, et cetera. but cultures jt movely. and the germans themselve does not seem to be ere, especially the ones who ar western rman. and so cultus, the 65 years ter a trauma like world war ii oworld war i that is the blink of aeye. and we shouldn't rh them tohere they as a people are t willing to go. an65 years is just not a a long time. >> lehrer: new subject e senate democratic compromise on alth-care rerm what do you make of it? >> as so as we know what it is. >> lehrer: a you really getting piy, aren't you. >> i was there wednesd after noon tryinto find out again what it is. and loand behold senators off e record would admit they didn't know exactly w was -- what was in i but you know - >> lehr: but no public option, is that at both of you have been told s tt real? >>ell, the left quite honestly itrying to hide its gl in many cases. i mean, the left, i me senators like jay rockefeller, dk gephardt pushed thifor years to expansion of medicare tohe age of 55. in fact, ahony wiener, democratic congre

controls, et cetera. at tier 1. and have you had a chance to rough those recommendations and do you have any -- >> i have reviewed them and have discussed them with members of the department including the newly confirmed undersecretary for science and technology dr. o'toole who's really an expert in this whole area. and the way we look at it is that the department of homeland security provides standards that would need to be met in a way similar or analogous or similar in the chemical arena where you have the tiering as you suggest, one, two, three, and four and you have an engagement process by which laboratories are tiered and standards established. >> well, i would just urge you we need to have a system that promotes best practices. but we also -- there's a lot of good things going on. we also need to have a much more sophisticated background checks, et cetera, and continuing review for those who have access to those items that could very well be part of a weapon of mass destruction. i think senator li

we've done in particular is to work with those who are trying to use new media, the internet, et cetera. one of the things that happened when the street demonstrations took place is that people were texting each other using twitter. and a young state department official found out, realized that twitter was going to shut down for servicing at a critical moment and he called up and made sure that the service stayed open. so we're looking for new ways to allow people in iran to speak to one another and to amplify their voices on the international stage. it's a critically important time there and we're very involved in a range of ways. >> speaking of twitter, we have this message from someone who identifies themself as c-span junky writing "sanctions in iraq killed scores of thousands of children. isn't hillary planning sanctions on iran doesn't hurt government but hurts the people." >> well, you know, there is a wide-ranging review now of how to deal with iran in particular in the context of the nuclear -- the danger of their becoming a nuclear power. and sanctions are certainly one of the

, et cetera.it's two-fold. as long as we adopt best practice in addressing these issues immediately as soon as the cases are submitted that should help solve it. and no, we don't drive hummers. >> rile remember that. the thing you mentioned in your testimony which i heard from our lab directors is forensic scientists and the amount of money that is put in to train them by the government and get them up to speed and what i have heard -- and i don't know if this was in your testimony, a lot of times they may leave and go somewhere else and go to the private sector and it becomes a bidding war and i have heard this in our state. do you want to comment on that? >> we have the same issue. as nice as miami looks on tv, we do have a problem that forensic science is a hot place to go and if they want to come and be trained, we have had the misfortune to lose a few. >> where do they go? >> usually home. >> they go to other labs? >> other labs. it's not a situation where they are seeking a job anywhere else

we're going to hold up some of the bills, et cetera, et cetera. i didn't like it then, i don't like it now. it's very unfortunate this situation has developed. but i want to assure the gentleman and my good friend that i am not here trying to hold anything up. and one other thing, isn't it true that there is a bill out there but nobody has really seen it, more especially the manager's amendment combined with what came over from the house and we do not have a score? whatever you have there, if that's the bill, i'd sure like to get it up on the web or something so we can take a look at it and also have a score. we keep talking about the bill. i would just ask the gentleman: is that the bill? is that the final bill with a score? mr. durbin: i would say to the senator from kansas, it's not the final bill. there will be a manager's amendment offered tomorrow. it will be considerably smaller than this. and it will have specifics in it that have been reviewed by the congressional budget office, and that is underway. it will be introduced, i hope, tomorro

petroleum and kuwait, which used to be the gulf oil companies, oil installations, property in atlanta, et cetera, even though he were seemed to be conservative and traditionally risk-free in contrast to some of saudi arabia's which were even more traditional and conservative. the total amount that they have invested abroad is roughly $1 trillion. half of that is in the united states. and there has been no economic pressure that comes to my mind since march 19th, 1974, which when the last oil embargo was terminated. and there's been an interlocking of financial and economic and increasingly commercial linkages through a degree of interdependence and a mutuality of benefit and a reciprocity of reward that was probably not even dreamed of two decades ago. as well as the number of american companies based in the dccc region have not doubled but they've increased themselves by 50% in the last five years. they are up from 500 companies to 750 companies in the dccc region. so at the corporate level and also at the intergovernmental level, there's a greater degree of us-ness and strategic similarity and

likewise we are totally approach when we reach out to human rights defenders, religious leaders, et cetera. it's part of our history and consistent with human rights. it's really the only way things are going to change in this world. our policy is engaging from people within societies and giving them a greater! >> that is a group of industries that has a positive balance of payment surplus with every single country in the world. and it was his goal to get more information about the nature of the county right issues especially intellectual property theft. he was very explicit this is not piracy, this is theft. he called it pure unadult rated theft i think is his exact terms. and what can the government do about it. and the white house has lots of meetings. and so i'm sure that they'll meet with people who have different perspectives on these same issues. but i thought it was a fair meeting. as you know i spent many years in the government including in a cabinet post. and we held meetings like this all the time. we were always careful to have a combination of different types of prospectives

