mr. udall: mr. president, i'm also very pleased to join all-colleagues here tonight to talk about one of the most pressing challenges confronting our nation in my state of colorado and that is climate change. we've seen in my state that this is not an obscure threat or a distant problem. we've had catastrophic floods and megawildfires that's been the result of drought, of a whole series of changes in the way that we see climate systems operate in colorado. and it's threatening our very way of life. i have a powerful photograph here. we've had the past two years three successive megafires. and last year's black forest fire brought destruction into colorado springs. over 500 homes burned and we lost two lives. and this fire quickly surpassed the 2012 waldo canyon fire, which was the most destructive fire in colorado history. mr. president, now is the time to act. now is the time to grab the opportunity to create new energy technologies, to enhance our national security, and to, by the way, to keep fai

before i begin, let me associate myself with the comments of my colleague, mr. udall. once again, our staff is still waiting for several documents that we have requested. these requests are not unreasonable. the amount of time it is taking to produce them is. as much as anyone, i want to say the committee study of the cia's enhanced interrogation program finished and released. that cannot happen while the cia slow walks the documents that we have requested. we do not have many options available to force the agency's cooperation, but i will not rule out any in order to get the agency to finally cooperate with our requests. i want to thank the chairman for her leadership in getting this study written and i want to mention something that happened this afternoon. i am outraged that the cia continues to make misleading public statements about the committee's study of the cia interrogation program. there is only one instance in which the cia pointed out a factual error in the study. a minor error that has been corrected. for the rest, where the cia and the committee differ,

mr. udall: thank you mr. president,. thank you madam chair for your very kind words. senator boxer is the chairman of the committee that deals with climate change legislation and has been ever present in terms of trying to see if we can come up with a bipartisan solution and get legislation. and i was just very proud to serve on her committee when the obama administration came in and the senate sat down to work and was really trying to do something about climate change. and, unfortunately we ran out of time, but we still as you can see by the number of senators that have spoken, we're up to 30 now we still have incredible passion about this issue. we know it's a serious problem the american people know it's a serious problem and we want something done. now, what have we learned? what have we learned? i've watched my colleagues over the night. i guess i'm number 30th and i've watched what they've been talking about. one of the things we've learned and the tradition here in the senate is normally if we're talking like this and our colleagues on the republican side of th

mr. udall's call for action and the actions for others in order to do something to remove or at least signal, think this through, members, signal to the ukrainian government and to europe that right now, very much under the thumb of russia, that there is a way forward should the gas be cut off, there is the hope that gas could be exported from the united states into their markets, thus relieving the pressure that russia might otherwise bring into play. i think the wider issues that have been made here, the economic benefits of exporting liquefied natural gas, the fact that the department of energy did look at this long and hard, the administration looked at this, the dod decided it outweighs the cost, the department of energy has found that america can produce more than enough natural gas to make domestic demand affordably, also supporting export markets and the report concludes the net benefits of exports applied to consumers as well as the overall economy and these benefits increase along with the level of exports in other studies, might take away from this is because it is non-binding, be

mr. chairman. >> senator udall. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning gentlemen. thank you for your distinguished service to our nation. admiral rogers, want to turn to you. your written testimony advance policy responses. in those i noted that you stated that if the government could continue to access phone records through foreign service providers or repositories, that could serve as a viable alternative to the current phone records collection program. i was glad to read that. he also wrote that the business records 215 program quote grew out of a desire to address the gap identified after 9/11. since one of the hijackers cleat on it hard to make a phone call from san diego to a known al-qaeda sake -- safe house in human. you know that the nsa saw that call but you could not see those coming from an individual already in the united states. i'm concerned by the invitation that somehow section 215 program could have prevented 9/11. and i want to set the record state. from my point of view. as the 9/11 commission one of the set a new about him made our but did not

if you look at the udall race, you have mr. same side of the same coin as ken buck. he supported the personhood amendment, which has been rejected twice. that works against his candidacy and works for udall. he'll lose a significant amount of the women's vote. he voted against the dream act. michael bennett carried the latino community 81-19. so if he voted against the dream act, he'll lose a large percentage of hispanics. he voted against don't ask, don't tell for the military. if that be the case, he loses a large percent of the lgbt community, that's another segment. he voted for the paul ryan bhuj et, and that also slashed medicare as well as he wanted to privatize social security. you lose a large part of the seniors. and with that kind of effort, i don't see how you can get to the middle and to the majority of coloradoans. he voted against the debt ceiling and he voted to shut down the government. >> i have to ask you about guns. >> "the national journal" said he's the tenth-most-conservative senator in the senate -- or in

mr. chairman. senator udall. >> good morning, general. dmiral haney, let me start by saying i enjoyed the chance to sit and visit with you. i'm looking forward to mr. chairman of the strategic working with u.s. senator sessions sessions, the ranking member of the subcommittee to make sure our strategic turn remain safe or reliable and affordable. we talk about the affordability factor. it will be a great privilege to work with you. it's always good to see you. the last appearance before the committee. how much he thank you for decades of service for your country. i remain concerned about it duties and the constitutional ramifications when it comes to liberty. i'd be remiss if i didn't address those concerns today for old times sake. i would add that your knowledge is fast and i appreciate your initial comment about how we move forward when it comes to section 215 and seven at two. i wanted to make a comment and ask you a question. you know members of congress seven years ago about the use of section 215. i learned that we could have an ope

