this is the right decision for ireland. mosul a time to take decision. we had our own back stopover to keep it in your war chest economic conditions were improving but difficulties to the day ahead he said the warning days are echoed by the polished. this decision. now the exit from the dead of an under seven fifteen. means the end of difficult economic decisions to soothe the mind in times ahead. today's decision is to start. this apart and i just love. i will be no celebration. went to our economic fortunes are fully recover. so the economic recovery is fully experienced and that it invites the people close relation of the government benches turned to anger with the beautiful indeed her toes to criticize decision. caving in to kenny had delivered the notes though that the implications of issuing a safety nets. i might vomit you is because of that struggle was quite content. like this. that's why. because the decision not to seek a backstop religion that has not been a single piece of paper presented to anybody. the mavericks are the merits of school do

la decisiÓn depende de ti.os dólares. además, tus favoritos todavía por sólo un dólar. más sorpresas. más sonrisas. en mcdonald's siempre hay algo más que te va a encantar. ♪

what made this decision, this difficult decision for me to join senator gillibrand on this particular amendment was an unfortunate -- it was a tragic case. last spring while i was trying to decide which path to follow in this bill my office received a gut wrenching call from the father of a young woman serving honorably in our military. he was calling against his daughter's wishes and only as a desperate last resort. she had been the victim of sexual assault and like so many others reported it to her commanding officer up the chain of command but like too many others her case went nowhere. her by the book reporting and patient waiting for results was met by delays, excuses nonresponse and ultimately during these repeated delays she was physically assaulted after she had warned leadership she feared for her safety. we took action and ultimately in this instance justice was done. but a chain of command like that isn't strengthening unit cohesion and morale, it's harming it. after this particularly troubling case i made a decision to join senator gillibrand as a cosponsor, to say mr. pre

>> it is rare that i make a decision like this on a map. >> but you have done it before? >> yes. >> have you ever rescinded a position before? >> not in this. i have rescinded to approvals but not for a situation like this. >> and the correlary there was there were certain portions of the lots that were designated as open space. when you made the determination, initial determination that it was not buildable, were you determining that it was designated as open space? >> no place on the map do i see the term open space. i saw this particular locating pattern in the subdivision and i saw the repeated building set back lines through the subdivision and my assumption was that the i intent was not to build on those areas, within those lots. >> okay. >> will you be issuing any documentation on this decision? >> i issued a letter to scott sanchez and to the developer, this morning. >> this morning? >> yes. >> this allows a process to... the process can begin again, and we will rerefer it to the planning department and they can weigh in on it and give it a general plan approval o

those decisions when we do make the wrong decision. and there are people who we want to catch transit, of course, we want to limit the number of vehicles on the roads, but there are people who need to catch the transit and i think that one of the concerns that i have although this may have been an open process that many of those folks who need to rely completely with no alternative on public transportation, often times are not a part of the process. and i don't believe that they were a part of the task force and although i appreciate the work that went into the recommendations of the task force and i am looking forward to taking a hard look at what is being proposed and making sure that the decisions that are made, or that the decisions that we make as a result of those recommendations are good decisions for the city and may not be every suggestion that the task force makes it is important to make sure that we are not just looking at it from a global perspective in the sense that making sure that it is efficient in the city and it is n

the board made the decision to set the level brother at $26,000 limit. based on the time many the lottery they're getting a reduction in the fee at the $16,000 per unit. as supervisor jane kim stated there's no reason for this tenant to pay her fair share that would be worked out between the owners along with the new condominium. additionally, you know, there were a variety of questions at the last hearing as to how easy it is for the owner to refinance and what sort of services our office provides. i want to say wove reached out to a number of our housing counseling agencies those are community organizations that the mayor's office provides funding for to get what sort of services that would be helpful to this particular homeownership. they don't turn anyone away and they have services to walk through the first time ownership. so invite all those homeownership's to contact our office directly or the homeownership counseling that we provide. we've spoken briefly to some of our lenders to talk about the easy process and it's individualized. most folks hav

it should be a technical legal decision, not a decision based on how tough you are on crime.hat's not measurable. so commanders will be held accountable for the command climate. and whether they make a legal decision up at the colonel level is not determined have asked whether they have done the job. the commanders who are getting opportunity make those legal decisions today are not doing a bad job. of those 3000 cases reported, one in 10 wichita. 10 way to go. that's not a terrible ratio. the ones they do choose to go forward, 95% conviction rate. and yes, i agree in those 100 cases were commander said move forward, convictions -- conviction rates weren't as high. those are excellent opportunities for the victims to be heard but we don't want just 100 more cases going forward. we want tens of thousands of cases to be reported so they have a chance to go forward. it's the difference, the difference of thousands. and that's why i feel this reform is so necessary. still in light of all the amazing reforms in the underlying bill i still think it's necessary because the crisis of

