why did congress become such a violent places? >> america was violent, congress was violent. partly it's not just congress but congress in this period is involved in all these sort of major union shaking issues. and part of what's going on with the violence is southerners and southern born werners tend to be the aggressors. so particularly over time talking about something that has to do with slavery and you're a werner and you want to shut somebody up, it's really effective to reach for your booey knife. >> this is part of the context, you brought this up in a discussion today on congress and politics in general. did you find people sort of surprised at the level of violence of emotion that was going on in congress? we don't see that in congress now. we do see emotion. >> that's true. i mean, i do think generally speaking, our image of congress in this period senior clay calhoun and webster sort of making great words. so yeah, it isn't the image. so i think people -- they're not surprised that there was some violence. there's a famous painting of charles sumner. whenever i s

it's not about congress declaring. we're not declaring putting a tight leash around the president, but they can do thing to make military action incredibly costly and really relevant, domestic politics of war. >> so, are you saying that congress, by doing almost, by abdicating in my ways, congress has become more popular by letting the president take the fall? >> no, i wouldn't go that far. i don't want to claim they are -- my sense is that congress is not fulfilling its basic institutional obligations and matters involving war, but that isn't to say they're irrelevant. they're not doing a lot of formal things. when a military action goes awry, what they can do is give all kinds of speeches. and launch investigations and talk about the incompetence of our president in putting our troops in harm way. that kind of behavior is cost to the president. >> time is back into congress this way. professor freeman, you're ed editing a volume on -- one of the founders -- congressal violence had a dual. how would we -- what was his

does that make it easier for congress to say yeah, okay, let's -- for congress to abdicate and let the president call the shots? >> yeah, at the front end. but that doesn't mean -- at the front end in terms of deliberations about whether or not to initiate military force. but that doesn't mean that congress isn't an important player in shaping presidential decision-making about whether or not to go. let me try to be clear. during this period, when we -- think there's been widespread abdication, wars have really done a number on three presidents. right? truman's approval ratings are in the high 20s in no small part because of the korean war. johnson decides not to run again in '68, precisely when the vietnam war is seen as a full-blown war. and bush. a big reason why he loses both chambers of congress in 2006 and why we have a president obama and not a president clinton is because of the unpopularity of those wars. in all those instances, members of congress played an important role in shaping the domestic debate about the efficacy of military action. there are things that congress can

that's it, i'm not going back to congress. in his mind, he said i'm not doing that again, it was humiliating, i wasted my time. setting that precedent of behavior that are affecting -- that might affect policy. >>n't it is moments like that that begin to show the rise of congressional power? that congress declares its authority to -- whether overtly or just by implication, hey, we want a few days to consider this treaty to advise and consent? >> no, a great example of that. it's one little guy who writes in his diary, he's kind of scared. he stands up in front of george washington, wie need a little time. it was an example of how new and experimental it was. >> you're writing your book on congressional violence. you're writing of a period ahead of the civil war. you talked about the statesman, calhoun and webster. those individual members of congress, did they fill a advantage yule of executive leadership that may have been missing ahead of lincoln's election? >> i don't know if i'd go that far. there are strong positions of c

congress met.t proved productive as members passed the homestead act, the pacific railway act and the revenue acts. coming up, "time" magazine editor-at-large talks about 1862 and the 37th u.s. congress. the university of nebraska lincoln hosted this event. it is about 50 minutes. >>> will's probably several hundred people more appropriate to talk about 1862 than i, i feel a little overmatched by the expertise in the room but if you will bear with me, this will be over soon. i would like to thank bob sutton for the very warm introduction and for the park service participation in this really cool event. i was so excited when i heard that rick edwards and the center for great playing studies had come up with this idea. it couldn't be a more appropriate place to tackle the -- the -- significance of what i believe was arguably the pivotal year of american history. 1862 was certainly the most eventful year in american history. perhaps the most misunderstood. the year in which the civil war became a cata

