host: what was the pvailing argument with the majority of baker versus exxon? guest: the prevailing argument was that the award was just too big. host: on what ground?

host: what was the prevailing argument with the majority of baker versus exxon? guest: the prevailing argument was that the award was just too big. host: on what ground?

senator byrd looked at senator baker and said, let me think about it.nd the next morning senator byrd called senator baker and said, it' a deal. and that's the way they operated the senate in those four years when senator baker was the majority leader and senator byrd was the minority leader. they operated the senate during that time under an agreement where senator byrd was careful to try to give every senator the right of amendment. he thought that was very important. in return, he got back from senators who had amendments that many senators thought were frivolous or unnecessary, not germane, senator byrd was able to get an unanimous consent agreement that permitted him toy have a -- permitted him to have a fairly orderly management of the senate, he and senator baker during that time. senator mcconnell a few minutes ago talked about the time senator byrd reexamined the constitution, changed his mind on the first amendment and flag burning. senator byrd and senator baker during that time both read david mccullough's book on the one hand changed they a

senator byrd looked at senator baker and said, let me think about it.and the next morning senator byrd called senator baker and said, it' a deal. and that's the way they operated the senate in those four years when senator baker was the majority leader and senator byrd was the minority leader. they operated the senate during that time under an agreement where senator byrd was careful to try to give every senator the right of amendment. he thought that was very important. in return, he got back from senators who had amendments that many senators thought were frivolous or unnecessary, not germane, senator byrd was able to get an unanimous consent agreement that permitted him toy have a -- permitted him to have a fairly orderly management of the senate, he and senator baker during that time. senator mcconnell a few minutes ago talked about the time senator byrd reexamined the constitution, changed his mind on the first amendment and flag burning. senator byrd and senator baker during that time both read david mccullough's book on the one hand changed they

the baker panel examined all of bp's u.s. refineries and found the toleration of serious deviations from save operating practices. is that an accurate statement of the findings of mr. baker's report chris or cracks it is accurate, and based on the findings of that report and the instances of 2005 and 2006, we implemented a systematic change in how we manage safety on a systematic change in the culture of bp. that is something we have done consistently over the last three years. >> did that systematic change that you said you implemented as a result of the baker report account for the reason that at deepwater horizon, when faced with the choice of the cheaper and quicker casing design or a saber design, vetoes the cheaper and quicker casing design? -- bp shows that cheaper and quicker casing design. >> as i said, we need to wait for the findings of the investigation. >> i am not going to ask you what the reason was, but i am going to ask if in fact, it is not in dispute, that the choice was made to use the cheaper and quicker

. >> the next question comes from susan baker. >> this is susan baker with dow jones. since the diamond sheer cut did not work, will this essentially make the spill wars in the short term? >> it will not make the still worse in the short term. no matter what kind of cut we would have made, there was a potential to increase the number of hydrocarbons coming out by about 20%. that was an estimate based on the fact of the king to holding back. that is one issued. since it is not a perfect sealed, there is a chance some oil could escape. when you are dealing with these rubber seals, there is a chance the pressure of the oil going up to the pipe will be more than what the type could tolerate. we intend -- what type could tolerate. pn -- what is the plight could tolerate. we are going to try to get the best fit we can. next question. >> your line is open. >> i think that might be me. i have a question. you mentioned sub-seeded spartans. i have been reading on the epa website that they have not been tested. the spartans, i believe, cost the -- dispersants, i believe, cost the

peter baker in "the new york times" this morning writes about the meeting today.until now he has employed most of the tools of his office, including the moratorium, traveling to the region, firing the agency director and appointing a commission. he used a few more on tuesday night, summoning the cameras to the oval office, of pointing and long term recovery coordinator, demanding that the company responsible set up a multibillion-dollar escrow accounts to compensate the victims." queens, new york. dave, republican line. you are next. thoughts on the oval office address? good morning? caller: good morning. right. long time listener the c-span. i have a queetion to ask the nation. are we so wrapped up in money that we are forgetting about life? what is more important? life or money? i heard mary matalin in an interview with james carville. she was talking about what happens if we put the key out of business. nobody gets anything. when is a firm, real message going to be sent to all of big business. at the same time people are talking about the loss of oil, the loss