, et cetera.it's two-fold. as long as we adopt best practice in addressing these issues immediately as soon as the cases are submitted that should help solve it. and no, we don't drive hummers. >> rile remember that. the thing you mentioned in your testimony which i heard from our lab directors is forensic scientists and the amount of money that is put in to train them by the government and get them up to speed and what i have heard -- and i don't know if this was in your testimony, a lot of times they may leave and go somewhere else and go to the private sector and it becomes a bidding war and i have heard this in our state. do you want to comment on that? >> we have the same issue. as nice as miami looks on tv, we do have a problem that forensic science is a hot place to go and if they want to come and be trained, we have had the misfortune to lose a few. >> where do they go? >> usually home. >> they go to other labs? >> other labs. it's not a situation where they are seeking a job anywhere else

et cetera, and i did, and i did propose savings, and we can make savings, and nowhere, nowhere in my wildest imagination did i ever believe we were going to cut benefits in order to create a $2.5 trillion new entitlement program when the system is already going -- going broke. a senator: reserving the right to object. mr. mccain: i will have those put in the record. if the senator from massachusetts wants to distort my record, that's fine, but it gets a little -- the presiding officer: any objection into inserting the documents into the record? mr. mccain: as ronald reagan once said, facts are stubborn things. i yield. mr. kerry: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. kerry: i'm not going to object to putting something important in, but i'd like my colleague to stay for a moment because this is very important. madam president? the presiding officer: the majority time has expired. the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i yield to senator thune. mr. kerry: i have objected to the statement being put in unless i have a chance to explain it. i would like

et cetera. polio.cine success stories of all, are made in cells but there are special is a challenges of sells and the reason we don't have the cell culture influenza vaccine is not because of some major safety concern, it's because it's taken a long time to get a good yield and a good antigen out of cell cultured influenza vaccines. another case where the flu virus has not behaved in the way we would like it to. this has required looking at new cell lines. new approaches to creating cell culture vaccine and very recently there was a first cell cultured influenza vaccine approved in europe but like the agivent it's important to realize in responding to the 2009hn 1n pandemic the first vaccines available were egg based vaccines and nonagivents. so even though we're beginning and i think, as i said, the vaccine programs will be transformed by things like cell culture vaccine. we're in a transitional period between how we've done it historically and how we can do it in the future. again, many licensed vac

we're going to hold up some of the bills, et cetera, et cetera. didn't like it then, i don't like it now. it's very unfortunate this situation has developed. but i want to assure the gentleman and my good friend that i am not here trying to hold anything up. and one other thing, isn't it true that there is a bill out there but nobody has really seen it, more especially the manager's amendment combined with what came over from the house and we do not have a score? whatever you have there, if that's the bill, i'd sure like to get it up on the web or something so we can take a look at it and also have a score. we keep talking about the bill. i would just ask the gentleman: is that the bill? is that the final bill with a score? mr. durbin: i would say to the senator from kansas, it's not the final bill. there will be a manager's amendment offered tomorrow. it will be considerably smaller than this. and it will have specifics in it that have been reviewed by the congressional budget office, and that is underway. it will be introduced, i hope, tomorrow

we've also created administrative savings through insurance exchanges, et cetera. and as my colleague from vermont, bernie sanders, put his stamp on this bill -- and i'm proud to support him in that -- we've significantly expanded community health clinics. there's $2 billion more for community health clinics in this bill today than there was when it moved out of committee. that is an improvement that i was proud to have helped brought to fruition. as i said, there are exchanges that were in every different version of the bill. i won't go into that. but i will go into just a minute support for small business. when this bill moved out of committee, when i gave it my vote to move forward, there were some provisions for small business, but i'm proud that in this bill there are an additional $14 billion of help for small businesses led by senator lincoln, senator stabenow and myself and others, members of my committee: senator shaheen, senator cardin, senator hagan, senator bayh and others, worked very diligently to convince the leadership that small businesses needed a

