the same should be true for federal workers when the federal workers are giving out federal contracts by the hundreds of billions of dollars, let them be able to look people in the face and say, we hold ourselves to the same high standard. we're not having a separate standard for contractors for you. those of us that do work for the federal government are honest in your dealings, we pay our taxes and if we don't around here they eventually fire us. that seems to be commonsense and the right approach. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah yields back. the gentleman from california reserves. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has agreed with s.con.res. 8 setting forth the congressional budget for the united states government for fiscal year 2014, revising the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2013 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary leve

they're the purveyor of federal funds. pbs is the national programming service, the national distribution service. they do a lot of work with the local stations in terms of improving management and so forth. they're private. they're also private, and nonprofit, and the association of public television stations is the organization for the licensees themselves, the people on the ground in hundreds of american communities who hold these licenses from the federal government and who provide all these local services, programming, and education, and other community services that we have described, and it's my honor to represent all of them here in washington. >> host: one more question before we turn back to cal mam lalanne. ken stern quoted as staying that perhaps npr would be better off without federal funding. whatting are your thoughts. >> guest: well, npr itself doesn't receive much direct federal funding. the local public radio stations receive a fair amount of federal funding, and some of that money goes to npr for the pur

government problems. >> the federal government budget is like a federal -- family budget is that itoes up on small things like groceries. and the federal government, cutting back the mall things will make a difference and pr ograms. if you could cut spending from the overfunded programs, which programs would you redirect the money to? >> take it away from military ending and invest it in the nations infrastructure, roads, transportation networks, and in education. >> none. [laughter] i would cut spending to cut spending. toould not redirect it underfunded programs. we do not have that luxury. >> we cannot keep looking our children in the eye knowing that we are going to give them a diminished future because we are pending their money today. you may bewahy concerned about the future. you will pick up the tab or your grandparents. >> we need a solution. one that will help us on the road to recovery. here are ways we believe he can get there. this affects all of us. we have to put aside our interest and let the special interest outside of the door and come up with a solution. more acco

your critique of federal spending. so so these are sort of the divisions and the conflicts and the contradictions that i think any serious proponent of limited government has to contend with. i think there's been a sort of this view that's been propounded that limited government is impossible. anarchists even make this argument, and i would argue -- i would counter to you that limited government is possible but difficult. the fact that there has been limited government in the united states government was a fairly limited government for 150 years even after the progressive era, even after the civil war where there was some government growth, and there were some impediments to government growth that were institutional that were kind of knocked out of our american political system, we still had a fairly limited federal government. now, i think the anarchists might have a little stronger government -- agent when it comes to sustainability, especially in a mass democracy or welfare state. but for the purposes of this discus

we had a limited federal government. i think they might have a little bit of stronger argument when it comes to sustainability of long-term for especially in a mass democracy or welfare state. for the purpose of the discussion we pause a somewhat limited government is possible. i argue in the book when republicans have been serious about cutting spending they had success in doing so. and i also think there are some things question learn from attempt. some worked better in others. in each of the cases i would argue that they were successful in preventing the united from becoming a full blown european style social democracy. but there were some spending cuts that were more longer term and prevailed far long time. there were other cuts to government spending that were really restored spend was restored right after the republicans left office and in some cases before. that to a large extend happened after the reagan administration and after the first couple of years in the gingrich congress in the mid 'out. most the successf

the federal contracting agencies how to go out and get access to federal contracts. it's a big role that we play. there is a federal government goal for 23% of all federal dollars to go to small business. we come to close it in the federal agencies come close to that number but don't reach it. about 22 and a half percent this year and there are separate goals for women owned pbs and 5% of contracting should go to women owned business. we fall short of that and three or 4% go to women owned business so sba triers to certify businesses to get access to federal contracting. in the last year that took a long time from the legislation that was passed in 2000 to 2009 a gap of time where that was not put into place. in 2009sba was able to put the small contracting program in place and get that program up. it's had a couple of years to really get access -- for women to get access to the self certification process to be available to take advantage of women contracting. it's a relatively narrow band of types of businesses that are available. there are about 83 industrial class

