garrett: thank you. madam chair, if there's anything the last few months have taught us and that's the american people telling us is that we don't need more government and overreach and big government solutions when targeted reforms are more appropriate and effective. when thinking about how to draft a legislative response to the recent financial crisis in regards to this issue of derivatives, we must ask ourselves one seminal question. what are we trying to resolve here? the vast majority of all otc derivative marketplace had absolutely nothing to do with the crisis. it provides critically important risk management tools for virtually the -- all large companies and many small and medium sized companies as well. when you think about it, the a.i.g. situation, even the problem there with the derivatives had much more to do with the extremely bad bets on the housing market along with failed prudential regulators who were supposed to be overseeing them than anything specifically to do with the derivatives th

garrett of new jersey. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 964, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: and i thank the madam chair. i was just at the microphone a moment ago and speaking about the recognition that i think we have on both sides of the aisle that the c.r.a.'s, the credit rating agencies, were part in par sell to the financial situation that we find ourselves in right now. and during the time i raised two -- probably three significant points on this and what we need to do when it comes to reform. i mentioned the fact that we need to reduce investors' reliance upon rating agencies. i mentioned also that we need to encourage investors due diligence that sort of goes with it. and the third point i is it raise is we need to have increased competition between the credit rating agencies. unfortunately, if you look at the bill before us, title 5 of the bill, includes a numbe

garrett: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. frank: with great enthusiasm i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the motion is say do notted. accordingly the committee rises -- is adopted. accordingly the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: madam chair. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 4173 directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 4173 and has come to no resolution thereon. mr. frank: mr. speaker. the speaker pro

garrett of new jersey. mr. garrett: i yield two minutes to the the gentleman from minnesota. mr. paulsen: this bill only continues the culture of bailouts and encourages firms to engage in risky behavior. as far as i'm concerned it will remove the element of surprise with the first amount of selective bailouts and this is not the right way to go. just look what it would do. the bill before us has provisions that take away capital needed by firms to help expand businesses, increase investments and ultimately create jobs. estimates show that the size of the fund could be more than $200 billion. this money has to come from somewhere and this will place a significant burden not only on these firms but also on credit that will get dried up. during these economic times with record unemployment at 10%, why would we make it more difficult for getting credit for small businesses and job creation. why should a company have to pay for those companies that have been engaging in extensively risky behavior? madam speaker, it's worth mentioning the danger that is posed when we create institutio

garrett: another two minutes. mr. hensarling: 4301, which credit cards, which home mortgages and which car loans we are allowed to receive and the list goes on and on and on. madam chair, what this really leads us to is a bailout and job loss bill where the bill get bigger, the small get smaller, the taxpayer gets poor and the economy gets political. what does a political economy look like? we have seen it. we have seen it in the government-sponsored enterprises of freddie mac and fannie mae and give them these monopoly powers. they are allowed to grow these profits, but then they do a deal with congress, but oh, you have to have an affordable housing machine, you need to have this political mission and $1 trillion of taxpayer liability of taxpayer exposure later, we know what that's about. how about gm and chrysler? when they went bankrupt, allies of the administration, united auto workers, they end up with a sweetheart deal. and chrysler, 29 cents on the dollar but the united auto workers, 43 cents on the dollar and

garrett: yes, sir. mr.k: i would say, if there were to be a no on the voice vote, i think that would be a reasonable end to this particular discussion and we can then continue on the level we talked about. mr. garrett: with that comment and also with the understanding that we are not talking about the other c.r.a., ou

garrett. >> thank you for your continued pursuit of this issue and this series of hearings that you chair. it's been a full year says bernard madoff called it his own house of cards and admitted that he had operated the largest ponzi scheme in history. you think that by this week, awful 12 months removed from his admission, our financial regulators, some of whom that have admitted they were negligent in protecting investors from his fraud, would have helped the many victims -- as many victims as they could. you would think that what the enormity of the ponzi scheme and human tragedy it has caused, they would be as generous as possible. and you would think that because his investors receive detailed, and genuine statements, his victims had every reasonable expectation that the money in their account was really there, belong to them, and that they were fully protected by the security laws. sadly, you would be wrong. instead, in the year since madoff has turned himself in, the largest and most sophisticated financial system and the world, rather than providing restitution and the largest fra