when you have not just the lunatic fringe going on about death panels and birth certificates, et cetera. but when you have incumbents who are going to be running in 2010 being so scared by their primary tea-bagging opponents that they change their rhetoric. i mean, even today we had john mccain on the don imus show saying, i'm madder than i've ever been and basically equating himself with the tea-baggers, in terms of that incredible rage that is fueling that movement. so that is the greatest danger. the impact it's having on incumbents. we've seen that in the senator. we've seen senator coburn talking about seniors dying sooner than they would have died without the health care bill. we've seen it with charles grassley. seen it with senator demint who said he wished he had told the president, you lied. that's the greatest danger. >> governor k he hadane mentioned at the federal level in 2009 they won 5 of 5 elections and gained two senators with specter and al franken. are the republicans, though, are any of the republicans scared about this or are all of them regretting that they won't

i spent my whole life back and forth on the iron curtain and the berlin wall, et cetera, for nearly most of my 36 years. we never really consulted with them. when you do, you get some degree of consensus that's required. and when you do that, you make them part of the solution. and that's what we're seeing now. and so they have a say in the decision sheet, the mission sheet that comes out for the alliance. general mcchrystal is a nato officer as well as a u.s. officer. there's a nato complain of command in afghanistan as well. how go get nato, 28 nations, to understand that is extremely important. they can provide add sets. by the way, it's not just not troop assets, we have training police of military, development stuff that needs to go on, capacity building in the government, all of that needs to be addressed. and i think nato has the resources to do it. >> host: kenneth from wyoming. good morning on the republican line. >> caller: good morning, gentleman. >> host: thanks, go ahead with your question. >> caller: yeah, i have a comment and a question. i was drafted into the military in

, et cetera.e under crisis conditions that exist? i just want you to talk about bonuses and then continue. >> well, congressman, again, from an enforcement perspective, my focus is on what the law requires and whether or not the law has been violated. >> well, do bonuses fall under that provision in the law? >> generally not. >> okay. >> except in this situation where they made a representation about what they were going to do about bonuses and that representation in our view was false. >> that was prior to the collapse, wasn't it? >> that was -- >> when people signed their contracts, as i understand, they had bonuses attached in there. but the whole condition has changed now where they have to comply with the provisions that were in the original agreement. >> well that's correct. the bonuses that were paid in this case were paid frankly shortly after the merger was approved. that's correct. >> would you continue on, please? >> well, probably not much more -- i don't mean to disappoint you, but pr

et cetera, et cetera. would be intolerable to ask senior citizens to give up substantial health benefits they are enjoying under medicare, said mr. nelson, who has been deluged with calls and complaints from constituents. i'm offering an amendment to shield seniors from those benefit cuts." i am offering an amendment to shield all senior citizens, the 11 million of them that are under medicare advantage, as the senator from florida said, to shield seniors from benefit cuts. that's what this amendment is all about. we should not carve out for some seniors what other seniors are not entitled to. that's not america. that's not the way we should treat all of our citizens. and i hope that my colleagues will understand that this is simply in the name of fairness that this amendment is proposed. and i would ask the senator from tennessee and the senator from texas, large numbers of enrollees in the medicare advantage program, also how this would be unfair as well. mr. alexander: i thank the senator from arizona f

shore balancing ideas, we should really be moving to a defensive strategy, which we could do well, et cetera again repeat, as a democracy, we can't with all the conflicting pressures here, have a coherent policy. for example, the settlements on the west bank. we can't stop them. >> the short answer to your question is we tried a defensive policy between 1998 when al qaeda declared war on us, and september 11, 2001. and we ended up with september 11, 2001. i sat in the situation room in the white house when we lobbed cruise missiles at what we thought was osama bin laden's next known point of activity. that's a very difficult strategy to carry out because we have to be lucky in foiling every single plot that they come up with. they only have to be lucky once or twice to have devastating effects on us. we may get there. let me put a marker down here. i said in 18 months we will know. if it's not working, we need to be very honest and rigorous with ourselves and say it's not working. the pashe patient is dead. and then we may have to go to that strategy. but i would rather find out whether ther

things we've done in particular is to work with those trying to use the new media, the internet, et ceterae were texting each other using twitter. young state department official realized twitter was going to cut down her servicing at a critical moment and called up and made sure the service stood open. we are looking for new ways to speak to one another. it's an important time there. we are very involved in a range of ways. host: speaking of twitter, w me. >> it's inÑi our interest to am fy the voice of those who seek change. whatever we can do to encourage that kind of a debate to go on and support people in the middle of that, we ought to be doing it host: next to the line. caller: thank you. one of the key focuses of the administration. depen with opportunitys in iran. iran already calls the united states theÑi great satan they already want to kill us. at one point, it is kind of lip service. it's not so much me being critical when you see your government leader doing one thing. they are taking this soft approach. it seems cowardly in my mind tfments more lip service than anything. som