did lincoln act rightly, because congress want around and it took congress a long time to make a decision anyway? is the president uniquely qualified to make a decision like this or should he summoned congress earlier to make the decisions? >> i think it absolutely makes more sense for the president to have this power. i mean, it took congress two years to make the law that basically justified what the president did. but that's two years of the war, the war had one year left. but like it -- congress can't act quickly enough and it's not practical for them, especially in 1861, to be called back sooner because they can't necessarily get there that quickly. >> they don't have planes flying into reagan national airport in d.c. >> right. it will take them longer to get there, it takes them longer to act. it doesn't make logical sense for it to be part of congress. >> jill, what do you think? >> i think that lincoln thought, well, a lot of people thought that the clause was kind of vague as to who it -- particularly who could say suspend the writ. >> why that is? >> it's kind of like the treaso

glad that congress is at last gone. he wrote to his fiance back home in illinois. and i am sure i shall enjoy the relief from the constant strain of petty cares and troubles which their presence imposes. and yet, even nicolai felt bound to add this. it has done well. and much more than could reasonably have been expected of it. certainly much more than any former congress has done. so how is one congress in 7 1/2 months able to accomplish so much? it's a natural question for us to ask today living as we do in a time of frequent gridlock on capitol hill. i'd offer several explanations for your consideration, but first i would say that it was not because politicians in those days were less partisan or more cooperative than they are today. if we think politics is a nasty business now, consider the fact the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee in 1862, charles sumner, of massachusetts, arrived for that session still bearing the scars of his savaged beating he had receive order the floor of the senate in 1856 w

congress moved -- that congress moved with such unprecedented speed to create a modern currency, raised the vast sums needed to fight the war because people in 1862 understood what later generations of americans have, i would argue, largely forgotten. that if secession managed a first success there would be no logical end to it. we see the civil war so much as a north versus south issue that we imagine other possible results, always revolving around two side-by-side nations. that's not what they were looking at. there was nothing inherently stable about two independent nations, north and south neatly dividing the space and the resources they had once shared. if the south was section cessful, more fault line were likely to open. the bonds that held the old north-west of ohio, indiana, illinois, iowa, michigan, wisconsin, minnesota, the connection between that part of the country to new england was extremely tenuous. if the -- union shattered into pieces to the east of the mississippi, there would be little or nothing to connect any of those pieces to the great treasure lands of the west.

did lincoln act rightly, because congress wasn't around, and it took congress a long time to make a decision anyway? is the president uniquely qualified to make a decision like this, or should he have tried to summon congress sooner to make the decisions? molly, and then jill. >> i think that it absolutely makes more sense for the president to have this power because i mean it took congress two years to make the law that basically justified what the president did, but that's two years as a war, like that war had one year left, it was, you know, or well i guess two, but, like congress can't act quickly enough and it's not practical for them especially in 1861 to be called back sooner because they can't all necessarily get there that quickly. >> they don't have planes flying into reagan national airport in d.c. >> right so it takes them longer to get there, takes them longer to act and it doesn't make logical sense for it to be part of congress, because it just -- >> jill, what do you think? >> i think that lincoln thought, well, a lot of people thought that the, that clause was kind of vague

a year and a half into a two-year congress. reconstruction's often been called the second american revolution and in recent decades, because of the growing literature, we've come to appreciate just how profound and yet also incomplete that revolution was. menard's legacy, of course, was that he was at the very vanguard of a group of african-americans who came into congress, but his experience in being excluded from the seat also intimates what would occur to african-american congressmen at the end of the century after formal reconstruction ended in the south in 1877. and what occurred was a process that we're familiar with that took place over several decades in which legal and extra legal methods of disenfranchisement and a system of customs and laws, collectively known as jim crow, systematically and ruthlessly excluded african-americans from democratic government. but like menard's modest but noteworthy part in all of this, the work of 19th century pioneer representatives and senators, african-americans laid the groundwork a

congress has to take that power back. and congress has to do it on their own behalf. and we don't have much faith in congress to do anything right now to do that big seems high in the sky. i think that's what needs to happen. thank you. [applause] first of all -- hello. i'm really tall. sorry. i'm here. i'm right here. can you hear me? thank you for coming out tonight. my question has to do with the nature of the war you're talking about in the book. a lot about more formal wars or decklation of wars. what does the role of arab war in counter terrorism have to do with the military functioning. whether that -- was a legal or reinterpretation of wartime powers. what does it have to do from the military. >> excellent question, very hard to answer. i think that basically -- i think there had is reasonable wriggle room in terms of the way we are set up as at country as the president's commander in chief powers to do some things in an almost unilateral or temporary unit lal really a way when speed is of the essence. the way the founders talk about it was do things like repe