they are in federal court all the time.going to stop any interrogation, any further inquiry with respect to whether he had other individuals he was working with or how he got the bomb materials. so the moment a lawyer enters the proceedings, that's going to put a stop on interrogation efforts. and of course, the lawyer will appear with him at arraignment either in the hospital or by video conference or by appearance in federal or state court. >> what's the timing on this? does this have to happen soon? especially given the fact we understand that he is sedated right now. >> it really depends on his medical condition. the federal statutes are somewhat vague. they say after an individual has been arrested, he has to be brought before a magistrate within a reasonable and practical time period. so there's no hard date involved. however, when someone is se day-to-day, unconscious, unable to perceive what's going on, the law is very flexible in this area and immediate arraignment is not require. he's got to be conscious, he has t

that is the violation of two different federal laws. this is proof positive that hat we said at the beginning is that you cannot trust the government. they will use this information in ways they are not supposed to be using it. >> you recorded an opposition to increase penalties that there would not be purchasing if there were no limits on who could carry a gun. you have said you are opposed to expanding the background checks. do you think there should be any limits on who should on the guns, felons, criminally insane at? >> the ones who should be in jail. let some out on the street. that is what happens. criminals have always broken the law. if we think someone is dangerous and we have proven it. >> if you were on the side of states having the right to determine whether legal immigrants could contain permits. the general counsel told us hat the group supports equal concealed rights. do you feel that anyone should be -- illegal immigrants should be allowed to carry? >> anybody here in this country legally, as citizens or visitor should

to muni related to the federal subway and to the public health. on the non-agency side you'll see the significant housing and homelessness and this is entirely the housing authority. >> and that housing authority is duplicate on both years; correct? >> that's correct. we'll go through those relatively quickly. so you can see the first slide gives a high-level sense of what's going on with children's youth and aging programs. modest reductions to city programs the big youth program is related to childcare like head start as well as idea. at this school district. in addition, nutritious programs of the school district are potentially impacted. for the aging this includes funds for case management for older adults and adults with disabilities. on the housing and homeless front we a strong indication of those kits. no impacts inform to the current year by to the housing authority almost $13 million of reductions. that's divided into two categories it's about $4 million to public housing funds which effects the housing authorities current operating fun

there is a federal terrorism law. the use of explosive devices in the course of terrorism is not only a federal crime, it is a federal crime that potentially carries the death penalty. >> when you say that, is there not also -- forgive me for not knowing the wording of the federal statute, but exploding a device in a public place causing death is also something that carries the death penalty. >> that's right. >> so video perhaps -- >> that's right. >> okay. >> remember, we are such an early stage of this process. you know, we are all taking it as a given that the fbi and other law enforcement have identified the two brothers as the people who set off the bomb. we don't know what the evidence is of that. we haven't seen evidence -- we haven't seen them setting off the bomb. we haven't seen them admitting it. now, supposedly one or both of them admitted it to the carja carjacking victim, but i think we just need to slow down a little bit and say, you know, what is the proof here. >> sure. >> i assume the government woul

some of you covered the federal reserve and are familiar with how it sits monetary policy to the federal open market committee. you know that the influence c.p. pays close attention in what it says in the statements it issues after each meeting. this is supplemented by chairman bernanke's press conferences and providing detailed minutes of the meetings. getting this message out to the public depends on the work that you do in reporting and analyzing the statements and actions and explaining its roles and objectives. want to thank you for those contributions. let me also say while i'm particularly pleased to speak to you fape all of you are consumers and producers of communication. at first glance, the o.f.m.'s communication may not seem different from what you've heard other government agencies about what they say about their policies or what businesses say about their products. i hope to show how communication plays a distinct and special role in monetary policy. i would like to offer a comparison that may highlight that difference. suppose instead of monetary policy we were talking abo