regardless of what drove that decision. with this in mind, we wrote a letter to odni and opm in september regarding their proposed rule in that letter we said, and i quote, from a fiscal and security perspective, far too many questions remain unanswered about the implications of the proposal, and due to the seriousness of the concerns we share, we urge you to finalize, and questions about the true scope with the estimated cost and number of impacted federal workers are answered. we're here today for answers. i'd like to introduce the witnesses, and senator portman has opening statement, he can do that when he gets here. i want to introduce the witnesses to the panel here today, and we want to welcome them all this truly is a great panel of witnesses. very knowledgeable and distinguished in your own right. first we have brian, assistant director of special security directorate in the office of the director of national intelligence. he's responsible for leading oversight and reform efforts of the security clearance process. h

it was a so called citizens united decision. the question was whether a paid program on hillary clinton counted as an electioneering message. that was the original question of citizens united. but he wanted to know is, how did that turn into the citizens united decision, this huge thing that shifted the ground under campaign finance legislation. he wanted to know how did that work for the court in what were the ups and downs. even when you publish a book like that enough sources like that, you still hear from other justices who say, it was a very good look but i think jeff is wrong about this one point. in the main, it is because he is writing a book. >> supreme court reporter stay on the beat for a long time. lyle has been there for 55 years. amy, do you worry about him getting too close to the institution? >> think so. i think especially with lyle. lyle calls them as he sees them and he prides himself on being independent, not only of his editor and publisher, but also he's not somebody who's out interviewing sources in interv

the decision was law of the land. equal justice under law. >> when a supreme court decided the gideon case, they really brought light to that phrase. it doesn't matter if you are rich, it doesn't matter if you are poor, you get the same equal chance. >> just look at what happened to gideon. the supreme court didn't set gideon free but it gave him a fair trial with a competent attorney. >> not guilty. >> clarence earl gideon was a free man. the man who won a landmark supreme court case went to live a normal living with a job pumping gas. >> when i read where it says equal justice under law, i'm very inspired by that. i'm very comforted by that. but i know a lot of people are treated unfairly. i see it as something encouraging but i don't see it yet. >> it's written into constitution and established into the goal for society to reach for and live up to. people will fall short, rights can be ignored or even trampled. with nothing more than a pencil and knowledge. >> if you know your rights you can protect your rights. if

call now to request your free decision guide.asy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. >>> sometimes just the decision to vote can make a guy very, very, very, very suddenly popular. veteran rob had hoped to spend his holiday hiking in the woods with hiss dogs. >> some times just the decision to vote can make a guy very, very, very, very suddenly popular. >> people, democratic party calling, everybody calling, coming to the door. on my way up here today, the cell phone is ringing off the hook. >> you wanted to go hiking. but then you went and voted now. everybody is calling. this is what is like right now in one part of virginia where the race is so close, and the rules about how to count the vote are changing while the counting is happening. individual voters are being plucked out of their normal lives and planned hiking trips to come back to the elections office and do work to try to make their vote count. there is a midnight deadline on

it was a decision made on the resultings of testing. but to consciously know that it failed testing and then to put it in to production for people to use is not what we do. if the test results show that it is not working, we don't put it into production. >> would the gentle lady yield sm. >> i certainly will, mr. chair han, if you make sure i get my time. >> of course. would you stop the clock? >>> the gentle lady's information, i've been told, the one that you're referring to is, in fact, the roll out to the decision that it had passed. i think the conclusion of the document is clear. documents show it passed the test. was it perfect? no. but if you can only get six people obama day r on day one, some might say that the web site was not passing the test in those first two days, either. so hopefully, that document, you can make it available to all of under the circumstances. i've been told that's simply the part of the supporting documents that cms has in their own documents, which is that portion which was excluded and we've been told