congress passed the budget control act. it requires a reduction of defense spending of $487 billion over the next ten years. as i've said, we do not have to choose between national security and fiscal security. but that does not mean that we do not have to make tough choices. we do. and defense should not be exempt from doing its share to reduce the deficit. what that means is, we have to make very difficult decisions. difficult decisions that are tied to a strategy that achieves necessary and real savings, and at the same time, protects the strongest military in the world. as you know, the military and civilian leaders of this department service as secretaries, serve as chiefs and combatant commanders, spent months developing a new defense strategy to meet our national security priorities and address our future security challenges. we then crafted a balanced plan that met the requirements of that strategy. as well as met the spending caps imposed by the budget control act. my concern is that if congress now tries to revers

the congress has, is reported on all of these attacks reported to congress either to the intelligence committees or -- this is all by statute -- or the armed services committees, and the president's authorities are scrutinized there. those committees don't have formal veto rights, but they can stop actions if they think them inappropriate, and they often have. >> [inaudible] >> the covert action is reported to congress in terms of what the action is, and then they're reported -- and then what happens in the operations are reported afterwards. moreover, there was a lawsuit brought by the aclu and the center for institutional rights, and among other reasons that the federal judge dismissed the case was he interpreted the constitution to say as tough as this is, this is an issue that our constitution leaves to the president and congress. congress has shown itself fully capable of pushing back against the presidency when he thinks he's gone too far, and by every indication congress is on board with what the president is doing. now, there's a separate issue about transparency and whether t

i believe as the fed does more, congress is doing less. in the long term, that slows our recovery. >> don't you think that congress could be doing something now as far as passing a transportation bill, which would be a job starter? >> you know, ranking member clay, i think it's important, especially long term, to get our transportation policy right. i think that would be helpful. i also think taking off the table this discussion of higher taxes. you know, this tsunami of regulation hitting these businesses. the president's health care plan, in my view, is a real, right now, a real deterrent to new job creation in america. so, yeah, there's a lot of things congress can do right. there's a reason the fed said, in the end, we're not setting an employment target because until the end we can't control employment. >> mr. frank, what do you think the federal reserve and congress could do? >> i think they have been very helpful. i think the policies in brady's bill would prohibit the future. we would have been worse off if it hadn't been for them.

let us not forget that congress declares war. guest: congress also approves money for the military, which is one of the ultimate checks and balances. even as commander in chief, he can deploy troops but he has to rely on the money congress approves. guest: congress has the power of the purse. host: new jersey. elizabeth is the last call. caller: hello. [unintelligible] guest: i heard something about political parties. guest: this is the blue slip and senatorial courtesy. there is more than just the supreme court in terms of this. all the lower levels of the court has to be approved, this is something we have blogged about. the senator for the state has a great amount of power to suggest names for the president and also sometimes possible federal judge nominees at the lower level. guest: the senatorial courtesy is much more likely for the district judges, less so for the supreme court judges. host: we did not get anybody to take our response but we had one on twitter as far as the question. -- guest: she is correct. host: congratu

and congress can change it. while it may be politically appealing the current domain to ask the fed to do something that is simply cannot do. chairman ben bernanke is testified before the in the long run the only thing the fed can control is inflation. in the long run low inflation is the best thing we can do for growth. in a federal open market committee statement said basically the same thing. the maximum level of employment is largely determined by non-mandatory factors. for the coming easy monetary policies short term tool to speed growth may harm the economy in the long term. let me skip to the end and make the point here that among other provisions in sound dollar act, we grant a permanent vote to all the regional federal reserve bank presidents because as important as new york and washington is, there is much more to america's economy and it should better reflect our geographic diversity. we require the fed for the first time to articulate the last resort policy in order to reduce uncertainty. create more

and that it's appropriate that we have her before congress. i think we heard 42 or 43 times already. but that's the role of oversight and that's -- >> i don't think any chairman of the s.e.c. has ever faced the problems and the issues, the harassment, the bedevilment that mary schapiro has faced. >> it's congress performing its elected -- constitutional responsibility. >> and on that note, i want to thank the three of you very much for a lively conversation here. very much appreciate it, congressman garrett, joining us, deputy secretary neal wolin, and arthur levitt, as well. thank you so much. >> and as they are descending, let me introduce the next panel. my colleague, susan goldberg, the executive editor here in washington of the local, state, and federal government will be the moderator. we have steve case, who needs no introduction, the chairman and ceo of revolution now, the co-founder of america online. we have carly fiorina, who is the chair now of carly fiorina enterprises and the vice chairman of the national republican senatorial co

