the hopelessly liberal state of new jersey -- [cheering] -- and the state of virginia, the great state of virginia -- [cheering] -- that only a month ago elected conservative republican governors. [cheering] we are not getting up. thank you. god bless you. god bless america. [cheers and applause] >> i tell you what, he's going to turn new jersey around with your help from new jersey, right? we are going to turn to new jersey about. [cheers and applause] back in the spring and winter when this health care battle first kicked off, there was one group, conservatives for patients right, that was the first group in the breach with television ads, with research focusing on what this health care bill would do, and the head of the group is here today and i want you to give a warm welcome. this was one o

americans know that medicare is gone broke. americans know that costs are rising too quickly. that americans want us to do this right and not in a partisan fashion and not with a bill that cost too much, taxes too much, and deprives people of their benefits. >> the senator from arizona, i thank you for your questions. i say we have two positions in the senate, dr. coburn and dr. barrasso for my domain. and i'm wondering if they were there with me for just a minute or two to reflect something the minority leader said. and the senator from arizona, the minority leader, the republican leader talked about a historic mistake. there's not a lot of talk around here about making history on health care. the problem is there's many different kinds of history as the republican leader has pointed out in seems our friends on the other side are absolutely determined to pursue a comic odyssey of political kamikaze mission towards a mistake which will be disastrous for them in the elections of 2010, but much more important that for the country. i did a little research on historic mistakes. we

sure, the american people get that. they -- they know that this is going to increase the cost of health care and it's going to increase the deficit. and that is -- that's why they're oh posted to this. mr. graham: would the senator yield for another question? mr. chambliss: sure. mr. graham: that's talk about class act a little bit more. it's a new program that doesn't exist today where the federal government, as i understand it, will be offering long-term health care insurance to the american people. it's a voluntary program at first, just like everything else around here. guess who's going to sign up? it's called adverse selection. the sickest people in the country are going to sign up. under the bill as it's written, it's just like what senator isakson said about the underlying bill. you collect taxes for ten years, you pay out benefits for six. that's the way you get the money to make the numbers come out right. well, guess what happens in the class act, this new program no one's heard much about? you start collecti

the american people get it. they already know the federal government is the worst credit card abuser in the world, and we are putting everything on the tab of our children and grandchildren. and they're not the only ones. internationally our creditors are concerned. chinese premier wen jiabao said we're concerned about the security of our assets. to be honest, i'm a little bit worried. that's why here i would like to urge the u.s. to keep its commitment and promise to ensure safety in chinese assets. end of quote. that's what he said to the president and anybody that goes to china. they're worried about the fact that they lent us a lot of money and might not get it back. while the international community understands our crisis, somehow congress doesn't get it. here we are considering a bill when fully implemented spends more than $2 trillion over ten years to restructure our health care system. i respect my friends on the other side of the aisle, but the assumptions that they make are optimistic about the cuts i

it is in the american frame of mind to do things on the basis of american decisionmaking, american resourcesamerican self-reliance with other partners being very welcome to add things where they can but is mainly being an american enterprise -- >> if i could interrupt you. when the british government took the decision in different military options it was presented with to go for the largest, including a division level land force, a strong part of the argumentation was that this would give us a significant influence over the way the operation was conducted. do you think that london failed to appreciate that despite that decision that we were a low- quantity partner, did you think we re -- did they think that we were a high-quantity part because of that? >> no, they would have to rely on good american decisionmaking and resource allocation to get this thing done well. in british terms, it was an enormous expedition, military expeditionary force to be sent to iraq to win one part of the country and hold that part of the country and if you look at the record of what we did in the southeast, we e

and other americans died. another american has died.a preventable death, each of them. forces since this heart rendering decisions every day. tonight every senator has a choice to make as well. that choice, are you going to do all you can to avert the next preventable death? i hope so. irish an aye vote. mr. president, -- i urge an aye vote. mr. president, i would advise my members that in 1984 the senate adopted resolution s480 to impose a requirement senators look from the basket on the wooden benches of the time, but i would ask that we do vote from our desks and followed the rule s480. senators vote from their desks. >> senate majority leader harry reid early this morning. following that late night debate, the senate passed the manager's amendment. it was 16-40. more procedural votes are set for tomorrow morning at approximately 7:00 p.m. -- 7:00 a.m. eastern. wednesday 1:00 p.m., a vote on final passage is scheduled for christmas eve at 7:00 p.m. eastern the date is alive health care debate when the senate returns this afternoon at