i think to allow commanders to make these decisions is unfair to the victim. it's unfair to the accused, and it's unfair to the commander. i do agree with that statement. i think that it's up to congress right now to make those changes so that victims don't have to continue to experience exactly what you just described. >> eugene, is this a current system that has only become more unworkable as more women have entered the ranks? >> yes, it is, ray, although the issues with the system go far beyond issues relating to women. and there are many men as well in uniform who are victims of sexual assault. the system has important parts that goes way before there were women in the service. i'm talking about the command centric aspect of the system. the role that the commander plays in the administration of justice. for that we have among others george iii the king to thank. he was monarch at the time, and we borrowed his system and we kept this important part of this system all the way threw despite the many, many quite important changes that have happen inned the 50'

i made the decision to focus on children and the families.ing the same question when i was younger why would i want to focus my efforts in san francisco. are there other places in the world where i could make a difference. i'm talking about the late 50s and 60s. there was at that time, a lot of population coming in from china. it was an opportunity for me to help people that were struggling in awe second amendment and getting used to things over here. >> what motivated you to get involved in politics. >> part of my motivation i guess you have to look at where i started. i as i mentioned he earlier i wanted to help people and at the time it was children and family. after many, many years of serving people i realized in providing services that somehow, i have to impact the decision-makers so i started advocating on issues i cared about. i was somewhat effective and wouldn't it be nice if i could do something different i ran an organization for 20 years. i felt i needed to grow as much as the impact i made the decision to leave the organization

so, i'll have to make my decision then. prospect of something like that would be very exciting for the city, i think, not only as an economic engine but also in terms of san francisco's cultural history. >> to a degree, do you feel the city should subsidize the team? >> i think that negotiations are still to be sorted out and i think that all of that is in the works. but it's something that i'll pay close attention to. >> what would you like to see change in the city's approach to developing its economy? >> you know, i think that san francisco is a very creative city and we tend to be on the cutting edge of issues, right? and i think that to that extent of our administration and our various departments such as the office of economic and work force development have always thought of creative approach he that might be new for the region to, for example, attract new businesses or, you know, other sorts of financing mechanisms. and i think that we will continue to do that in san francisco. >> well, are there any other issues th

people are writing a lot about their big decisions. you can believe that they are aware of what is written about them and take it quite personally. >> justice thomas says he doesn't read any newspaper except the dallas cowboys fan newspaper. usually brings them up to date about what is being written about him. said, once in a call from a get a public information office. this is how it's done. and the officer says you wrote such and such the other day. are you sure that is correct? i will be reprimanded and i know it is coming from upstairs, from the justices. sometimes you make a change, sometimes you don't. that is about the only -- i've never gotten a call directly from a justice saying that was a terrible thing you wrote. you get it indirectly. have books to sell, justices rarely give interviews. >> justice ginsburg has a message. she will come sure house if you have a garden party. she is not leaving. she wants everyone to know she is staying on the supreme court. she has been doing interviews like mad to get that point of view out

it is a 1993 decision. there were two schools created by a charitable trust to help orphans and poor children. the trust instructed and i quote, the teachers shall forever be persons of the protestant religion. the schools shall provide a good education and also instruction in morals. the schools hired only protestant teachers. they held themselves out as protestant schools. they required all the students to take religious classes. they offered bible studies and worship services and they had a cooperative relationship with one specific protestant church. now the district court found the schools were religious and, therefore, they were covered and they qualified for the exemption. but the ninth circuit court, considering the exact same set of facts, found the opposite and stkaoeupded that the schools -- and decided the schools were secular. the ninth circuit decided the school's original principle was providing religious instruction but saoepbgsly ruled since -- essentially ruled since some students were not

you don't have the record as a basis to know what was the decision. thank you. >> to the chair, could i comment? we don't actually produce minutes for the mayor's disability council but the meetings are televised and can be watched on play back. i think if anybody were to do that to watch the play back, they would see that there was a motion that was made to take an item off the agenda at the last meeting and that that motion did pass to take it off the last meeting, but that it wasn't necessarily binding on future meetings and in addition to the televised proceedings we also have captioned notes which are a word for word description. so i would feel confident that the council has the authority to move forward on their agenda today. >> as cochair, i don't know which way to go but i'm going to proceed with our meeting and move on to chip has been elected or should you say would like to be cochair. well, there is no one else here to vote. i guess we still vote, i guess? >> also, did you want to provide your councilmember with an opportunity to speak to