court first circuit court with common cause for members of congress including congressman john lewis keith ellison co-chair of the progressive caucus and three undocumented students who would be united states citizens today but for the dream act which had fifty five votes in the senate we had a president yesterday where we said you know that bill won by five votes disclose that received fifty nine votes in the senate that won by nine votes one vote short of a filibuster passed the house passed the senate the president would have signed it it's not law that's the crux of this this debate and that's and that's the real crime of this stephen thank you thanks so much for having thanks for the great work that you're doing thank you for the last few years republicans in the senate led by mitch mcconnell who boasted that his number one job is not to create jobs for americans but instead to put president obama out of a job and shut down an entire branch of government by abusing the filibuster this is not what democracy looks like. twenty years ago as the united states is about to jump into n

congress can regulate the price, congress can have your house without a warrant therefore congress can'tve your house searched without a warrant. the chief proponent of the argument was madison joined in making this argument. he was among the majority of ultimately all the state delegates voting voted not to have a declaration of rights in the constitution and the philadelphia convention and that was one of the main reasons for maine mason and randolph receipts to sign in the night defend the constitution colonel mason has less philadelphia in a very ill-humor indeed, mason had promised he would go home to virginia and see the constitution was not ratified in the governor drafted a pamphlet and thank you to the speaker of the house of delegates laying out his objections. there were several important ones, but the chief was that there is no bill of rights in this unamended constitution. so what to do? will come and madison got around a little for not after the constitution signing day sending a copy to his friend jefferson and france. everyone thinks jefferson wrote the constitution that

maybe there's some members of congress watching. if you need some motivation to make this happen, then you should come to reno and you should visit with folks like the kellers. i'm not saying -- i'm not saying the kellers want all these members of congress up in their house. it's bad enough having me and secret service in there. but at least they -- they probably wouldn't mind saying hello and talking to them here in front of their house. but they should talk to people whose lives are better because of the action we took. all over the country, there are people just like paul and val, folks just like you who are doing everything they can to do the right thing. to meet the responsibilities to look after their families, raise their kids right, give them good values. you're not looking for a hand out, you just want to make sure somebody's looking out for you. when you do the right thing, that you're able to keep everything that you've worked for. it's what folks are looking for. and that's what they expect from washington. to put the po

is a little more accountable to its constituents and congress needs to. actually make sure that what they're doing is what their constituents want is what's going to keep us safe for the t.s.a. right now has very little accountability the courts are having a hard time keeping them accountable congress is having a hard time keeping keeping them accountable they've they've stopped detained actually several people in congress at this point in the airports so it's getting that leverage that. the t.s.a. for accountability purposes that that we're after and i'm going to use some of the words that you used you called the nude body scanner program nothing more than a giant fraud i know that you're also the first person to sue the t.s.a. for those body scanners talk to me a little bit about your biggest complaint. my biggest complaint there are lots of complaints i guess forefront is the privacy issue and that the government is essentially demanding a digital strip search to head to the airports nowadays that that's what it is no more no less these devices can tak

to congress and join us a little earlier to talk more about what he shared with them sure so the congress today presented actually a little more detail than than we saw in that you tube video there are several exploits that myself and others have identified these body scanners and the one of the video is just a nice one because it's so easy to do it doesn't really take anything and it's effective for objects large enough to be a firearm or or even larger than. a percent of those details to congress so that they can kind of demand some accountability from the t.s.a. and you seem to be somebody that congress wouldn't want to be associated with somebody that's sort of testing the government were you surprised when they invited you to sort of share what you had learned with em. you know. i can understand having having that kind of point of view but that congress. is a little more accountable to its constituents the congress needs to. actually make sure that what they're doing is what their constituents want is what's going to keep us safe the t.s.a. right now has very little accountability bu