uninsured americans get taxed. insured americans get taxed. families with high-value plans get taxed. high-health cost families get taxed. flexible spending accounts get reduced. small businesses get taxed. and we could go on and on and on to the tune of $500 billion, and that's not evenly counting the unfunded mandate hammer that we're sending to every governor in this nation. a senator: i might add a statistic i was reading here. mr. crapo: if you take out that c.b.o. report, which is what actually analyzes on a nonpartisan basis, the impact of these medicaid expenditures, not including the proposed increase that we heard about overnight, it clearly says -- and i'm reading from the report -- that c.b.o. estimates that state spending on medicaid would increase by about $25 billion over the 2010 to 2019 period as a result. provisions affecting government in table 3. that estimate reflects state's flexibility to make programmatic and other necessary changes to medicaid and chip. i think that's the statistic my colleague from tennessee was looki

americans know that medicare's going broke. americans know that costs are rising too quickly. but americans want us to do this right and not in a partisan fashion and not with a bill that costs too much, taxes too much and deprives people of their benefits. mr. alexander: the senator of arizona, i thank him for his comments. and i see that we have the two physicians in the senate, dr. coburn from oklahoma, and doctor barrasso from wyoming. i wonder if they would bear with me for just a minute or two to reflect on something that the majority leader said and the -- what the minority leader said. the minority leader talked about a historic mistake. there's been a lot of talk around here about making history on health care. the problem is there's many different kinds of history as the republican leader -- leader has pointed out. it seems our friends on the other side are absolutely determined to pursue a political come cozkamakazee mission for td states. i did a little research on historic mistakes. we made them before in the united states congress and maybe we'd be wise to take g

americans insured. why? what is so good about that? more people have health insurance but also it will spread the risk of paying for an accident or disease. if more people covered, the risk is shared more broadly in spreading the risk more broadly should lower premium rates for everybody. it is a basic tenet of insurance. fit, health care reform will reduce cost by cutting administrative red tape. no small item. today insurance companies spend a lot of time and money finding ways to discriminate against people. they spend time and money finding ways to deny or drop coverage and insurance companies pass those costs on to all americans in the form of higher premiums. the figure i've heard mr. president and its 18% of our administrative costs and this legislation would dramatically reduce that percentage to a much lower number. don't know exactly to what level yet but a much much lower level today. 18% and perhaps more of total health care dollars go to pay administrative costs. that is subtly not the case

the first american leader ever to do so. by the time he died, he had held more offices than any public figure in history. state legislator, congressman, ambassador to france, to britain, minister to spain, fourth term governor of his home state of virginia, u.s. secretary of state, secretary of war, and finally to term president of the united states, the fifth president. as governor of virginia he became the second most powerful figure in america. virginia than was america's largest, wealthiest and most heavily populated state with 20% of the american population. it stretched all the way to the mississippi river and all the way up north to the great lakes. it was enormous. and the prestige and importance of its governor was akin to the governors of california, illinois, new york and texas put together today. and monroe was not only the governor of america's most important state, he was a national hero in the revolutionary war. in other words, he was a giant in his day. and i don't understand why historians ignore him, which

american soil.ho are the terrorists, what senators are terrorizing the citizens and i encourage you -- we've got the sun filled beard were going to put it out on the internet. we want you telling your friends. [cheers and applause] we want you to know their time to stop her voice. god bless america and god bless this movement, go team america! [cheers and applause] >> i tell you what. we are going to bring her back up one more time. [cheers and applause] she's going to make a very special introduction born of our guest of honor here today. michele bachmann! >> are we ready for the great lady that we've all come to see? [cheers and applause] we are rolling up her sleeves to hear from the freedom side! not only is she the most listened to female in talk radio, she's also "the new york times" bestseller author of what all of you are, their power to the people! [cheers and applause] phobos welcome. and not to mention she is drop dead gorgeous, and smart. laura ingram in mac [cheers and applause] >> hey