garrett: you yielded it to me. i'm responding. mr. frank: i a want to respond to the response -- i want to respond to the response. i said i took -- i took two minutes for myself and yield time -- mr. garrett: i'm sorry. i thought you wanted a response. i'm sorry. the chair: both minutes have expired. mr. frank: i yield myself 30 seconds to explain to the gentleman who misunderstands the rules. i yielded myself two minutes so we could have the conversation. he then used up both minutes. it was not within my power to continue it. i will get back to it now, i don't want to keep my friend, i yield four minutes to the gentleman from illinois. mr. garrett: hopefully i answered your question. mr. frank: i yield to the gentleman from illinois. the chair: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for four minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i rise in strong support -- mr. frank: the gentleman -- temporarily i move the committee do now rise. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts -- mr. frank: i move the committee d

scott garrett is a republican from new jersey.democrats when republicans were in the majority because of the pharmaceutical billÑi. i believe that the tax-cut issue, top earners are not paying their fair share. host: top earners not paying their fair share. guest: first and foremost, your question before was what is our solution to the problems? one of the solutions was tax cut across the board. we would suggest that everyone would be better offñxi if they right now. about where she wouldñr want to keep and spend her money. we would try to allow her to be in the driver's seat on spending. Ñihost: we began the program ths morning talking about kenneth feinberg, talking about a cap of $500,000 on firms that receive government money. what do you think of that idea? guest: in general i am opposed to the government stepping in like that. in general saying that the government should not be stepping into the private sector. in this case we are talking about financial institutions that have received the largess of the american public. so,

. >> chairman kanjorski, ranking member garrett, and members of the committee, thank you for holding these hearings and looking into the sec's complicity with bernard madoff investment. my name is jeannene langford and i live in san rafael, california. as one of the more than 16,000 victims of the madoff ponzi scheme, i am grateful to have the opportunity to present how financially devastating scandal was to me personally. it shattered my trust in my government's ability to serve and protect us. my hope is that congress would choose to recognize and protect all indirect investors such as myself who were victimized by this scandal. i have worked for 30 years as an art and design professional in the stationery and craft industry for the past 17 years have been as a single parent working to provide for myself and my daughter. in the areas where i have little expertise, i recognize the necessity to hire a specialist. personal investment was one of those areas, and i knew that there were systems such as the sec employees from my research, there was no reason to believe that this investmen

. >> we're here with garrett peck, the author of "the prohibition hangover," what was the pro hijack and when did it take place? >> prohibition was a constitutional amendment that took place in 1920 and lasted almost 14 years, until 1933. the country realized that prohibition didn't work out too well, because we banned the manufacturer's sale and transportation of alcohol, which of course, engendered a tremendous amount of law breaking and then once the great depression took place, the country realized, you know what, this is becoming such a big law and order issue and we need the jobs back, so we ended up repealing prohibition. >> can you talk a little bit about how we got to prohibition iand the lit example infighting that led to this system amendment. >> there was a century long reform movement, called the temperance movement, which was designed to get our countrymen who not just sober up, but to abstain altogether and they used the excuse of world war i to change the constitution. we declared war on germany in 1917 and of course the brewers at that time that germans, so what whol

garrett: delay, delay, delay? it's absolutely delay.we have been waiting here for the last four hours waiting for your side of the aisle to come to the floor to debate this bill. and i would ask, who it is on your side of the aisle that was delay, delay, delay. i would be glad to ask that person why are you delaying trying to reform this in the country. people are watching what is going on on the floor right now and they said you must go down to the floor to end the bailouts and end this legislation that will cut jobs in this country and end this legislation that will expand the size of government. i understand why the gentleman from colorado says we are mistaken as to whether or not there are bailouts in this bill. this bill is larger than the health care bill. it's larger than the cap and trade bill, the bill that no one read before they came here or the health care bill before they came here. maybe the reason why the gentleman from colorado is perhaps mistaken on this point is because enough people on your side of the aisle haven't r

>> chairman, ranking member garrett and members of the subcommittee.thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of the securities and exchange commission. i am the s.e.c.'s deputy sy solicitor. there are a number of issues being discussed here today but i wish to focus my legitimated time on views of liquidation of bernard madoff's funds. we are keenly aware of the devastating losses incurred by the investors who entrusted their money to madoff. many if not most of his victims have had their lives up ended. experience and reform the way we operate. over the past year we have taken significant steps in that regard, reinvigorating the enforcement division, enhancing our inspections, bolstering the training program, revamping our tips and complaints process, and hiring personnel with new skill sets. and we will continue to reform. with regard to the madoff liquidation t commission and its staff have been analyzing cipat legislative history and case law to determine how to properly value the claims of the investors. while claims for