. >> the next question comes from susan baker. >> i am with dow jones. the diamond-year cut did not work. -- the diamond shear cut did not work. will this make this bill worse in the short term? >> it will not. there are two issues. no matter what type of cut we would have made, there was a potential in the minds of our technical flow rate team that we could increase the number of hydrocarbons coming out about 20%. that was an estimate based on the idea that the tank was holding back some oil that could be released. that is one issue. the other issue is once any containment cap is on this is not a perfect seal. there is a chance some oil could escape. in a perfect world we want an absolute steal where you put to pipes together with flanges and built it. -- you put two pipes together with flanges and bolt it. there is a chance the oil going up the pipe will be more than they can tolerate at a time and it will spell out from under the seals. we will treat that with subsea dispersants. the amount of oil that will get through is something will have to determ

. >> the next question comes from susan baker. >> i am with dow jones. the diamond-year cut did not work. -- the diamond shear cut did not work. will this make this bill worse in the short term? >> it will not. there are two issues. no matter what type of cut we would have made, there was a potential in the minds of our technical flow rate team that we could increase the number of hydrocarbons coming out about 20%. that was an estimate based on the idea that the tank was holding back some oil that could be released. that is one issue. the other issue is once any containment cap is on this is not a perfect seal. there is a chance some oil could escape. in a perfect world ww want an absolute steal where you put to pipes together with flanges and built it. -- you put two pipes together with flanges and bolt it. there is a chance the oil going up the pipe will be more than they can tolerate at a time and it will spell out from under the seals. we will treat that with subsea dispersants. the amount of oil that will get through is something will have to determ

baker's report? >> yes, it is. based on the findings of the report and the instances of two dozen 5 and 2006, we implemented a systematic change in how we manage safety. and a systematic change in the culture of bp. it is something we have done consistently over the last three years. >> did that systematic change you say you implemented as a result of the bigger report account for the reason that at deepwater horizon when faced with a choice of the cheaper design, bp chose the cheaper and quicker design? did you do that based on recommendations of the bigger report? >> we need to wait for the results of the investigationnto conclude. if there is any evidence whatsoever that people put costs ahead of safety -- then we will take action. >> i will ask you, it is not in dispute but was was made to use a quicker and cheaper design. again, there were fewer casing centralizes than some were recommending. i will leave out "motivation" -- but there was thh choice of more or fewer. more costs more, fewer costs less. which ch

baker decision rejected a jury's award of $5 billion in punitive damages, only one year's profits for exxon. and reduced the award by 90%. anything more than the compensatory damage award the court reasoned, would make punitive damages too unpredictable for corporations. the judgment of the jury and the wisdom of founding fathers were for the court lesser values and then providing corporations predictability. what of the unpredictability for alaska? of exxon's of drunken capt. running his shipper run? and one cannot help but wonder now what additional precautions bp might have taken in the gulf if that corporation did not know that the supreme court had its back on predictability? i mention these concerns to you, solicitor general elena kagan, because you made decisions that affect every aspect of americans lives. if confirmed, i hope and trust you will adhere to the best institutional traditions of the supreme court, and act with a clear understanding of the proper role of all the institutions of government, provided for us by our founding fathers. host: that was from the first day o