to stall everything that would help get americans back to work or that would help 15.4 million americans who are looking for work. and now to stop us, as i said, from extending health insurance coverage to over 30 million americans. their objections aren't about policy, they're about politics. earlier this year, objection 74, they stalled the unemployment bill and their delaying tactics caused nearly 300,00 200,000 ams to lose their unemployment benefits just a couple of months before christmas. they objected to the bill twice. they filibustered, not once but three times, before they voted unanimously, they voted unanimously for the bill. so why would you filibuster something three times and then vote for it unanimously? not because you're concerned about the policy. the only explanation is that republicans were just trying to waste time. time that cost 200,000 americans their unemployment benefits. the difference between paying the mortgage, keeping the heat on, putting food on the table, and possibly trying to keep health care going with a cobra payment or in some other fashion. object

the americans shrugged it off. it's harder to walk away from the middle east precisely because of oil. i don't think the afghan war, though, to speak to your question, has a lot to do with oil. there's always these conspiracy rumors, but from what i've seen afghanistan is not exporting a lot of oil and gas. there is gas up in the central asian region, but afghanistan is a very resource-poor country. it actually would solve a lot of our problems if someone would find a lot of natural gas and oil there. >> host: kerry on the democrats' line. >> caller: yes, i'd like to know, i'm familiar with your job as a reporter for the pentagon for "the washington post", and i was wondering through that experience do you know of any way that the, the u.s. military forces could better use their technological advantage such as with the drones and stuff and the, you know, modern technology or they could use that as an advantage to help them try to get better outcome in afghanistan? >> host: mr. ricks? >> guest: on the question of te

that's buy american. then we have black businesses in the business of transporting pipe or giving pipe to various companies, excuse me, giving steel or -- to various countries, and can you believe these small businesses that have workers and truck drivers, minority companies, that transport this steel, cannot buy any steel from american companies. what i would say to the gentleman, yes, i hear the pain in our houses of worship, i hear the pain in grocery stores. but i hear the pain when we go to mass feedings that people are coming to now in more numbers than i've ever seen before, it re-emphasizes the fact, are we going to answer the pain, the call that's being made upon us, and i hope the congressional black caucus would be front and center doing that. i yield back. ms. fudge: we have been joined by another of our colleagues, laura richardson of california. i'd like to yield to the congress lady. ms. richardson: i thank the gentlelady for yielding and i especially want to thank congresswoman lee and con

and in which he denounced american jews, all american jews, as an israeli fifth column. it was bad enough that a major liberal periodicals like the nation could play host to the naked invocation of two of the classic themes of anti-semitism. the jews as a disloyal alien, and the jew as a conspiratorial manipulator of blind power, dangerous to everyone else. but what was even worse was that vidal's article elicited no more than a week peak of protest from the magazine sponsors and readers. the bundle a fair provide a powerful confirmation for the argument, some of us have been making since 1967, that anti-semitism had found a new home on the left. and then by a lucky coincidence, the nation's opposite number on the right, national review, became embroiled in a similar controversy of its own that provided commensurately powerful evidence to the argument went also been making since 1967, that anti-semitism was becoming more and more unwelcome among conservatives. this controversy involved a member of national review's editorial staff named joseph so brand. who had devoted a

not for all americans, some won't get all of it, but most americans. and the next year, 2019, a net tax cut of $40.8 billion. i just want to make it clear that there's a net tax cut in this bill and this is the distribution over three different years, 2015, 2017, 2019. that's information prepared by the joint committee on tax. i want americans to know that there are tax cuts in this bill and they're very significant. madam president, i yield the floor -- the presiding officer: under the previous order -- under the previous order the senate stands in recess until until 2:30 p.m. recess: in the debate earlier today, senator ensign raised a point of order against the health care bill. what's that mean? >> senator ensign as you said raised a constitutional point of order. republicans haven't had much success so far thwarting democrats effort to pass a bill by christmas. senator ensign raised a point of order, claiming individual mandate to purchase health insurance in the bill violated the constitution. >> will that get a separate vote? >> it will. part of

the american people and the american economy cannot afford for us to wait for the next time. because, you see, mr. president, there may not be a next time. nearly 65 years ago, harry truman condemned a system that condemned its citizens to the devastating economic side effects of sickness. nearly 65 years later we still suffer from the same. just months after world war ii came to crease, president harry s. truman wrote in a letter to congress to this body and i quote -- "we should resolve now that the health of this nation is a national concern, that financial barriers and the way of attaining health shall be removed. that the health of all of its citizens deserves the help of all of the nation." decades have passed and these financial barriers have grown taller, but we will never solve the problem unless we find the resolve, which we haven't found, until, mr. president, today. this is how long we've waited. think of those who are just 1-year-old in 194 a 5 -- 1945. there are far too many who have lived their lives have not had any type of health care. any type of health care