, et cetera.my debating career went down in a hurry. the congressman who just hated me put his arm around me and said, told me that's all right, son. so that was -- that was my debating career. i figured after that no more. election day came and we had -- we got everybody together in the headquarters and went to mcdonalds for dinner. seriously. i sent everybody -- and everybody was six people -- to the key precincts. dumont, and bergenfield and just to get the info back in. so when the polls closed on election day in englewood, new jersey, in 1976, i was alone in the campaign headquarters with a woman college radio reporter because her mother -- with -- who was there with her mother because her mother wouldn't let her come along, just the three of us at campaign headquarters. the numbers started coming in and you know what, it looked pretty good. i'd done all the targeting stuff. i knew where we had to be and, you know, this is jimmy carter is winning the presidency but you know what? it was going

people i've talked to on both sides of this who've said, you know, i had chest pains, sweating, et cetera. i went to the emergency room, found out i didn't have a heart attack and almost had one when my insurance company refused to pay the bill. i -- i did what the doctor told me to do, and now they are not covering. this provision will make sure that that person's bill is covered. and tragically, we have had people who have delayed treatment, who should have gone to emergency rooms, whose circumstances have become much worse and some have actually died. we cover access to emergency care in the manager's package, an important consumer protection we also allow you as the -- as the subscriber to determine who you want your primary care provider to be. we give you protection as to the the -- you make your decision as to who you want your primary care provider to be. and if you have a child, the pediatrician can be the primary care provider. if you're a woman, the ob/gyn can be your primary care provider. many insurance companies deny you that today. that protection is in this bill for everyo

security checkpoints to look at people and see whether they're acting suspiciously, doing more check, et cetera. goes without saying that that makes it more likely that they'll be some delays at airports all across america and that's going to add to some of the pain people have been feeling with all these delays with the holiday travel. but it also goes without saying that security comes first here. and the administration is going to try to do everything it can whether it causes more delays or not to make sure that there's not a repeat of this situation. in fact, just got a statement a few moments ago put out by senator susan collins of maine, she was saying she's expecting a briefing from the department of homeland security because she has a lot of questions starting with how did this person get these materials on the plane in the first place. >> larry: there's going to be a lot of questions asked of this administration about what security officials have been doing and have not been doing. >> and whether this person had any ties to an extremist organization as the government claims he said he

now and then but failed to make really a human connection that you talked about in louisiana, et cetera. >> that's a good question and there are two parts to it. i don't consider blogging and social networking because blogging is just another way of writing a column in publishing it. whereas social networking is more user generated community. so i'll make the distinction. it's both kind of worried me. and what worries me in particular is cast since dean has a good book about this called tipping two extremes or whatever is that when there is a technology worth thousands of possible places you can go for possible information. versa ball, you're not going to make a lot of money blogging, social networking, whatever. so you can express opinions, you're not actually going to go to donate. you're not actually going to be in helmand province. that takes a lot of money. it takes a big organization. and so the lone blogger. people say why do we need newspapers. if it hadn't been for a newspaper or a magazine like time, i never would've gone to any of these places. you need an industrial organiza

which allowed for the purchasing of a lot of these things on credit, houses, cars, student loans, et cetera -- i mean, not only was it a way to sustain this sort of fake prosperity but it was also -- but it was also a way to belay a more fundamental, you know, like social conflict over like the distribution of resources in the united states. so i guess what my question is, is, you know, with -- you know, with your character saying the money was there and, you know, the system saying yesterday that tuition was going to go up 32% across -- >> that's really extraordinary. >> what do you see is the potential for this crisis to lead to, i guess, a kind of politics that the united states hasn't seen in probably decades, questions about the distribution of resources and money and credit in an age where credit isn't easy to get anymore? >> that's a great question. certainly there's more conversation now about inequality than there was before as we understand that inequality was one of the driving forces of our economy for reasons i've already elaborated on. clearly, president obama took office with

are you not seeing people going into the banks stealing, et cetera.so by and large this is still a nonviolent movement. hopefully it will be able to be kept that way. it is absolutely critical in order not only to ensure that they can see change, but that they can see change that was going to be positive and sustainable. so that we don't see the repeat of what happened in 1979 where one brutal regime was replaced with another brutal regime. >> warner: how do you see this? whether this was deliberate -- for instance, why would the government, i mean they could have just let demonstrations go forward on this religious holiday. and not interfered. >> i think margaret had they not interfered we would have seen protests in the millions in tehran. the regime does repression very well. and tehran is a city which is more akin to los angeles than say manhattan t is a vast city. and it's easier for the government to kind of block off highways and major thoroughfares and prevent people from congregating in one area. one i think interesting distinction to make or

the motion would commit it to the senate committee of finance, et cetera. i and the 5.5 million supporters of 60-plus urge you to support this motion. the patient protection affordable care act is nothing of the sort to senior citizens. it would cut medicare by by $500 billion. these cuts would harm seniors who have paid into the program and expect it to be there to help them with their health care needs. at 60-plus, we pride ourselves on advocating for the best interests of seniors, and that is a yes vote on this motion. my friends, let's pay attention to 60-plus. and again -- a senator: a question. does 60-plus sell a supplemental insurance policy to seniors? mr. mccain: i don't believe 60-plus does. mr. coburn: but au pair does. mr. mccain: most experts on the health care issue believe this could be a windfall of millions and millions and tens of millions of dollars for aarp if the legislation is passed as it is presently crafted. mr. alexander: the senator from arizona, how many medicare advantage members, for example, there are in the state of arizona?