two years ago, activists sreme court in the decision exxon versus baker created an arbitrary limit ofe damage in maritime cases chaired a hearing and expressed my concern at the time that the supreme court's exxon valdez decision would encourage corporate misconduct. why? because it reduced the consequences of their misconduct to a discounted cost of doing business. that's almost like saying we're giving you a green light to do whatever you want to do. the fact is, i can't imagine why anybody would be surprised that the supreme court effectively capped damages to cap misconduct while oil companies cut corners and sacrifice safety. the exxon valdez decision was another in a supreme of business-friendly supreme court decisions in which a narrow majority has essentially written new law and disregarded laws enacted by congress. the impact of lives of americans is enormous. two years ago we heard from alaskan fishermen. now we're worried about the livelihoods of slimmers and oyster men in the gulf, people who spent decades, generations obeying every single rule, building their businesses,

host: what was the prevailing argument with the majority of baker versus exxon? guest: the prevailing argument was that the award was just too big. host: on what ground? guest: that it was just too big. host: what constant constitute it is grounds for that? guest: well it said in big oil spills the ratio is going to be one-to-one for compensatories against punitive, but that i go nors 250 years of anglo sacksen injuries prunes. you know there's a court you find in the bible and english common law and they come to america. they are part of the law at the time of the revolution. and they have been with us in all other aspects of the common law since the signing of the republic. it is the first time anyone's ever -- and the justification, if you'll read the opinion, the justification essentially is we think it's too big. and we're making it up as we go. host: let me tell you a little bit more about brian o'neal, in addition to his long legal career, he served from 1969 to 1979 in the u.s. army obtaining the rank of captain and then served as the stapt to the general

a town hall meeting in baker's bill, california. it was part of a new initiative -- a result, california. it was part of a new initiative by republicans, aim to solicit opinions throw website and other high-tech means. this was an hour and 45 minutes. >> thank you all for coming. the district is quite vague. it goes from los angeles county all the way to ridgecrest -- quite big. it goes all the way from los angeles county to ridgecrest. to start out our meeting, i would like to call out angela to lead us in prayer. come on up. you can stand if you like. if you would join me in prayer. our heavenly father, we thank you. now we ask that you give our elected representatives strength, courage, and wisdom to do the things that serve the people. most especially, we ask that you protect the men and women who are putting their lives at risk so we may continue to enjoy the blessings of liberty our forefathers and vision for us. amen. -- envisioned for us. i would like to invite brian to lead us and the pledge. >> i pledge allegiance to the f

you will regard that james baker met with saddam hussein's days before we went into iraq in 1991.whenever the character rears its head, i look at the president's strong record in think, what president are they talking about? our founders spoke deliberately of the common defense, because the threats we face make no partisan distinctions. they are common to us all. secondly, the force is at times clearly necessary, and i have supported that use. we learned from the cold war that force alone does not win ideological struggles. then it was the promise of a better life that led some need to abandon ccmmunism and its faulse promise of progress. today, there is the hatred of a modern world that seems to have left too many behind. chronic oppression of women and girls condemns nations to poverty and abandons young men to extremist ideologies. and the failure of institutions in distant states, as we have seen from somalia to afghanistan, is a direct threat to our own people. so a strong development policy must be a pillar of our national security. enter national development reflects our mo

with the recommendations of the national park second century commission led by former senators howard bakernd bennett johns ton. over the course of 2008 and 2009, the commission gave serious conversation to what the park service needs to do and came up with four brood recommendations. -- broad recommendations. one, to advance a 21st century national park idea. two, strengthen stewardship of our nations resources and broaden citizen service. three, build an effective responsive and accountable 21st century park service, and, four, ensure permanent sustainable fund forg the work of the service. i would like to just touch on a few of those recommendations under these broad categories. one suggestion of the commission is for congress to require the national park system to develop a national park system plan, which would identify natural and historic themes of the united states from which additions to the system are needed. it would also identify those places where the service can best play the role of partner, assisting the efforts of others. the plan would provide a strategic approach to build