i would say from the point of view of the congress, it seems to me you want the congress, the fed to report on its strategy, not to dictate exactly what the strategy should be. that's the fed's job. you come to this hearing and report the strategy explicitly, like they did about the ms, i think was constructive and also requires the congress, this committee, to ask the questions about the strategy. i think that dialogue is very important. i wish we'd go back to that. >> dr. galbraith, i tend to agree with you about the constitutionality of appointments to the federal reserve board. we always have a different opinion about what we should be doing with monetary policy and the federal reserve. where does this authority come, constitutional authority, since you addressed the constitution, the constitutional authority to actually emit the bills of credit, which is prohibited by the constitution, the creation of a fiat monetary system? where does that authority come from exactly? >> i believe, mr. chairman, and i would be cautious about tangling with you on this, that the authority for the

he's lost three separate runs for congress. so this is not someone, if you look at resume versus resume, that you would think would beat dick lugar, but we're talk abin about a small party republican primary. not to mention lugar's residency issues and past votes are really hurting him. >> thanks so much, chris. see you later. moments from now, president obama is going to be speaking on the economy at a high-tech facility in albany, new york. the president is going to call on congress to pass job credits and mortgage relief. today's rollout has been overshadowed by the gay marriage debate and by president obama's campaign isn't the only one off message. chuck todd is with us as well as dan walls, "the washington post" chief correspondent and author of "the take." thanks to both of you. this was supposed to be the rollout of the campaign. you were with him in ohio at ohio state on saturday. but we've seen all of this overshadowed, first by joe biden on "meet the press" speaking about gay marriage, and the inability of the white

it is a creature of congress under the constitution. i think also that creating a single rigid price stability mandate would bring back the technical difficulties we experienced in the 1970s and 1980s over the definition of money. the definition of price stability would become similarly problematic if one looked at the notional definition of inflation presently in use, i think you would find that the federal reserve did not, in fact, violate its price stability mandate in the run up to the great crisis. it would be very hard to know before the fact when it was doing something that was not con sannant with that mandate. the profession fell into complacency before the great crisis and the crisis delivered a shock from which economics has not recovered. issues of the cost of resources, as yet unfinished project of financial reform remain unresolved. unemployment is not going away as many prominent forecasters believed it would have been now. reasonable price stability, which was the language in the humphrey humphrey/hawkins example is one

congress passed the budget control act. it requires a reduction of defense spending of $487 billion over the next 10 years. as i've said, we do not have to choose between national security and fiscal security, but that does not mean that we do not have to make tough choices. we do. and defense should not be exempt from doing its share to reduce the deficit. what that means is we have to make very difficult decisions -- difficult decisions that are tied to a strategy that achieves necessary and real savings, and at the same time protects the strongest military in the world. as you know, the military and civilian leaders of this department -- service secretaries, service chiefs, combatant commanders -- spent months developing a new defense strategy to meet our national security priorities and address our future security challenges. we then crafted a balanced plan that met the requirements of that strategy as well as met the spending caps imposed by the budget control act. my concern is that if congress now tries to reverse ma

until lincoln could persuade the congress that he needed another person on his staff. eventually he got a third secretary by hiding him at the patent office. so while the issue you're raising is real and the devaluation of money was a huge problem for the north through the war, although infinitely larger problem for the south where inflation by 1863 was running at vimar republic rates, it was an issue that just didn't rise to the top of their agenda that i can determine. the other story i like about the money is chase did not want to go to fiat money. he tried everything he could not to. but when he finally did, he never got over the fact that the republican party had made such a terrible mistake in 1860 in chicago by nominating abraham lynn cop instead of himself to be president. and as doris kerns goodwin has said in team of rivals so nicely, a lot of people in the cabinet felt that way, but most of them got over it. chase never got over it and he was running for president constantly even as he was treasury secretary. so it donned on him in january after the currency

congress can regulate the price, congress can have your house without a warrant therefore congress can't have your house searched without a warrant. the chief proponent of the argument was madison joined in making this argument. he was among the majority of ultimately all the state delegates voting voted not to have a declaration of rights in the constitution and the philadelphia convention and that was one of the main reasons for maine mason and randolph receipts to sign in the night defend the constitution colonel mason has less philadelphia in a very ill-humor indeed, mason had promised he would go home to virginia and see the constitution was not ratified in the governor drafted a pamphlet and thank you to the speaker of the house of delegates laying out his objections. there were several important ones, but the chief was that there is no bill of rights in this unamended constitution. so what to do? will come and madison got around a little for not after the constitution signing day sending a copy to his friend jefferson and france. everyone thinks jefferson wrote the constitution th