that hasn't seen the kind of innovation that you have seen with computers, laptops, notebooks, et ceterale devices, so that's one of the reasons we are looking at that. >> what about the national broadcasters worried about their spectrum being taken away. what do you say to them? >> look, first of all, we're not taking away anybody's spectrum. here is what we are saying. number one, we believe the record is clear on this, in three or four years, our country will have a very big problem with its mobile broadband unless we act now to start making sure there is more spectrum put into the system. >> you know, there are some broadcasters who are saying there is no evidence in the record, and i don't know what record they are looking at. there is significant evidence in the record that that will occur. number two, we have to have a plan that gets us more spectrum or the consequences will be that the american broadband experience will be much more extensive and the it will be louder than our international competitors. when you consider that the mobile broadband platform will be the most importa

title 1, the federal government probably could not unleash all of the rules, recommendations, et cetera it does because that's the engine that drives all of that. title 1 funding. and it is our view that title 1 funding has not been significantly targeted to the poorest districts with the poorest children in the poorest schools. and for us, that's the answer. are we concerned about all of the other things that have been talked about? are we concerned about the fact that the federal government has not met its promise on a 40% on idea? are we concerned about the fact that teacher quality, all of those things. but it gets down to, what does it cost, how do we pay for it and where's the money? the money is already there. it just needs to be redirected. the answer really is in poverty. and we don't use that. we talk about low income kids, children of color. but the answer -- the elephant in the room is really poverty, in our judgment. and this cuts across color, by the way. it's appalachia. it's kentucky. it's the highlands across the south where that is predominantly white but that's where

second ad claimed that mccain's plan would bring about a 22% cut in benefits, et cetera. and the factcheck.org claims these claims are false based on a single newspaper report that says no such thing. mccain's policy director states unequivocally that no benefit cuts are envisioned. mr. president, i ask that this entire factcheck.org article be included in the record. and i hope that the senator from nevada will stop making false claims about what -- repeating false claims that were in attack ads throughout the campaign funded by tens of millions of dollars about my positions on health care in america, which the fact checkers found to be totally false. and the nature rarity says "mccain's plan means a 22% cut in benefits. the ad displays a footnote citing an october wall street story as his authority." factcheck.org says "the journal story makes no mention of any 22% reduction or any reduction at all." so, i hope that among other things, may i describe this frustration that the senate majority leader would at least not repeat false accusations about what i wanted to do in

, et cetera. so if we have a disaster in primary health care which is driving people to the e.r. rooms makes no sense at all. as i mentioned the other day, there is a provision in this legislation in the senate which authorizes a very significant expansion of federally qualified community health centers, which in a nonpartisan way -- bipartisan way is widely supported by i suspect everyone here in the senate and in the house as well. and these community health centers today allow 20 million people to access not only good quality primary health care, but dental care which is a huge issue, mental health counseling, a very big issue, an low-cost prescription drugs. while the health centers do an excellent on, there are not enough of them. so in this legislation, we have greatly expanded community health centers. and if we as a congress are talking about bringing 13 million, 14 million, 15 million more people into medicaid, i am not quite sure how a medicaid program is going to accommodate those peopl

, et cetera, you think that's in place? >> i think it is in place in theory. i think some of the theory will be very thin. especially when you talk abo about -- i want to be realistic here. when you talk about new people doing jobs that have never been done there is a limit as to how much you can think it through in a vacuum. when those people arrive there will be a@@j3%'""gjkjb$j" plann have you learned from your mistakes, how is the plan flexible enough to adapt instead of coming up here on the hill and defend what may have been an inadequate plan because you didn't see something right as opposed to saying i'm learning and fixing it. the other detail is planning which the staff has to work on. what are the questions -- i think you have to say what are the questions you're trying to answer in your plan. it needs to get down to a level of detail on numbers of -- not just numbers of people but how many people are going to secure. right now the answer being given to how you will handle the civilian surge is the military's goi

second ad claimed that mccain's plan would bring about a 22% cut in benefits, et cetera. and the factcheck.org claims these claims are false based on a single newspaper report that says no such thing. mccain's policy director states unequivocally that no benefit cuts are envisioned. mr. president, i ask that this entire factcheck.org article be included in the record. and i hope that the senator from nevada will stop making false claims about what -- repeating false claims that were in attack ads throughout the campaign funded by tens of millions of dollars about my positions on health care in america, which the fact checkers found to be totally false. and the nature rarity says "mccain's plan means a 22% cut in benefits. the ad displays a footnote citing an october wall street story as his authority." factcheck.org says "the journal story makes no mention of any 22% reduction or any reduction at all." so, i hope that among other things, may i describe this frustration that the senate majority leader would at least not repeat false accusations about what i wanted to do in