law to that federal prosecution.n though juries don't do things we think they always should do, they are presumed to follow the law and they typically do. >> do you think he's going to get a fair trial? >> that might be a little bit outside my pay grade. this case has aroused incredibly high emotions. we don't know all the answers yet, we don't know who these brothers may or may not have been working with. there's been some suggestion that the explosive devices that were used were really a little more advanced than might be expected for two people who were amateur bombmakers. there's so many unanswered questions that it's hard to figure out what the emotions are going to be, how much more inflamed and impassioned this case is going to become. certainly if we get reports that they were working with others, that there might be some other broader link to this horrible event, then you're going see an even further inflaming of passions, but the people who step inside this courtroom will be given very precise instructions

we are winning the war on aids in san francisco but those cuts from the federal government continue to challenge us and specifically threaten to derail the progress we maid make. so today, we're going to hear from our department of the public health and community organizations about the strategist the endesk about the cuts we're about to experience yet again from the federal government and about how we locally in san francisco, california renew and continue to move forward on our own commitment with those living with the disease and frisks the disease. so we'll start with the public health and dr. garcia >> to the chair and the boards members first i want to let the audience know we provide direct services in the county of los angeles with all our partners. as many of you know, we continue to see reductions in our hiv and aids funding. there has been more - the fact that health care reform is being mrementdz many people who dooptdz on our program for the medical care they'll have the opportunity to be covered under medicaid but to note that the population at large is not covered but we

the federal open market committee. you know that the fomc pays very close attention to what it says in the statements it issues after each meeting. this communication is supplemented by chairman bernanke's post meeting press coverage is and by providing detailed members of the committee's meetings. getting this message out to the public depends a good deal on the work you do in reporting on the fomc, analyzing its statements and actions, and explaining its role and objectives. so i want to begin by thanking you for those contributions. but let me also say why and particularly please to speak to you today. as writers and editors, all of you are prodigious consumers and producers of communication. at first glance, the fomc's communications may not seem so different from what you've heard from other government agencies say about their policies or businesses, what they say about their product. i hope to show though how communication plays a distinct and special role in monetary policy. i would like to offer a comparison th

subsidized with federal tax buyerings. >> oh, nissan.ve a billion of green money to a foreign car company >> and track record . obama administration is much worse than any other administration when it comes to this type much -- of folly. there tens much thousands in the pet projects . there are over five hundred convictions of corruption. you talk about bad investments, they are also criminal investmentings. >> morgan look at all of the bad investmentings. solyndra is the grand daddy. there is abound, a, 1, 2, 3 systems and everygreen. it goes on and on. >> it is making harder for me to defend them but i will take a swing. with all . green investing that is happening with the government, less than in green start up us. one of tholce places is energy efficient technology and affordable and subsidized housing. we are seeing it with federal tax cuts and natural gas that is now on the table finally for proposal. i think there are areas where government should be involve would. >> steve, it is when the government gets involved particularly wi

rules that go with the federal prosecution, the judges by and large in the federal courts, they are that go with the federal prosecution, the judges by and large in the federal courts, they are as mit procedural rules that go with the federal prosecution, the judges by and large in the federal courts, they are as mit procedural rules that go with the federal prosecution, the judges by and large in the federal courts, they are -- rules of evidence even make it moore prosecution friendly often than not, the right to counsel on the federal level, search and cea seizure law. so when i heard it was going federal, it seem taos make a lot of sense to me. >> don clark, do you agree with the weapons of mass destruction, b, how do you get it out of state of massachusetts and the fbi do that withhere there is n murder charge? start with these two. >> well, first of all, this is going to be a federal case. and the laws and the rules that the fbi will go by and the agencies that's working with them will have to be under that rule. so they will be able to do and get the punishment that's warrante

