and a power play wither stein. 3rd opportunity for toronto. kessel had the earlier power play goal. 5-3. kaberle, a man with a million power play assists. and ovechkin to kessel. and beauchemin on the rotation. stops. and the fellow native of the czech republic will recover. and given a little not to his defensive pattern, beauchemin who laid that baby right across. 15 power plays assists, as joe was talking about, 1st in the national hockey lead throughout the career. that has been the forte, bread and butter working the pt. and look at that. attacks it away. and back to toskala, nailing it off tot kaberle. and down by 1. a game that looks like they had complete control after a attach rouse 1st period, but the mapleleafs have responded. and back on the ice, kaberle in no hurry to wind it up. and center. hagman. over by poety. cleared it. -- poti. and penalized team on the circumstance the. and dodges opposey. and -- opposey. and opposey. blah blah á6 poti. behind the play. morrison a nice play getting to the inside. right across there. that b

former speaker newt gingrich, quote, we believe it's going to wither on the vine." speaking of medicare. you would think my friends on the other side of the aisle were the biggest supporters of medicare when they opposed it from the very beginning. now we hear all of the stuff about medicare advantage. medicare advantage. well, they like to tell you that if, in fact, we're going to be cutting a little bit out of medicare advantage, that somehow this is going to ruin -- this is going to ruin medicare. well, if that were true, why would the national committee to preserve social security and medicare, aarp, the alliance for retired americans, groups that represent tens of billions of seniors, why would they stand with us in support of our bill and not with the republicans who want to gut the very provisions that we have in there that will strengthen and preserve medicare? do people really believe that our republican colleagues care more about seniors and these groups that actually represent seniors? well, the truth is when we talk about medicare advantage, we're talkin

philosophy has and hopefully limit it to an area where we can monitor and contain it, hopefully it will wither and die like a plant without water. two questions real quick. on the civilian surge, talking with some of my colleagues and people who have been there, there seems to be a bottleneck on the civilian side with respect to getting projects actually on the ground. you get people there, but they can't get through the maze of okays. i know we were stolen blind in iraq sometimes because we didn't have some protections. if you could really take a close look, both of you, at the coordination of the commanders, the serb money and how that can be streamlined with the civilian money and coordinated, i would encourage you to do that, because i think that is -- both of you have said, is a critical part of our success. the other thing i would like to talk about is the reintegrati reintegration -- i think general petraeus talked about it yesterday. i knew him when he was at ft. campbell in our district. i think that is down the line maybe a part of it. i would be encouraged to have your insight into

they have argued that it is wasteful, that it's doomed, that it should be allowed to wither on the vine -- that was actually a quote from a leading republican not that long ago -- and they suggested there was a better way. let's privatize medicare. they love the notion of privatizing -- get government out of the picture. and they came up with this theory with the health insurance industry of something called medicare advantage. this was where those flinty-eyed entrepreneurs would teach government a lesson. they would offer the benefits of medicare and show how to do it at a lower cost. we accepted their challenge and gave them their opportunity and what we found was they failed. oh, some succeeded, but by and large when it was all over and the accounting took place, those private insurance companies couldn't help but have the urge to maximize profits at the expense of medicare. and so now we spend about $17 billion a year out of medicare subsidizing private health insurance under this so-called medicare advantage program and the experiment has failed. the basic idea of medicare was prov

one of the first statements from the leader of that party was to let that program wither on the vine. again, that's one person, the speaker, the leader of the revolution that produced the votes electorally in 1994. i think it is a backdrop when we hear the debate about medicare, it is important to have some history on where the parties have been on this issue generally speaking. in 1995 we begin with that as a backdrop. in 1997, two years later, it happened again. in 1997, here were the proposals. in 1997 medicare's funding as proposed in the republican balanced budget act of that year were twice of what we're talking about in the savings of this bill. a 12.4% reduction in medicare benefits in 1997. and of course in the last budget submitted by president bush last year -- and i think, again, it's reflective of where things were at. this is a year ago, not 14 years ago or not 1997. in 2009, the bush administration in submission of its budget proposed a $481 billion reduction in medicare benefits. that was not in the context of a health care reform bill. that was just in the context of