, et cetera. is a bonus appropriate under crisis conditions that exist? i just want you to talk about bonuses and then continue. >> well, congressman, again, from an enforcement perspective, my focus is on what the law requires and whe >> do bonuses fall under that provision and a lot? >> generally, but not. except in this situation where they made the representation about what they were going to do with bonuses. >> that was prior to the collapse, wasn't it? when people send their contracts, they had bonuses attached in there, but the whole condition has changed now where they have to comply with the provisions that were in the original agreement. >> that is correct. the bonuses were paid shortly after the merger was approved. >> would you continue? >> it is probably not much moret. there is probably not much more on that topic that i would say, whether or not bonuses are appropriate and the appropriate level and the balance scene between incentivizing talents versus what is appropriate conversati

, et cetera, you think that's in place?>> i think it is in place in theory. i think some of the theory will be very thin. especially when you talk abo about -- i want to be realistic here. when you talk about new people doing jobs that have never been done there is a limit as to how much you can think it through in a vacuum. when those people arrive there will be a certain amount of muddle, quite frankly, while humans work out what they can do in a complex place. i have every expectation that there is going to be a huge amount of muddle, particularly on the civilian surge when we get people. we don't own enough people who have the requisite qualifications. not just we don't own them in the state department. they don't exist in america. so part of the planning is going to be, how are you going to learn from your mistakes and how is the plan going to be flexible instead of to come up on the hill and what may have been an inadequate plan because you didn't see something and what, in fact, you want to say, i learned something.

title 1, the federal government probably could not unleash all of the rules, recommendations, et ceterat does because that's the engine that drives all of that. title 1 funding. and it is our view that title 1 funding has not been significantly targeted to the poorest districts with the poorest children in the poorest schools. and for us, that's the answer. are we concerned about all of the other things that have been talked about? are we concerned about the fact that the federal government has not met its promise on a 40% on idea? are we concerned about the fact that teacher quality, all of those things. but it gets down to, what does it cost, how do we pay for it and where's the money? the money is already there. it just needs to be redirected. the answer really is in poverty. and we don't use that. we talk about low income kids, children of color. but the answer -- the elephant in the room is really poverty, in our judgment. and this cuts across color, by the way. it's appalachia. it's kentucky. it's the highlands across the south where that is predominantly white but that's where we

quarter i was there, on the surface, mexico had a great fiscal and monetary policy, a great economy, et cetera. but pretty soon, the lack of transparency, the lack of candor of their monetary as well as fiscal policy began to show through. the markets saw it and they stampeded out of mexico and mexico still hasn't fully recovered and reached the kind of economic level they should have since that 1995 peso devaluation that was caused by a perception, a lack of confidence in the country, in the government. so i think we have to have a way to get the policymakers to deal with the deficit. in my judgment, the current congress and the process in congress is simply broken. it's broken mostly because of a strong sense and a growing degree of partisanship. that disallows working together for common solutions. i think what this does in the bipartisan makeup of this commission is to show a way in which these issues can be dealt with. they've been dealt with in other countries. for example, sweden -- if you look just to the past two decades, sweden and canada had an unsustainable debt and they took care

there's a standard number of swabs and slides, et cetera, that are taken at the time. when we analyze the evidence in house, we analyze it once. unless it's required to be retested for court purposes, either the original analysis is not there or for whatever reason, the analysis is done once. >> it could be multiple swabs. >> correct. >> and you analyze each swab? >> we would analyze each swab. correct. >> if you knew, if the person was arrested and you did it, you would only have to have one swab or specimen of that person's d.n.a. to put it into the data base. is that right? >> well, i think, if i'm understanding you correctly, the information if it's obtained, like if we were to obtain a male profile from one of the e items, we wouldn't need to test multiple items to put that in. however, when we do test the rape kit, we do test multiple items but the profile is only entered once. does that satisfy your question? >> i think so. i just think, if you identify the victim -- the perpetrator, you know the perpetrator, i think it could be put in and might not cost quite a