that is not one of the regretings i had in my term in congress, when you mentioned members of congress who are shirking their responsibilities with regard to reform, i assume you're talking about the senate who basically has not had a meeting there in the last 14 months to deal with any of the reforms that both sides of the aisle says we should be doing with regard to dodd frank. >> i'm talking about the house. >> i mistook that. maybe talking about us. >> then cut their budget by 30%. >> well, that's not quite the way, as paul harvey used to say there's the rest of the story on some of these things. when it came to dodd frank, which was a third part of your opening question is how things could have been different, if there was some degree of certainty in the marketplace today. if the person who you say the one of your heroes with regard to the eclipse that we came to the edge of the cliff i was going to say, he was one of the leaders even of our own party he was one of the leaders that led to the uncertainty. why did we have the situation back then, was because wall street, the busine

good morning. >> good morning, gentlemen we have the republican congress, the worst congress in american history. okay, proceeded by the worst presidents in american history, there would be george bush. let's look at the track record for the republicans. they come in with their little places, grover norquist we aren't going to raise taxes on anybody first thing they did, george bush tax cuts raised by $4 trillion. >> host: why don't you bring all of this to conclusion. where are you going? >> caller: the problem i have is if they don't want to raise taxes, okay, they have the right and budget cuts four or $5 trillion. they got 90% income you're not going to cut that. >> host: robert draper come anything to respond to? >> guest: as to the republicans and what they were up to in the 112 congress, the argument has been made, certainly is an argument they would make that they were responding to a movement and to the will of the voters in the 2010 the election that basically had a mandate as a result of the voters turning the house back over to the republican party to roll back the obama admi

congress should extend these tax credits.inally, congress should help our veterans returning from iraq and afghanistan by creating a veterans job corps. our men and women in uniform have served this country with honor. now it's our turn to serve them. so that's congress's "to-do" list. but now we need them to start crossing things off. i need you to call your members of congress, write an email, tweet, and let them know we can't afford to wait any longer to get things done. tell them now is the time to take steps we know will grow our economy and create jobs. you're working harder. you're meeting your responsibilities. your representatives in washington should do the same. let's push congress to do the right thing. let's keep moving this country forward together. thanks, and have a great weekend. >> hello, i am kristi noem. a m a y, mother, a rancher, and a member of the house of representatives. last week i took on another title -- college graduate. i had to leave school when i was 22 after my dad died in an accident on our

he started a war with the congress barely knowing about it when congress said no to what he wanted too he secretly went around them to do it any way reeking of law. when he got caught in his administration trying to save his presidency they invented a brand new radically expand the doctrine of power that he essentially said a president alone has one person can direct any war related action anywhere on earth even in the direct contradiction of the law passed by congress which is bizarre to save him at the end of the contrast that became the basis of the political life of an obscure wyoming congressman named cheney. [laughter] and the became unexpectedly important when congress muscularity on issues of the war wind flabby and then cheney as the white house chief of staff and later as the defense secretary came up with something that was essentially the cure to the abrams doctrine instead of making sure the manpower needs of the military and gauged the whole country whenever we went to war he restructured its of the manpower needs of the military would be met as quietly as possible with

this is not about going around the congress. there are precedents for codes of conduct in 1972 the nixon administration negotiated an incidents at sea . agreement to help prevent dangerous games of chicken involving warships and submarines. in 1989 president george h.w. bush negotiated a dangerous military practices agreement with gorbachev. establishing norms for ground and air forces operating in close proximity. the george w. bush administration agreed to two codes of conduct to help combat proliferation. all of these useful diplomatic initiatives took the form of executive agreements, not treaties, because they don't control or reduce military forces. in fact, our joint chiefs of staff support the administration's effort to negotiate a code and they have been closely consulted. although they have raised potential for impacts on defense activities they have expressed support for this approach as the u.s. enters into discussion to resolve areas of disagreement. >> will the gentle lady yield? >> i would yield. >> a quick questi