you will see in the book an american general standing over an american army soldier.ey are waterboarding if filipino on the ground, and the europeans in this illustration are standing in the back, and the europeans are smirking, those americans won't be able to criticize us anymore. and there are pictures of waterboarding. it was a common occurrence in the philippines. so common that i reprint in the book, an american marching song. there was a waterboarding song put to song that the americans marched to. it was a very common thing for us to do at that time. i had no idea. >> interesting. several questions here deal with what are the lessons to learn from your research on our current situation in the two wars that we are engaged in today? >> well, that is another book. so, i would like to reserve that one. i go back to the idea that we have a system set up by the founding fathers. we have a constitution that says that this is how the system should work. it is a very good idea to have congressional oversight. congress is supposed to be the one that debates and declares

we are proud to be americans. we want to pass on to our children the blessings of our liberty that we inherited from our forefathers, and because nothing matters more to less than protecting our homes and families. our hope is that as a result of this determination and sacrifice, we never again will see our cities and citizens under attack. i hope we also take a moment this year to reflect on those suffering here at home. for too many families, this will be a difficult christmas. one in 10 americans are unemployed. nearly 6 million citizens have been looking for work for more than six months, the most on record. all year long, republicans have offered common-sense solutions to put money into the pockets of hard-working families and help small businesses create new jobs. we have also had a plan to lower health care premiums by 10% and a strategy to create more american jobs. the strained budgets and clean up the environment. just as important, these solutions to not raise taxes, grow government, or add to the skyro

workers, the american economy. it didn't turn out to be necessarily the case that clearly. while this was unfolding, $700 billion in tarp, the eight huge national entities, private sector, that were nationalized by the federal government and the $787 billion economic stimulus plan, all of that came at the american people faster than they could react. faster than they could understand. and they were not simple enough in their -- in the foundational understanding of them, that the american people could look at that, describe it in a bumper sticker and mobilize. it took too long to understand them, took too long to explain, it was hard for the american people to get caught up and hard for the members of congress to understand the details to rise up and say, hold it, that's it, we've got to stop. we cannot race down this path and leap off the abyss into the socialized economy. that's where we have gone, mr. speaker. the american people started to catch up when they saw cap and trade be pushed through this congress. the

they wave a flag, stand up the un-american strawman, saying the bill is against old-fashioned american values and denounce it. we say, don't you dare question our patriotism. do not dare question our commitment to doing what is right for the american people. they stand up the death panel strawman, claim the legislation would kill grandma and denounce it as inhumane. we say stop the outrageous misinformation and tell the truth to the american people. they stand up the tax strawman and say, health care reform will increase taxes. we say we're making health care entities, like insurance companies, pay their fair share. they set up the spending strawman and say the bill will indebt the next generation despite congressional budget office estimates to the contra contrary. we say, you can't pick and choose when to believe the congressional budget office and stand by their numbers only when it's convenient to your cause. for instance, my friend, senator gregg, the ranking member on the budget committee,tout, touts c.. numbers even on his specific bill. when they benefit his arguments, for exam

the american consumer knows it. they know a bad deal when they see it, a deal that includes increased premiums, higher taxes and cuts in medicare. and so, frankly, i think those people with such glaring conflicts of interest should not be in the position of trying to endorse something that's basically going to make them to enrich them at the detriment of the american people. mr. president, i plan to offer amendments about this bill's provisions to cut nearly -- that as currently proposed cut $500 billion from the medicare program. my first amendment would make medicare play by the same financial solvency rules as private insurers. now, we hear our friends on the other side of the aisle talk about insurance companies, and i have no doubt that their desire is, frankly, to do away with private-sector involvement in the health coverage field, which leaves, of course, only the federal government, ultimately a single-payer system making decisions out of washington, d.c. that affect the health care delivery to 300 million