, et cetera.ut again, we get back to this whole line that we heard for an entire year and even in early this year about change, about how we were going to change things in washington, we were going to change the way we do business. president obama said about the last omnibus bill, which was passed last march, three months into the obama administration, he said -- and i quote president obama -- "the future demands that we operate in a different way than we have in the past. so let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability that the american people have every right to expect and demand. so what are we doing today? the exact same thing that we were doing before. and here's a quote from the white house chief of staff, rahm emanuel. what he said about the last omnibus bill. remember? this is the one we weren't going to do anymore. "second, this is last year's business" -- he was talki

this provision, et cetera, et cetera, is intended to tax the wealth plans for the -- health plans for the wealthiest americans but will also tax the plans of officers who need high-cost insurance due to the dangerous nature of their profession. the fraternal order of police supports your amendment because it should not increase the tax burden who risk their lives to keep our community safe." mr. franken: let's think about these union folks who, again, they negotiated these health care policies and sacrificed in salary. what are they getting? they're getting affordable deductibles. they're getting affordable co-pays. sometimes they're getting vision and dental care. this is comprehensive health care that we want americans to get. and these -- that's who's going to get hit. in the whole, we have seen over the last 20, 30 years a squeeze on these people. we have seen a squeeze on the middle class, a shift in the risk to people. that's what this whole bill is about. we're trying to eliminate the risk of losing your health care if you have a preexisting condition. we're trying to lose the

baucus: with health insurance market reform and with the rating reforms, et cetera. mr. whitehouse: all those and a public option. all of that adds to a better environment. one of the interesting things about this is that you really only have a good and fair market. america is founded on market principles. we all believe in market principles. one of the things about a market is people will cheat on it if there aren't rules around the market. if you don't make sure that the bread is, you know, good, honest, healthy bread, then some rascal will come and they'll sell cheap, lousy, contaminated bread in the market. you have top discipline in walls to protect the integrity in the market. that is what the health insurance market has lacked. i think it will enliven the market in health insurance and animate the market principle. mr. baucus: i ask my colleagues: is there anything in this legislation which will interfere with the doctor-patient relationship? that is today people choose their own doctors, whichever doctor they want. they can by and large, with the hospital they wa

that's because of market reform and rating reform and no more rescissions, et cetera. so this is a very, very good dealment i'd like to say one word too on health care cost reduction. a lot of senators have quoted an article by gawande in the "new yorker" magazine explaining why the phenomenon of agree graphicc parts of the country, due to the way we pay hospitals and doctors for the are you imbursement system and, therefore, explaining about the basic reason why there's so much waste in the american health care system. well, dr. gawande has recent just recently published another article in the "new yorker," i think it was a week or two ago. and that n that article, he beaskly says -- and in that article, he basically says that of all the ideas that have been provided by practitioners and providers and people worried about the rise of health care costs in america, all the ideas are in this legislation. they're all in there. all the ways to work to start to lower health care costs are in this legislation. and he also says that the pilot projects, the demonstration proje

and you're thinking, hey, used to be last year we had orders for 100 rig et cetera, this this year, orders for 50. you aren't thinking about a machine or making investments in adding to the building so you can increase production because you are expecting that you are going to sell less this year because of the fact there is a slowdown in the economy. a slowdown in the economy affects businesses and jobs. pretty much common sense, i think. excessive taxation, how does that hurt jobs? well, here's the deal. you are the president of a business. maybe you have 100 employees and you find out all of a sudden that your taxes are really going up. now if you have a lot of taxes, that means you don't have much commoice and you are going to have to pay those taxes. it will be paid with from the profits and proceeds of the company that you have. and hopefully you have 100 employees and paying them and selling product and selling product for more than it costs you and making some profits and you are pocketting those profits. now, you understand there is going to be a lot of taxation coming down the pi

supportive on -- eon other geopolitical areas where we need their help and iran and north korea and, et cetera and latin america, things look, europe is having a hard time and the united states is having a hard time but the question is, this, this person said, is -- you know, what happened to capitol hillism. the talk of regulation and -- capitalism, the talk of regulation and the bailouts and what not. there's a fear about where america is headed this this regard. and you see that reflected in some of our major companies too who don't like the uncertainty about health care, don't like the uncertainty about energy policy and about tax policy. and so i spoke to those who say, where is the impetus for economic growth? we don't see it. there's no impetus for investment. the administration is trying to get the private sector jump started to create jobs and get consumer spending again. so i think one of the trends and i spoke to the politician and the policy side, there's a question about role government and effectiveness of government with regard to the economy, worldwide and a lot of that is look

et cetera, et cetera. we have plenty of history in the united states senate that's a bipartisan history that we ought to maintain medicare advantage rather than do an injustice to it as this present piece of legislation before the senate is trying to do, and i'd like to place this in the record, mr. president. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: i would -- does the senator from wyoming want the remainder of our 20 minutes? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. i would like to do that, to first correct something that i heard a little earlier op the floor today when the senior senator from connecticut had some concerns about -- he highlighted, he said how private health plans deny claims, and what his statement was is that he said that medicare does not deny claims. in the united states of america, the number one deaner of claims for health care is medicare. the -- the study that's out from a full year, march, 2007, to march, 2008, medica