does the economy need congress to set aside the real rlunacy?n, john mcloughlin, republican strategist poll, good to see you. are we safer when congress is on vacation or when they are working? >> i'm torn if they would have removed the lunatics from government, that bill would have been worth its weight in gold. purely a correct political speech issue in a perfect world, congress would have a budget, dealing with the fiscal cliff on the spending side and tax side, but they are not. and so as a result, at least they are not making things worse. i think we'll come to a point this year, maybe because of china, your previous guests pointed out, maybe because of the euro, where we begin to get very nervous again, about the credit rating, the tax increase and if we hit a wall in terms of growth, the president is going to want to do something. i think it's a little late, though. this is american as facebook. in other words, if you have a good opinion of congress who are you? and the pollsters want to know your families. who are these nine or 11% who l

convincing congress to support his plan would not be easy. one of those to whom he turned to help was sam, who could both talk the talk of finance and more importantly bring together men of opposing views to talk over their differences. and sam was happy to oblige. from new headquarters on e street, sam sent out to win a victory with the treasury paying the bill. sam was delighted when reporters placed the cost of his efforts for the secretary of the treasury at $12,000. soon the key senators and representatives on both sides of the currency zee bait were sitting down to dinner at sam's table. although mak cull la was disappointed when he didn't get what he wanted, he was not disappointed in sam. thanks to his work and a string of successes, sam's star was rising. to julia he boasted he was a sort of a figeroe. every one calls me, every one wants me. what exactly did he do for sam, and what did he do for those who called his name? in a letter to a friend, about work he was doing for him in washington, sam wrote "it's taken me a week, i'm at l

congress to do something. if everybody's taxes go up, if you start cutting spending mindlessly across the board that will be a super wake up call, but, we ought to have the good sense to avoid it. >> i think the action forcing events that you talk about are going to require action sometime before the end of the year. we need a medium and long-term plan to set the country on a more fiscally sustainable path. i'm optimistic the congress will rise to the challenge whenever it might be to be able to do that. >> a very bad way to run a government. absolutely terrible. i don't think we have a choice right now. if the grand bargain could come together in a lame duck session that would be better. i just don't think it's feasible. and it is feasible to do a framework which says we're going to do these kinds of things to entitlement programs. we're going to do this. i hope comprehensive across the board tax reform that will give us a simpler broader based tax system with lower rates and more revenue. that's what we need

send someone to be in congress. i would succumb to what this is all about, which is held after state constitution. such ever since i drafted the state constitution was what the war was about. at one point he said if we end up with a bat over a device in iphone except when it was on a her from across the water without albeit in. the main thing we do here is my constitution. he didn't get to hold to that food be satisfied with the declaration of independence. madison was on the ground for doing such ever since i was the more important thing, inventing the idea of written constitutions adopted by the people's representatives, were not ascend that his political start and of course the end of playing the lead role in drafting the federal constitution. i didn't mention this because he didn't have anything to do the church and state, but at the end of his life in 1829 and 30 when he was and has laid a 70s, he was involved in another constitutional convention where they revise the original state constitution peers that was

but it also is -- members of congress have run against congress forever. i want to go serve in the body that i hate. it's always been mysterious to me. but -- >> you know what, cokie? i agree with you. when i ran in '94, i ran as a republican. and the people that were elected in my class ran against the institution. i have never trashed the institution of congress and i've never trashed federal employees because i know what good congress can do when they put their mind to it. >> but that's where i was headed. now what you have is in addition to running against congress it's running against all of government. >> right. >> and i mean, what does that do in terms of your -- you all doing your jobs? >> but we see that also unfortunately not only in congress but on the state level. so you have people who have sought public office to really dismantle government. anything involved with government has to be bad. so whether it's cutting off education funding or health problems or immunization programs, things that again typically we're seeing as public good, public

yes, we have our remedies, we have cob tempt of congress, we have -- we have content of congress, we have criminal prosecution, and in the case of a cabinet level position like mr. holder it could get to impeachment depending on what we find out. the constitution provides the ultimate remedy there. there is the lifeblood of the federal bureaucracy is money. we have got to cut off the money to the employees like eric holder who stonewalled at best and lie more likely. we need government officials who own up to their mistakes. you know, my colleague here, mr. gowdy, was talking about the fact there's not a single email after a certain date from mr. holder. i'd like to remind the chair and the american people that what gets you in this country nine times out of 10 is the cover-up. the american people are willing to live with the mistake, but they are not willing to live with a liar. and this amendment cuts off funding to the liars in our federal government. so i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i yield back the remainder of my time. >> madam chair, i rise to strike the last w