the review decision, it was a megalegal issue. there were a couple cases that were at play, but it really was not a factual or heavily technical kind of issue, but a pure legal issue, but -- my guess would be if the court had that idea, it had to do that. another option could be that the court shall release an unclassified summary of the key rulings of a case or something like that, like head notes or something. >> well let me ask you about that because we heard from another judge that he would rather not see summaries because a summary is not always a full picture of what the. would say, and in that, it's preferable. is there a view about that, up classified summary versus redacted of the opinion. which is better? >> understanding that no two judges might agree on whatever review i have thinking about this for the first time. again, it all depends. what is the issue? does it really involve something that's classified or simply, i mean, can you recast it in a way? i think it's impossible to predict an advance how difficult or easy

but thegement accountability for decisions that were made. you probably recover, the lady in the army that work and said she was astounded at how little decision-making power that the program managers in the services actually have versus outside. so we have to empower them. and understand there is some risk that someone will not take a good decision. give them more power, but hold .hem accountable i think that is a least an approach we need to move for. >> you mentioned the hearing that the committee held three weeks ago looking back at the past 25 years, essentially back to the report of the packard commission and the undersecretary of defense for acquisitions. there are those that would argue those 25 years of packer commission reforms have failed. others would say they have never even been tried. finding the right person, putting them in charge, clear requirements and resources they need to do the job in setting out the goals and holding them accountable to it. is that something you can legislate or do you reward that by finding examples o

my point is it's important who is at the table when they're making these decisions. there were a couple of comments and i don't know if there's questions. mr. williams from the rider's union brought up a good point about staff. no one's talking about staff. no one is talking about -- we're talking about system, but general fund dollars or mta dollars or what have you, that needs to be brought into the mix. when we talk about increased capacity, clearly we're talking about increased staff which includes benefits and management, and includes a whole new additional set of people that will need be to be employed and are we planning for that and hiring people at a rapid pace. do we have the money to hire them in the future. i know this is a plan, but even if the dollars don't necessarily come from any of these particular options, where potentially are they going to come from. how do they fit into this equation. i want to mention something about the vehicle license fee. when i look at this list, i'm not necessarily -- i know it's not just about me and what i believe, but i

people faced with tough decisions. >> that's a woman. had to decide what i'm going to do now. >> moral dilemmas with life-or-death consequences. >> to my girlfriend if he does jump, i'm going in. but i don't think that i really believed that i would actually -- it would come down to that. >> scenarios that force you to ask yourself, what would you do? >>> hello. welcome to "caught on camera." i'm contessa brewer. how well do you think you know yourself? in this show, we pose the question, what would you do? in situations that are confusing, dangerous, and even life threatening. some present ethical questions. some are questions of judgment. and others are uncomfortable. but briefly put yourself in the place of the people in these stories and ask yourself, did they make the right choice? and what would you decide? a car with its hazards on runs a red light and pulls into this hospital parking lot. with police in hot pursuit. the driver is nfl running back brian moats. earlier that evening, his wife gets an urgent phone call from a nurse t

i don't want to make the decision. i want us to make the decision.cision we make, one of us is going to be unhappy. may i have everybody's attention, please ? i would like to take this opportunity... to thank katherine for all her hard work... at crossroads cafe... and to wish her the best of luck for the future. that's enough talk. let's open the presents ! okay. this one's from mr. and mrs. chang. "wishing you much success. we will miss you." thank you, both. that's very nice. can i help open it, mommy ? sure. it's beautiful. thank you. open mine ! open mine ! fine, rosa. which one is it ? oh ! i think i found it ! do i open it, or do i eat it ? - you look really funny, mom. - that's the idea ! oh, i almost forgot. marie, this is for you. for me ? but i'm not going anywhere. i just started. - hello ? - it's a spanish dictionary. ah, carol ! finally ! i don't understand. you will when you try and figure out rosa's specials. what ? what did you say ? this is from mr. brashov. i hope it's not all the receipts i forgot to add up. - that was carol. - fi

decisions that we met. the idea that commanders would have responsibility for the atmosphere they create, one of the things that was mentioned more than once was what finally happened as we integrated the armed forces. president truman, i stand here by his desk, one of our predecessors in the senate from missouri was -- signed the order that integrated the armed forces. president eisenhower pursued that further, but only when the command structure was given absolute responsibility to deal with what had become a real possible, as there were even race riots on ships, according to senator mccain, who talked to us about this. it was when the commanders were given the responsibility to see that this problem was solved that it was solved. i think this bill and the additional amendment that i will be supporting, the mccaskill amendment really clarifies in new ways how important it is that commanders accept this as part of their command responsibility. the numbers that senator gillibrand talked about are totally un