the case will likely proceed to the federal district court. the federal sister first.he state will obviously have their own independent charges. based on the results of the federal case, they may end up dismissing the state charges at the end of the day. if the state interests are satisfied as a result of charges in convictions, the state interest may be satisfied as a result of the federal case. >> neil: i thank you very much for joining us. mike sullivan. >>> is this the closure everyone has been looking for. it ain't over, are they celebrating too early? [ male announcer ] how do you measure happiness? by the armful? by the barrelful? e carful? how about...by the bowlful? campbell's soups give you nutrition, energy, and can help you keep a healthy weight. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. when i first felt the diabetic nerve pain, of course, i had no idea what it was. i felt like my feet were going to sleep. it progressed from there to burning like i was walking on hot coals to like a thousand bees that were just stinging my feet. i have a great relationshi

number one, the federal income tax, number two, the federal reserve, and no. 3, the direct election of senators as opposed to being appointed by the states. those along with the tendency of the supreme court to legislate rather than just interpret laws has really expanded the federal government. if you look at the numbers, it is tough to follow trilliums, but let me give you an idea. take off those heroes. -- it is tough to follow trillions. if last year with a household that earned $24,000, it spent $35,000, it charged the $11,000 short cart -- short coming into the credit-card. if you at unfunded obligations for social security and medicare, civilian and military pensions and a few other things, it's real obligations are $720,000. that is on a $23,000 per year salary. those numbers do not work. if you use honest and comparable accounting, which i believe in, since i'm a member of the accounting hall of fame and a cpa, you have to have federal, state, local government debt to compare it to other industrialized nations, for example, europe. there is only one country that has higher deb

>> well, sure, the federal government could break the two up.al government, which owns, as you say, 80% of them, can do anything they want. these are corporations, wholly owned by the federal government which basically means that the secretary of treasury. i have to look the the enabling legislation, but he probably has the authority to do this on his own. liz: way are we waiting for? >> again, the attitude of this administration is that federal government is a safety net for you, for your physical health and for your fiscal health, and this is the way you buy a home, even though it's a disaster, even though it costs us billions, we're still in the business. liz: scwuj, should they be on the government's books, period? >> no, and in the opinion of those of us who believe the constitution means what it says, it's not in there. the framers never intended for the federal government to be financing the purchase of the private property. liz: it would give truth to what the deficit is, more than 20 trillion on the books. >> you're right. liz: i don't

some through our federal application process.nd then funding for possibly a new emergency shelter in bayview hunters point, 100 bed shelter. in our adult service area, you see about a 6 million increase. that's principally an increase in ihss for an increased case load which is representative in wages and benefits. and i want to point out the black segment in the upper right because it represents a significant increase investment by the state into our calworks or welfare to work program. in january the governor proposed about 160 million statewide to increase our work focus in our calworks program. which translates to increased funding for our community partners to deliver employment training services as well as increased employment services staff to help our families move from welfare towards self-sufficiency. some of that will also take the form of increasing our subsidized employment program

>> no, because there is a federal case, probably the federal government doesn't have jurisdiction overet but i would say two things about that, larry. first of all, remember that this is not the end game for the government. this is a place-holder charge. this is to start the process going. there has to be a grand jury under the federal system. there will be an indictment that will undoubtedly cover more ground. as they head towards trial, if there is a trial, they can subsequently add material to that indictment. so i don't think that's surprising. >> will there have to be a change of venue at all? >> well, the lawyers will certainly ask for it, be you the federal standard is very tough. you have to basically say there is no way to put a jury together that wouldn't be prejudiced. now, there was a change of venue in the oklahoma case, that bombing was in november. the person charged in the next wave of hijackers, that was here in suburban virginia not far from the pentagon. so you don't always get a change of venue. it's hard to get in the federal system. >> all right, many, many thanks