"let's let med care" -- quote -- "wither on the vine." that's just a few years ago in all of this debate. and so nes there's again some v, very strong provisions in this bill that reduce co-pays for seniors, ensures that seniors see their own doctors, prevents medicare from going bankrupt for an additional five years. we're being told today by c.b.o. and others that medicare becomes iinsolvent in eight years if we vote for the mccain amendment. we provide new preventive and wellness benefits for seniors, lower prescription drug homes, not end up in nursing hoaxes this is a long bill, a big bill. but instead of complaining about its size, i'd encourage my colleagues to read it and understand what's being done for medicare. this is a complicated area but nonetheless critically important. i see my colleague from california, senator boxer, who is here and others who want to address the issue on the mikulski amendment. and i'll yield the floor so they can be heard. i yield -- mrs. boxer: senator, if i might respond -- the presiding officer: th

one of the first statements from the leader of that party was to let that program wither on the vine. again, that's one person, the speaker, the leader of the revolution that produced the votes electorally in 1994. i think it is a backdrop when we hear the debate about medicare, it is important to have some history on where the parties have been on this issue generally speaking. in 1995 we begin with that as a backdrop. in 1997, two years later, it happened again. in 1997, here were the proposals. in 1997 medicare's funding as proposed in the republican balanced budget act of that year were twice of what we're talking about in the savings of this bill. a 12.4% reduction in medicare benefits in 1997. and of course in the last budget submitted by president bush last year -- and i think, again, it's reflective of where things were at. this is a year ago, not 14 years ago or not 1997. in 2009, the bush administration in submission of its budget proposed a $481 billion reduction in medicare benefits. that was not in the context of a health care reform bill. that was just in the context of

years later, we know newt gingrich when he was speaker of the house said he wanted to see medicare wither on the vine, his words. and in 1995 while seeking the republican nomination for president, senator bob dole, he said quote, i would say are in 1965 fighting the fight, voting against medicare because we knew it wouldn't work in 1965. so when you hear our republican friends say my goodness, they're making a lot of savings in medicare, this is bad for the seniors. please, please, which party has good for protect dean our seniors? it's not a matter of being bipartisan. it's just a fact. so the echoes of the past fill this chamber, but i'm convinced now in 2009 that hope and reason and determination and good policy will triumph over fear and obstruction and the status quo. let's look at the immediate and near-term changes for the better that people are going to have because our colleagues say we are raising revenues but there's no benefits right away. let's talk about what the benefits are. and i don't have time to go into them. i have them in a statement which will be placed into the rec

that every lawmaker but at their desk was not a smooth one -- he can under with three -- came under witheringcriticism. the public here at tom harkin yesterday on the floor debating the bill. -- have a look here at tom harkin. >> the last couple weeks of we heard from the other side is attack, attack, attack. no, no, no -- ñryou know, they keep talking. i just heard the senator from arizona saying this is not a bipartisan bill. i have heard so much talk on the other side about how this should be bipartisan. let's look at that for a second. as i see it the republicans have no bill of their own. our bill has 60 democrats, a super majority. my friends on the other side are all over the place. they cannot even agree among themselves what they want to do. they have no comprehensive bill. not like we have come up with. i keep hearing that we democrats are not bipartisan, but who do we deal with? just the senator from arizona? just the senator from tennessee? how about the senator from oklahoma or from south carolina? so, i am sorry -- i feel sorry that the republicans are all split up. host: ted, f

here is later when newt gingrich when he was speaker of the house said he wanted to see medicare wither on the vine. his words. in 1995 while seeking a republican nomination for president senator bob dole, he said quote i was there in 1965, fighting the fight, voting against medicare because we knew it wouldn't work in 1965 so when you hear republican friends say oh my goodness. they are making a lot of savings in medicare. this is bad for the seniors. please, please, which party has stood for protecting our seniors? it is not a matter of being-- it is just the fact. so the echoes of the past filled this chamber but i convinced now and 2009, that hope in reason and determination and good policy will triumph over fear and obstruction and the status quo. let's look at the immediate and near-term changes for the better that people are going to have because we are raising revenues but there's no benefits right away. let's talk about what the benefits are. and i don't have time to go into them. i have them in my statement which will be placed into the record. there will be a 5 billion-dollar

philosophy has and hopefully limit it to an area where we can monitor and contain it, hopefully it will wither and die like a plant without water. two questions real quick. on the civilian surge, talking with some of my colleagues and people who have been there, there seems to be a bottleneck on the civilian side with respect to getting projects actually on the ground. you get people there, but they can't get through the maze of okays. i know we were stolen blind in iraq sometimes because we didn't have some protections. if you could really take a close look, both of you, at the coordination of the commanders, the serb money and how that can be streamlined with the civilian money and coordinated, i would encourage you to do that, because i think that is -- both of you have said, is a critical part of our success. the other thing i would like to talk about is the reintegrati reintegration -- i think general petraeus talked about it yesterday. i knew him when he was at ft. campbell in our district. i think that is down the line maybe a part of it. i would be encouraged to have your insight into