. >> we're here with garrett peck, the author of "the prohibition hangover: alcohol in america frm demon rum to cult cabernet." what was the prohibition and when did it take place because the prohibition was a constitutional amendment that took place, that took effect in 19 and lasted almost 14 years until 1933. the country realized that prohibition didn't work out too well because we had banned the manufacture sale and transportation of alcohol, which of course generator hms amount of lawbreaking and ended up once the great depression to place the country realized, you know what, this has become such a big issue and we need the jobs back. so we ended up repeating prohibition. >> can you talk about how we got to prohibition in the political and defined that led to this constitutional amendments because there was a century long social reform movement called the temperance movement which was designed to get our country, not just sober up a stay altogether. they use the excuse of world war i to change the constitution. of course, the brewers at the time were germans. so that whole lobby was

. >> author is garrett peck, the book is the prohibition hangover. thanks. >> thank you. thanks for having me here today. >> the producer and directer of the documentary, kabul 24, talk about the capture and detention of 24 aid workers from shelter now international in afghanistan just prior to 9/11. henry arnold and ben pearson describe what the western workers went through before they were released and their afghan counterparts who received harsher treatment. from the southern festival of books held annually in nashville, this is 50 minutes. >> for three months in 2001, the desperate plight of eight international workers captured by the taliban in afghanistan captured the the attention of the world. with the growing specter of the u.s. retaliation for 9/11, the taliban and osama bin laden attempted to use these western hostages as bargaining tools. kabul 24 revisits not only these westerners' horrific 105 days in captivity, but also the torture endured by their 16 muslim co-workers who were accused by the taliban of converting to christianity. today we're going to hear

garrett. >> what we can try to do from the government's perspective is try to make sure that there was justice. we need to strive in order to get justice. everyone should be held accountable for executing their own due diligence in their investments. this changes from who your from the proverbial lowly the and the union official who might have more resources and the little old lady would be. the level of due diligence as core to be responsible. we do expect the due diligence. that is your responsibility. added to that this will that is reliant. when you do your due diligence, looking to the sec, have they done their job? you are relying on them to do their job. when you look to -- that is before the factory at the should be able to look to others to do their job. this is the whole issue. there is a bill on the floor this week. this creates a moral hazard, if you will. by relying on the government, as you did, because the government says there were to protect you, you have the right to rely on them. maybe you would have done more due diligence, but we told you that you could rely on it.

and new orleans capitalizes with garrett hartley's 18-yard game winner to give the saints the improbabletory. now shaun suisham is on shaky ground despite hitting on 18 of 21 field goal attempts this year. but chic hernandez did confirm today that the 'skins will bring in a few kickers to work out tomorrow one of which is former terp and former redskin nick novak. he hit this game winner in 2006 against the cowboys. how could you forget. there could be a change in the running back rotation as well. quinton ganther is likely to get the start sunday against the raiders which clearly is news that may not please current starter rock cartwright. and we think quinton is a pretty good runner, finishes runs off a little bit better, you know. so, you just go with this, it's not what rock isn't doing, we think it's what quinton may be able to do for us that rock is not tony. so we'll just give him a chance. >> monday mornings quarterback is brought to you by could be could be. >> redskins quarterback jason campbell with a stellar performance yesterday, 367 passing yards, three tds, but then there

[applause] lawrence garrett send the final guest was released earlier this year as a result of the sentencingguideline changes after serving more than 10 years of a 15 year sentence his twin brother convicted at the same time is still incarcerated. in 1988 convicted of conspiracy to distribute carter and crack cocaine a few months after graduating from howard university parker he currently resides in washington d.c. and has received his real estate license and is willing to move his life for word. ladies and gentlemen,, lawrence caris then it. [applause] the. we will hear from five minutes from each of our speakers then have time for questions and answers part of the first speaker, chris burns. >> thank you so much mr. moderator. good morning. the are currently serve as attorney advisory to the u.s. commission of civil-rights i appear in my personal capacity to present a recent paper proposals to eliminate sentencing disparities between carter and crack cocaine. i wrote this for the federalist society. i cannot speak on their behalf be there. but the purpose of the project is to monitor and a