regardless of what drove the decision. with this in mind, we wrote a september regarding the proposed rule. andaid that from a fiscal security perspective far too many questions remain unanswered about the implications of this proposal and due to the seriousness of the concerns that we share we urge you to do for finalizing this row once the matter has been fully and publicly aired and questions about his true scope -- it's true scope are answered. we are here today to get some of those answers. i would now like to introduce .ur witnesses mall.t to welcome the -- them all. this is a great panel of witnesses. the assistant director special in they directorate office of the director of national intelligence. he is responsible for leading oversight and reform efforts of the security clearance process. he has more than three decades in the cia. i want to thank you for your service. i want to thank you for joining us today. prior to his current position, he served as the executive director of the labor management and employee r

transparency means helping them make a decision. we pay more every year as an employer and we have really no idea whether the care we're purchasing is better are or worse than the year before. the lack of data transparency is there for us as well as purchasers. it's more expensive but we don't know what to do. we pay or shift cost to employees and none are sustainable. believe it or not, the people who are providing health care to us have the same problem. they have no more access to to data than we do. the doctors are trying to make decisions on quality, they have little access to data. you don't know what california pacific is charging for a hospitalization. how can you manage health care or be asked to manage or contribute to the solution if you have no transparency into the costs. so what we are all aiming for, everyone in health care, what we're all aiming for is what have been dubbed the triple care. we want to have lower cost or cost that are sustainable. this is important to the patients, the purchasers and providers and eve

and there'll be lots of decisions. you can't account for everything that's going to happen in a disaster or how people react, how families react. and having certain guidelines like you can't kill patients just because it's inconvenient, if they're going to die, let 'em die naturally. and especially here, as sheri points out. most of these patients were comatose who were given the injections of morphine. today didn't need to have any -- they didn't need to have painkillers. if you're comatose you have no pain. >> there's some debate about that. >> if a person's not conscious, they're not feeling pain, and giving morphine is not needed for pain killing, for comfort purposes. no? >> well, i mean, i think some pail yative -- >> but failure to -- >> there's a question of whether there may be some awareness or some discomfort on some level. >> the doctor has discomfort, but what does the patient? [laughter] a slippery slope, but if you're going to -- >> [inaudible] point out there are several -- [inaudible] withholding care

and analysis of the decision comes out. and we have the long term look at is both looking ahead what's going to happen at the court next term, looking back at picture when it's going to happen in the court in the previous term. day-to-day coverage in terms of the roundup of the news and events of the court, he developments of the court, things like filing a particular brief that might be significant. we also have to fill the summers. we use on-line similar pose yeah where we use six or eight posts from people who know an area of the law. action.affirmative recess appointments case. going to be at the court. prayer, ve legislative abortion. hard to ry very, very make sure that if we've got eight contributors, withe have four from ne side or the other. we will hear from people if they perfect e a near balance. we'll let them write 1500 or a ew thousand words on what they think the court is going to do, what they think the court should do in these particular areas and we'll post that to try to fill some of the contents. >> you

call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. >>> brecking news, senate democrats vote to approve the nuclear option, a move that would make the partisan divide on capitol hill eeven worse. >>> also right now -- a massive cargo plane getting ready to take off from an extremely short runway at a kansas airport where it was never supposed to be in the first place. woel sh we'll show you the challenging feat live this hour. >>> also, new jersey governor chris christie riding high, brand-new leader of the republican governors association, that could set him up perfectly for 2016. >>> hello, i'm wolf blitzer reporting from washington. if you think congress is bitterly divided now, just hold on. only a few moments ago the senate approved the nuclear option, making it easier to end filibusters. it landed like a bomb on capitol hill. ahead of the vote, majority leader, harry reid, e

commanders should be held accountable for those decisions. and in fact when he a woman who is currently in the marine corps come to the republican conference, and she is a woman commander, very impressive to have gotten to where she is in the marine corps. she works training our marines. i was so impressed with her experience. she's commanded at every level. she said, if we want to get this done for victims, don't make commanders a bystander. that's what makes me very worried. if i thought that taking the commanders out of the decision-making process would help victims further, i would do it. but, as she described, if you make a commander a bystander, which is what this will do -- what the proposal that is on the table that my opponent, certainly my -- the proposal that senator gillibrand has, who i very much respect, and i know her passion is very real for this, and i share it. i don't want commanders to be bystanders. if they're bystanders, how do we relieve them from command when they don't do their job? because we've taken the decision