hopefully it will wither and die like a plant without water. two questions real quick.n the civilian surge, talking with some of my colleagues and people who have been there. there seems to be a bottleneck on the civilian side with respect to getting projects actually on the ground. you get people there but they can't get through the maze of a okay or whatever. i know we have stolen blind in iraq sometime, because we didn't have some protections. but if you could really take a close look, both of you, at the coordination of the commanders, that serve money and how that can be straight in line with the civilian money and coordinated, i would really encourage you to do that. because i think that is, both of you have said, is a critical part of our success. the other thing i would like to talk about is the reintegration. i think general petraeus talked about yesterday, and i knew him when he was at fort campbell in our district. i think that is down the line may be, a part of it. and i would be encouraged to have your insight into what you think the chances there are. the

former speaker newt gingrich, quote, we believe it's going to wither on the vine." speaking of medicare. you would think my friends on the other side of the aisle were the biggest supporters of medicare when they opposed it from the very beginning. now we hear all of the stuff about medicare advantage. medicare advantage. well, they like to tell you that if, in fact, we're going to be cutting a little bit out of medicare advantage, that somehow this is going to ruin -- this is going to ruin medicare. well, if that were true, why would the national committee to preserve social security and medicare, aarp, the alliance for retired americans, groups that represent tens of billions of seniors, why would they stand with us in support of our bill and not with the republicans who want to gut the very provisions that we have in there that will strengthen and preserve medicare? do people really believe that our republican colleagues care more about seniors and these groups that actually represent seniors? well, the truth is when we talk about medicare advantage, we're talkin

change medicare, they couldn't directly do it so they would do it through the back door and let it wither on the vine, those famous words that we heard at that time, in terms of trying to privatize medicare, which is what i believe medicare advantage really is. recently in the debate on the house of representatives, we had 80% of the house republicans support an effort to do away with medicare at all as we know it as a guaranteed benefit. and, instead, give vouchers to seniors to go buy from private for-profit insurance companies. so we know what the reality of this is. this is about the for-profit insurance industry that right now is receiving overpayment at every -- whether it's congressional budget office, whether it's medpac, any analysis will say that they are receiving overpayments right now and we are trying to ratchet that back. and what is happening? why should folks care? of course, taxpayers care about overpayments much but we have about maybe 15% or so, 15% to 20% of seniors right now that are in the medicare advantage program, and we've been told by the budget office that the

speaker of the house, leader of the republican revolution, that said he wanted medicare to -- quote -- "wither on the vine?" was it not senator bob dole, the standard-bearer for president in the 1990's, who said, he had fought against medicare and was proud he voted against it? now all of a sudden it seems like the republicans are the guardians of medicare. people know the truth, mr. president. the american people know the truth. they know it's the democrats who fought for medicare. lyndon johnson and the democrats -- lyndon john s.o.s. was president -- lyndon johnson was the president and the democrats in the house and senate ... if it weren't for them, medicare would never have been passed. every step of the way it was opposed by other friends on the other side of the aisle. now to hear them talk about how much we're going after medicare ... boy, talk about crocodile tears. well, the other thing i wanted to say, mr. president, is that i wanted to correct something that the senator from oklahoma said. he talked about the recommendations that recently came out -- and i'm going to have nor say

then buys them from manufacturers, it spurs hiring, because local contractors and construction work withers do the insulation, it save consumers money, perhaps hundreds of dollars off their quite bills each year. and it reduces our energy consumption in the process. in other words, most of this stuff is going to pay for itself. you put in the insulation, you weatherize your home now. you will take up that money in a year or two years or three years. and then everything after that is just gravy. but the challenge for a lot of people is getting that money upfront. they know this is a smart thing to do. but times are tight right now. it's hard to afford making that capital investment. that's where the government can come in to provide the incentives to help people make that investment so they can recover the money over the long term. these incentives will build on the work that my administration is doing to eliminate the barriers to retrofitting millions of homes across the country. environmental quality appreciately released a report called recovery through retrofit and explains how to overco

years later we know newt gingrich, when he was speaker of the house, said he wanted to see medicare wither on the vine -- his words. and in 1995, while seeking the republican nomination for president, senator bob dole, he said -- quote -- "i was there in 1965 fighting the fight, voting against medicare because we knew it wouldn't work in 1965." so when you hear our republican friends say, oh, my goodness, they're making a lot of savings in medicare, this is bad for the seniors, please, please. which party has stood for protecting our seniors? it's not a matter of being partisan. it's just the fact. so the echoes of the past fill this chamber, but i'm convinced now in 2009 that hope and reason and determination and good policy will triumph over fear and obstruction and the status quo. let's look at the immediate and near-term changes for the better that people are going to have, because our colleagues say, oh, we're raising revenues but there's no benefits right away. let's talk about what the benefits are. and i don't have time to go into them. i have them in my statement which will be pla