residents pay more in federal taxes than they get back in the federal government. my question is this -- the 14th amendment was passed to protect those enslaved coming out of slavery and not corporations. o you believe corporations are people that have the same protections as natural citizens without any of the egativity? second, the constitution requires that congress declare war, the power to declare war is the power that congress has. he allegedly lied about an ffair. george bush be considered a war criminal for getting the u.s. into a war with iraq? should barack obama be impeached for getting into libya without an act of ongress? >> how about yes, no, no, yes. no, seriously, corporations are not the same as people. you do not have a trial by ury. i think sometimes corporations use government to get special privileges and i'm against that. i'm against special tax reductions for orporations. i'm against anything that takes your money. however, on the other side, corporations do have a very important function in our society. let's say when you graduate and you ge

when we talk about bullying and harassment there is no federal definition of bullying. in fact, one of the things we're working on is getting a common definition so we know what that means. and tom and i have an enormous amount of jurisdiction and team support to help ensure that when it comes to race, when it comes to color and national origin and sex and disability that there is some real teeth behind that, but it also is about students that are bullied and harassed because they are short, because they might act differently or unique. that's where we have to provide the kinds of tools and supports and training to superintendents, like -- i see another one over there, tony smith from oakland, the sort of heroes that are deeply trying to transform their communities and recognize that this is also a community issue, that it is not just a school issue. >> tom, why don't we have a federal definition? >> well, we're working on it. i mean, i think there's a, when we had the white house conference there was a conversation about what is the federal role and there continues to

also facing federal charges, right now he's in federal kus i can custody and will face federal charges and could face state charges of murder but from there a deal should be worked out between federal authorities and state authorities. again so far no charges have been filed but we're hearing from sources that those charges will be brought soon. >> what kind of differences in penalties are there for the state and federal charges? clearly that's what prosecutors will want to look at very carefully. >> absolutely. on the state level, because we are in the state of massachusetts, we would not be able to face a death penalty. there is no death penalty here in massachusetts, but because of federal charges supersede the state charges he could still face the death penalty on the federal level. >> pamela braun there in front of the hospital with us, we are told he's still in serious condition, he has not been charged yet but he is in technically federal custody and we are awaiting those charges. >> pamela says the federal prosecutors have been there all night working up the charges that could

this individual could face further federal charges.this, by no means, means the end of the charging process. >> ifill: david rivkin, what else could you imagine that he could be charged with based on what we know. >> if i may, gwen, it's not just a question of what he will be chared with. there are other charges i agree with my colleague about the possibility of state prosecutions. i think what's important, this administration has made a serious mistake is not considering, completely taking off the table, the possibility of classifying him as a potential enemy combatant and subjecting him to the interrogation process that would have frankly yielded a lot more in terms of intelligence than the standard criminal justice type interrogation process. it has nothing to do with miranda on which everybody has been focusing. it is simply the case that a interrogation process that would last for a period of weeks and maybe months and enables the interrogation team to develop without any interruptions a full intelligence take. it is not something

but their mission, their charge generally is that so the federal federal -- has a dual mandate. the federal reserve is told you should stabilize employment. the bank of england from the british government. having central bankers appointed by elected officials created by elected officials i think and being answerable day-to-day. bernanke has to write a letter to the federal -- he has written quite a few explaining why he did this and why he will do that her next time. bernanke twice a year by statute and probably more often than that goes to congress and they ask him a lot of question and why aren't you doing what you are supposed to? there's a lot more accountability now then there was 30 or 40 years ago. it's still not a democracy and is troubling but i'm not sure there are a lot of better options. >> host: tell options. >> host: tell us ukel bit about how you did the reporting in the book. did you ask central bankers to explain what they did to you? >> guest: those that do talk you will notice they are are relatively few in the wreck or did direct quotations from people and at