baker decision that capped the level of damages at the level of compensatory damages. the exxon court believed predictability for corporations was more important than deterring corporate misconduct. i disagree. the people of my home state, rhode island, the ocean state, would put our environment and our safety ahead of profits for irresponsible corporations. in fact that is exactly what rhode islanders have done. john torgan, thenary gans et bay keep for the rhode island urk submitted a letter catalogging the legislative and other reforms put in place after the north cape skandia oil spill off the coast of capetown. we know how important penalties and fines are to keeping sea farers safe and marine ecosystems healthy. like my fellow rhode islanders, i insist that in the future oil companies do everything they can to prevent needless deaths whether in the gulf, of the coast of nonge or anywhere in our great country. today's hearing is an important step toward that goal and i applaud you for holding it, mr. chairman, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. our first

robert schiller, the real rub been a, a dean baker. -- nouriel roubini. this was something we had never seen hhstorically. moving beyond that for a minute, the rating agencies did play a fundamental role in accelerating the securitization and therefore me would argue that the origination of products intended to be highly efficient. we are talking about low teaser rates,-and a transition. there was a warning in 2004 from the fbi that mortgage fraud became so epidemic tt if unchecked, it would result in a crisis as big as the s and l crisis. there were many flashing lights along the way. there is a country song by don mclean wheree says when the gates are all down and t signatures are flashing and the whistles are screaming and you stay on the tracks of boarding the fax, you cannot blame the wreck on the train. was the rolef the rating agencies to be referees in a game that got out of control? you told our staff that if they had not done the ratings come up they would have been hunted at by congress. do we not expect referees to make the call even if they g

jim baker, in the days before we went into kuwait was talking to saddam hussein to see if the matter could be resolved. on the one side, as i said, is that policy of engagement. this engagement reveesed years of diplomatic silence during which iran's nuclear program grew. it showed the world our patience, tested iran's willingness to negotiate in good faith and built international support for sanctions. sadly, the time limit for engagement has come and gone. it is time to pursue the second prong, pressure. the international atomic energy agency tells us that iran has now enough low-enriched uranium for two bombs. iran has attempted to hide nuclear facilities and refused to cooperate with the demands of the national atomic energy agency and the u.n. security council to suspend enrichment. let's be clear, iran has defied the will of the international community. this is unacceptable. that is not a partisan position, it is an almost unanimous position of the administration and of this congress. that is why this is the right time to bring strong economic pressure to bear on the iranian re

baker -- they circumvent people. we have to get some poor people in office.some for politicians who know what a dollar is worth. we're obviously spending trillions of dollars. we're going right into the hole with the whole country. this gulf oil spill just adds insult to injury. host: let me turn a sentiment into a question that you can answer. their superfund sites in every state except north dakota. the obama administration is looking at a tax that would try to restore some of the funding for this. what type of tax? is the environment conducive to a tax on these companies? guest: i do not think it is. my concern is -- i testified earlier this week -- their taxing a very small part of the industry, which is unfair -- they are taxing a very small part of the industry, which is unfair. in my epa days, we finished over 1000 sites. i would like to see the epa and states bear down on the other sites. they're getting $1.2 billion a year to help with that. i would like to see that money focused on finishing sites, not just to keep adding bureaucracy to the program.

robert schiller, the real rub been a, a dean baker. -- nouriel roubini.his was something we had never seen hhstorically. moving beyond that for a minute, the rating agencies did play a fundamental role in accelerating the securitization and therefore some would argue that the origination of products intended to be highly efficient. we are talking about low teaser rates,-and a transition. there was a warning in 2004 from the fbi that mortgage fraud became so epidemic that if unchecked, it would result in a crisis as big as the s and l crisis. there were many flashing lights along the way. there is a country song by don mclean where he says when the gates are all down and the signatures are flashing and the whistles are screaming and you stay on the tracks of boarding the fax, you cannot blame the wreck on the train. was the role of the rating agencies to be referees in a game that got out of control? you told our staff that if they had not done the ratings come up they would have been hunted at by congress. do we not expect referees to make the call even i