on to say he also found that roughly 20% of all part-a providers -- hospitals, nursing homes, et cetera -- would become unprofitable within the next ten years as a result of these cuts. hospitals will close. nursing homes will khroefplts this isn't fabrication. this is the chief actuary for the center of medicare and medicaid services who is part of this administration. the c.m.s. actuary found that further reductions in medicare growth through the actions of the independent medicare advisory board -- this is the advisory board that's being set up to make determinations about coverage in the future. and the chief actuary said, "which advocates have pointed to as a central linchpin to reducing health care spending may be difficult to achieve in practice." in other words, it's not us that's making claims that aren't right. it's the authors of the bill that are making claims that aren't accurate, according to the chief actuary. minority leader. mr. mcconnell: if that were not bad enough -- and it may have been referenced here on the floor before i came out -- we have an announcement from t

the cuts would result in roughly 20% of all part-a providers -- that's hospitals, nursing homes, et cetera -- being unprofitable within the next ten years as a result of these cuts. as a former small business owner myself, i understand the impact this will have on doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers. in rural areas like my state, these providers will go out of business or have to refuse to take any more medicare patients. the c.m.s. actuary noted that the medicare cuts in the bill could jeopardize medicare beneficiaries' access to care. he said, the reid bill is especially likely to result in providers being unwilling to treat medicare and medicaid patients. that's what we've been saying for about 11 days. the reid bill also forces 18 million people into the medicaid program. the foster report concluded that this will mean that a significant portion of the increased demand for medicaid services will be difficult to meet. these aren't the claims made by insurance companies or anyone who might have a vested interest in the outcome of the debate. these come directly from the a

the reputational hit to the eretailers with the legitimate sites or the banks that are involved, et cetera. the problem is when the charge comes through, it comes through in the name of the membership club and all the attention is directed to the club and so you get this problem where the market doesn't take care of it because the reputational interests aren't at stake. >> let me ask the very good websites are playing ball and making money off of this scam. maybe we ought take a look at saying to the website, you know what? you allow that sort of thing to bounce up on your web page, you've got some liability here. you better be finding out who's using your web page and you certainly better find out who you're providing financial information on your customers to. you buy an airline picket, ms. lindquist to come out here and if if that company that you bought the ticket from provides your credit card to somebody else, shame on them. >> right. >> they have some liability in my judgment. they may not now but maybe we ought to find out if there ought not to be some way to do that. my time is up

capital, municipalities who issue bills on utilities, waters, sewer, like that, waste collection, et cetera, courts dealing with fees, fines, taxes paid on installment basis for counties and municipalities, schools, tuition, installment, room and board, third-party agencies handling fee process ing, merchants, layaway plans, real estate activities, brokers, appraisers, title companies, auction nears, inspectors, survares, cockroach inspectors for homes are covered under this bill. what is fnshal about that snr doctors, issuers of credit, point of sale, lawyers, disbursing money to a trust account, real estate transaction. madam speaker, this bill is so pervasive that the term anybody involved in a financial transaction literally covers someone writing checks on behalf of his mother who is in a nursing home. this bill is dangerous. we can't proceed on a bill like this and have all these different groups that are impacted, most of these groups will have no idea they will be governed by the so-called financial czar. we don't need another czar. we need a lot more freedom in this count thri try.

senate et cetera so go on-line to the "washington post" and you can see the comparison short here.w york on our opposed line. caller: good morning. i do appose it. the reason for that is, with the unemployment rate so high, the highest it's probably ever been, how do they expect and i agree with the other two individuals that coulded earlier. how do they expect with the subsidized information and programs at this moment. people have been unemployed for over 12 months like myself. how do we look at this bill and say, are we going to be able to afford even with that, this @&% healthcare when you have only one income? and only one way of paying for your rent. your car and other bills that you have. my concern is for those people. not just myself but everybody else on the unemployment side wondering how to pay and support your family at the same time the end of the week to pay for any other healthcare program and then on top of that be fined. not that the unemployment rate will been issue but people probably turn to crime. i see things not going down the right path and i hope that this

senate et cetera so go on-line to the "washington post" and you can see the comparison short here.rk on our opposed line. caller: good morning. i do appose it. the reason for that is, with the unemployment rate so high, the highest it's probably ever been, how do they expect and i agree with the other two individuals that coulded earlier. how do they expect with the subsidized information and programs at this moment. people have been unemployed for over 12 months like myself. how do we look at this bill and say, are we going to be able to afford even with that, this @&% healthcare when you have only one income? and only one way of paying for your rent. your car and other bills that you have. my concern is for those people. not just myself but everybody else on the unemployment side wondering how to pay and support your family at the same time the end of the week to pay for any other healthcare program and then on top of that be fined. not that the unemployment rate will been issue but people probably turn to crime. i see things not going down the right path and i hope that this sub