i don't want just to liftie arab-americans or muslim-americans, but this is a long list of u.s. residentses or u.s. citizens in most cases who are somehow experimenting with terror, and while i agree with you, mr. zogby, we need a scalpel not a sledgehammer and i agree that we should focus on actual terrorist acts, and not someone's belief system i truly agree with that, we need to do something here. we need to intervene. hopefully we will not intervene after the fact, but we will find exactly the right place to intervene to prevent these terror actions. so our second two witnesses, dr. weine and dr. craigin suggested ways to learn more. i'd like to ask our first two witnesses what strategies do you think we, the united states government, this subcommittee, should undertake to intervene at the right moment to prevent acts of terror by people like the list i just read against the united states? >> thank you, chairman harman. i think there are a lot of good ideas expressed by all of the witnesses here today. today. i would reiterate our point that you start with the violence and n

we cannot make muslim americans save. we cannot make the united states save -- we can make muslim americans safe. we cannot make the united states safe. we have -- that is until we have [unintelligible] is inadequate how the united states thinking is on that front. >> the turning point, actually -- moslems should agree on reality, even if we do not accept it. muslims are an essential part of the solution. without muslim americans in that for one, there is no solution. there is no solution and america will not be the america we want. we need this country because it is the best country in the world, the best human experience that we have. we need to keep before us and for our children. to keep it, we should solve that problem of dangerous, violent extremists. without the muslims fighting, there is no winning. not homeland security, not the military -- muslim troops must be on the front line. >> cynthia, in terms of the media and how these kinds of problems are framed, but i think we can agree that, even though we come from

they are poor americans. they're not good americans. good americans would come in and say how much more money can we give you, big government, to take care of all our needs from cradle to the grave. i've got to tell you, the people at the tea parties understand the kind of games that are being played here and they understand that the cuts to home health care, the cuts to hospice programs, the cut to hospitals, the disproportionate share moneys for poor that deal with hospital care for poor people and $23 billion from just general medicare accounts is a cut to medicaid -- medicare, which is our seniors' program. all right. now, so i will ask this questi question. how is it, then, that we have this disagreement? how is it possible that you can't agree on where $465 billion comes from? the sponsors of the bill, this is what they say. they say, we're not -- we promised we wouldn't cut medicare benefits, any guaranteed benefit, any senior citizen has, we promised not to cut it. all we're doing is cutting the providers, the people who provide

all-american story. he never caught on with the voters and i could never figure out really why that never happened. >> now, while you have noted that president reagan obviously ran the best campaign, he was victorious in the stories, you call it a blundering start. >> uh-huh. >> take us back to that time because the reagan presidency almost wasn't the reagan presidency because of the very bad start. what happened? >> what happened was this, was that after 1976, after kansas city, reagan does what he wants to do, which is to go out and to communicate to the american people his views on america, conservatism, the world, communism, opportunity, freedom. all those things he believed in. it's in june in 1977 alone he gives 13 major policy speeches. he's on the tonight show with johnny carson. he's testifying on capitol hill against the panama canal treaties. he's hither and yon and reagan was like a thoroughbred. the more you ran him, the better he ran. but if you pulled him off to the side and you put him in

or too many democratic americans instead of american democrats and american republicans. i'm telling you the time is now for american democrats and american republicans to get together over the next 60 days and figure out what we are going to do because we are on an unsustainable financial course. thank you, mr. neal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from nevada is recognized. mr. heller: thank you, madam speaker. i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from texas, a colleague of mine on ways and means, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. brady: thank you, madam speaker. it is interesting to hear our democrat friend's newfound interest in paying for the war. that hasn't always been the case. here's what the current majority leader said on this house floor in 2004 when the debt limit was proposed to be raised and we were at war. now majority leader mr. hoyer said, raising the debt limit is immoral. this is disastrous consequence will cripple our future prosperity a

stood up -- americans stood up.y made their voices heard, and now the tide has turned. the american people oppose this bill. they want us to start over. they want us to make common sense, step-by-step reforms that everyone can support, not some backroom deal to have the government take over the health insurance system that's then forced on the american people without discussion. our friends on the other side can read the writing on the wall. they know the american people oppose this bill. but they've apparently made a calculation to force it through congress over the next several days before the american people even have a chance to absorb the details. the only thing that can stop them is the realization by democrats themselves that this plan would be a tragic mistake for seniors, for the economy, and for our country. and that a better path would be the kind of step-by-step reforms that americans have been asking of us, reforms americans really want. americans don't think reform should come at the expense of seniors