udall. think,ask this first, i to mr. chow, then dr. montgomery. it should be better known in the united states that russia's national budget is made up 52% of editing -- energy revenue. i'm sure the u.s. budget is considerably less. it has been written over the course of several years that russia has continued to use what has been termed -- not my term, but someone else said this -- energy blackmail. their state coffers full. foreign policy over the last 20 used thissia has energy blackmail over 40 times, including in countries like lithuania. you said that there was no silver lining. that our actions today may not take immediate effect. were much more bullish on your position. i would like to ask you all, what are the steps, in your opinion, that the u.s. should take to reduce russia's influence and reduce their quick access to cash and promote policies not in our interest and not in the interest of europe and democracies around the world? starting with you, dr. montgomery. what are the one or two things we should do? >> i will stick energy thing

udall and then i will come back to the list. thank you all for being present. let me ask this first to mr. chow a chow. i think this should be better known in the united states that russia's national budget is 52% made up of energy revenues. i will ask our staff to get information about the united states budget, which i am sure is less. it has been written that russia has continued to use what has been termed, not my term, energy blackp blackmail to keep the state coughers full. russia has used the energy blackmail more than 40 times including lithuanian who testified. mr. chow, you said there is no silver lining and our actions might not take immediate effect. dr. montgomery you were more bullish. so what are the steps that the u.s. should take to reduce russia influence, quick flow of cash, and to not promote what is in our interest. starting with you dr. montgomery. >> i will stick to energy things because i don't offer myself a expert on others. 20% of revenue energy and 10% of the russian budget. if we could take out half that would be about 5% of the budget. i think what the budget committee memb

mr. chairman. to both of you, thank you for your service and commitment to freedom. make a comment for the record. admiral rodgers, with regards to comments that senator udall made, i don't want to leave a false impression with the american people that if we had had 702 and 215 in place in 2001, there is a strong probability that we would have that ale to determine major attack was going to occur. there is the probability we would have picked up on those inion between those that were planning the attack. knowing that he was in country versus knowing he was in communication with terrorists planning an attack are two different things. we did not have to 15. we did not have 702. we knew that a phone call came from the night -- to the united states. we did not know it went to san diego. if we had had more information that we had gleaned from these programs, there is strong probability that we might have picked up on that. i want to make sure that the record reflects the actual facts on the ground relative to him. we discussed something that senator mccain discussed earlier. those with respect to trying to communicate these programs to the american people. it wi

mr. chairman. to both of you, thank you for your service and commitment to freedom. i want to make a comment for the record. admiral rodgers, with regards to comments that senator udall made, i don't want to leave a false impression with the american people that if we had had 702 and 215 in place in 2001, there is a strong probability that we would have been able to determine that a major attack was going to occur. there is the probability we would have picked up on conversation between those in yemen and those that were planning the attack. knowing that he was in country versus knowing he was in communication with terrorists planning an attack are two different things. we did not have 215. we did not have 702. we knew that a phone call came to the united states. we did not know it went to san diego. if we had had more information that we had gleaned from these programs, there is strong probability that we might have picked up on that. i want to make sure that the record reflects the actual facts on the ground relative to him. we discussed something that senator mccain discussed earlier. those with respect to trying to communicate these programs to the american peopl

mr. chairman. to both of you, thank you for your service and commitment to freedom. make a comment for the record. admiral rodgers, with regards to comments that senator udall made, i don't want to leave a false impression with the american people that if we had had 702 and 215 in place in 2001, there is a strong probability that we would have that ale to determine major attack was going to occur. there is the probability we would have picked up on those inion between those that were planning the attack. knowing that he was in country versus knowing he was in communication with terrorists planning an attack are two different things. we did not have to 15. we did not have 702. we knew that a phone call came from the night -- to the united states. we did not know it went to san diego. if we had had more information that we had gleaned from these programs, there is strong probability that we might have picked up on that. i want to make sure that the record reflects the actual facts on the ground relative to him. we discussed something that senator mccain discussed earlier. those with respect to trying to communicate these programs to the american people. it wi

quorum call: mr. udall: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico. mr. udall: i would ask to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: and i'd like to speak for ten minutes in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: madam president, new mexico is blessed with some of the world's finest scientists. each day brilliant researchers at our universities and national labs go to work and the results are amazing. at the same time entrepreneurs in new mexico and across the country are looking for opportunities to leverage innovation and to create new high-tech products and applications. i rise today to introduce the accelerating technology transfer to advance innovation for the nation, what we're calling the attain act. that's a long title and an important goal to improve the department of energy's technology transfer mission and to move innovation from the lab to the market. this grows our economy and creates a greater impact from our research and development dollars. but before i talk to you about