robert schiller, the real rub been a, a dean baker. -- nouriel roubini. this was something we had never seen hhstorically. moving beyond that for a minute, the rating agenciesid play a fundamental role accelerating the securitization and thereforsome would argue that the origination of products intended to be highly efficient. we are talking about low teaser rates,-and a transition. there was a warning in 2004 from the fbi that mortgage fraud became so epidemic that if unchecked, it would result in a crisis as big as the s and l crisis. there were many flashing lights along the way. there is a country song by don mclean where he says when the gates are all down and the signatures are flashing d the whistles are screaming and you stay on the tracks of boarding the fax, you cannot blame the wreck on the train. was the role of the rating agencies to be referees in a game that got out of control? you told our staff that if they had not done the ratings come up they would have been hunted at by congress. do we not expect referees to make the call even if they

his bassist baker particularly the defense department is very frustrated with this -- particularly theefense department is very frustrated with this. there is a lot of pressure from congress, industry, other agencies to speed things up and come up with regulations that will provide a more widespread access. there are working on this. it is going to be a while. they have targeted next year for coming upper with regulations to allow the very small unmanned aircraft. they can be the size of your fist. they can fly through your window. it can be smaller than a model airplane. they come in all sizes. the can be as big as a small airliner. the very small ones, they're talking about regulations next year. host: our first call comes in salt lake city, utah, on the democrat line. welcome to the program. caller: we have had run at least for the past year flying for in utah. when they go through there is a high frequency vibration. the cause is a severe headache. do you know about that? do these cause health problems? host: whole lot. are you still there? do you know what they are being used for

spill in the gulf of mexico, you will be equally alarmed by the supreme court decisi in exxon versus baker, which imposed limits and damages that could be recovered in environmental disasters. time and time again, by the narrowest of margins this activist court has sided with big business over main street america, wiping away protections set in place by years of legal precedent and congressional action. as justice stevens stated in citizen united, i know senator durbin quoted, this i want to give the line that comes aftwards this is justice stevens, essentially five justices were unhappy with the limited nature of the case before us so they changed the case to give them saechbs portunity to change the law. there were principaled narrow paths that a court that was serious about judicial restraint could have taken. i join him in wondering just how and why those who pross to oppose judicial activism have voice third support for these supreme court decisions in which justices have overturned long-standing precedent and substituted their own legislative voices for congress, blurring the line be

must never fear to negotiate, but we must never negotiate out of fear here you will recall that james bakermet with saddam hussein days before we went in to iraq in 1991. whenever the character rears its head, i look at the president's strong record and think -- what president are they talking about? our founders spoke deliberately of the common defense because the threats we face make no partisan distinctions. they are common to us all. second, though force is at times clearly necessary, and i have supported the use, we learn from the cold war that force alone does not win ideological struggles. then, it was the promise of a better life that led so many to abandon communism and its false promise of progress. today, chronic lack of opportunity drives the appeal of the jihadism of islamic extremists and its hatred of a modern world that seems to have left too many behind. chronic oppression of women and girls condemns nations to poverty and abandons young men to extremist ideology, and the failure of institutions in distant states, as we have seen from somalia to afghanistan, is a direct thr

jim baker, in the days before we went into kuwait was talking to saddam hussein to see if the matter could be resolved. on the one side, as i said, is that policy of engagement. this engagement reveesed years of diplomatic silence during which iran's nuclear program grew. it showed the world our patience, tested iran's willingness to negotiate in good faith and built international support for sanctions. sadly, the time limit for engagement has come and gone. it is time to pursue the second prong, pressure. the international atomic energy agency tells us that iran has now enough low-enriched uranium for two bombs. iran has attempted to hide nuclear facilities and refused to cooperate with the demands of the national atomic energy agency and the u.n. security council to suspend enrichment. let's be clear, iran has defied the will of the international community. this is unacceptable. that is not a partisan position, it is an almost unanimous position of the administration and of this congress. that is why this is the right time to bring strong economic pressure to bear on the iranian re