the we these people were first noticed by saifullah when garrett posting positive comments on youtube they were posting positive comments on youtube. we really need to figure out a combination of technical tools and other tools to get better insight. we don't want to crack down on these things, we don't want to change who we are as americans, we don't want to curb freedom of speech or the positive force of the internet. what we after recognize is that it is being used as a tool for adversaries and in that sense is a vulnerability. how do you balance that with democracy? that is what we are facing today. host: john on the democrats' line. caller: i have a question about this fear of terrorism. i had a cute numbers here, and these are just rounded off. every year, 100,000 people go to the hospital and died from malpractice, infections, different reasons. 40,000 people are killed in automobile accidents. 40,000 people are murdered every year. 45,000 die because they don't have any health insurance. if we add those up, the last eight years, that comes to about 2 million people. and we are

host: garrett from massachusetts. caller: i was wondering three or writing for the "washington post" -- through your writing for the "washington post" you know if there is a technological of vantagadvantage to try to ger outcome in afghanistan? guest: on the question of technology, the answer is, unfortunately, i do not think so. the job i really doing right now is writing the history of the last 50 years of american military operations since world war ii. one of the things that you see is a constantly looking for technological solutions. we are very technological and we like the idea of fixes through technology. the problem is that our problems are not technological. they are human. in fact, we have spent at least $10 billion in the military on finding technological answers to roadside bombs. they were at least temporarily successful. could you jam the radio waves that turns on and ignites the bomb? could you somehow detect bombs better and so on? it turns out the best way to detect a roadside bombs is to talk to the

. >> chairman kanjorski, ranking member garrett, and members of the committee, thank you for holding these hearings and looking into the sec's complicity with bernard madoff investment. my name is jeannene langford and i live in san rafael, california. as one of the more than 16,000 victims of the madoff ponzi scheme, i am grateful to have the opportunity to present how financially devastating scandal was to me personally. it shattered my trust in my government's ability to serve and protect us. my hope is that/gg)k i provide for myself and my daughter. in the areas where i have little expertise, i recognize the necessity to hire a specialist. personal investment was one of those areas and i knew that there were systems such as the sec in place to protect me. from my research there was no reason to believe that this investment was not a viable place to put my life savings. i have no way of knowing a partnership where i place my money was invested with madoff. money i had invested with madoff represented my life savings. it was my retirement, a down payment for house, investment for t

welcome to those of you attending garrett nih into people joining us by webcast. i am francis cones the director for national institutes of health and is a pleasure for us to oppose this discussion about vaccine prepared as any technologies to put together ideas for the future many of which are quite exciting about ways in which the development of future vaccines for influenza and other infections agents. what is a rapidly moving field in the scientific arena in which you'll be hearing about in the course of this morning's presentation. happy to be able to oppose this seminar just five months after the h1n1 summit that was held here at nih back in july. at that point, president obama put forward four pillars to it plan that are constantly being revised and reconsidered. those four pillars are surveillance, secondly community mitigation measures, third, vaccination our main topic today and for communication which is also an important part of today's activities. we have learned a lot since july about the course of h1n1 over the course of the autumn as it returned to

she practiced commercial law as a litigation associate at the private law firm of music, peeler and garrett. her caseload included contract disputes and intellectual property cases. she left the firm to become an assistant u.s. attorney in the u.s. attorney's office in los angeles and a very good one. at an assistant u.s. attorney in the criminal division, she prosecuted a wide variety of crimes, including violent crimes, narcotics trafficking, organized crime, gun cases, and all kinds of fraud. she spent six months in the organized crime strike force section, handling a title 3 wiretap investigation of a russian organized crime group responsible for smuggling sex slaves into the united states from the ukraine. and in 2000 she received a special commendation from f.b.i. director louis freeh for obtaining the first conviction ever in the united states against a defendant for providing material support to a designated terrorist organization. the justice department recognized her with three additional awards for superior performance as an assistant u.s. attorney and in 2000 she was promoted to

host: garrett from massachusetts.caller: i was wondering three or writing for the "washington post" -- through your writing for the "washington post" you know if there is a technological of vantagadvantage to try to ger outcome in afghanistan? guest: on the question of technology, the answer is, unfortunately, i do not think so. the job i really doing right now is writing the history of the last 50 years of american military operations since world war ii. one of the things that you see is a constantly looking for technological solutions. we are very technological and we like the idea of fixes through technology. the problem is that our problems are not technological. they are human. in fact, we have spent at least $10 billion in the military on finding technological answers to roadside bombs. they were at least temporarily successful. could you jam the radio waves that turns on and ignites the bomb? could you somehow detect bombs better and so on? it turns out the best way to detect a roadside bombs is to talk to the