the federal open market committee. you nona the fomc pays very close anticipation to what it says in the statements to these issues after each meeting. this communication is supplemented by chairman bernanke's postmeeting presence conferences and by providing detailed minutes of the committee's meetings. getting this message out to the public depends a good deal on the work you do in reporting on the fomc, analyzing its statements and actions and explaining its roles and objectives. so i want to begin by thanking you for those contributions. but let me also say why i'm particularly pleased to speak to you today. as writers and editors, all of you are prodigious consumers and producers of communication. at first glance the fomc's communications may not seem so different from what you've heard other government agencies say about their policies. or businesses what they say about their products. i hope to show, though, how communication plays a distinct and special role in monetary policy. i'd like to offer a comparison th

that are defaulting to the federal exchange. six of them will be having something called a partnership exchange where the state will take on certain responsibilities like getting consumers enrolled, however, the federal government's going to be the one that's running them, so this is a really big difference between a state run and federally run exchange. when congress wrote the affordable care act, they expected that most states were going to want to run their own exchanges. even the republican and conservative governors thought, well, if they were forced to have the exchange, at least they are in control and run their own, but, really, that's not at all what happened. there's only 17 states that chose to run their own. the rest of them chose to have the federal government run them for them. bus the law was written with the idea that all run their own, they wrote in the law there's unlimited funding to set up exchanges. unfortunately, they left out the word that the federal government could have unlimited funding. suddenly, ther

here's the federal budget. this is last year's federal budget. we spent $3.7 trillion. we took in $2.46 trillion. we had a deficit of $1.32 trillion. we added to our total debt, so we've come to a total debt now of $17.57 trillion. and the sequester cuts are $85 billion. $85 sounds like a lot of money. now let's compare it to the average family household in america. the median household income in america last year was $53,000. by the way, in real dollars, that's less than what it was in 1989. less than what it was in 1989. the total spending -- if we spent money in our household the way the federal government spends money, we would have spent $81,000. we woef only earned -- we would have only earned 5 3 but spent $81,000. and we would have had an annual credit card debt of $28,000 doing exactly what the federal government does, which would have made our total credit card debt $375,000. we're spending $81,000. and if we cut the amount of spending in the sequester as a percentage of the total federal budget as to the median family income in america, we would have cut $182

in federal court, isn't a federal judge bound by, you know, the federal rules of evidence, preaccusatory delay, because they may not be able to talk to this defendant for a month or two because he's so drugged from all the injuries, and would a judge be faced with the evidentiary issues he would be with a regular criminal in a criminal trial? >> so far as delay in charging him, motions will be made. i think i can pretty well guarantee you they will be denied. >> all right. and then you presided over the blind sheik trial. you ended up sentencing him to life in prison. now when you did so, we all expect as judges, that when we sentence someone to life, they'll spend their life in prison, but last year there were some discussion that the blind sheik, whose picture is up on the screen now, might be freed by the obama administration, that president morsi in egypt that seemed to infuriate you some what and you wrote an article, "will obama free the blind sheik?" now if you think about this, in this case, if the death penalty is not sought, are you concerned that some president down the road c

>> well, it is a federal charge. they wanted the case to be in federal court where the death penalty was available to them. it is a common charge in terrorism cases. a weapon of mass destruction can be any explosive device and in this case they fit perfectly. >> he will be charged and tried in a federal court, not in a military commission. what will be the difference? >> the big difference is that the federal courts over the last 30 some years had a great deal of experience trying terrorism cases of all types. this case is more likely to go smoothly in the federal court. military commission it is had a lot of trouble frankly getting off the ground. they moved very slowly. because they don't have the history of process and all of the rules that were laid out the way they are in the federal court. >> do you think at this point the suspect will have had his miranda rights? >> what happened today when he was charged, he had an initial appearance before a judge in his hospital room. a judge from the courthouse came to the

we learn how the branch devidians came to be and how they ended up the target of the the federal agents. >> reporter: waco was not the apocalypse. but for david koresh and 80 of his followers it might as well have been. they certainly believed in the world great ending battle between good and evil and they almost certainly believed this was it. and it is perhaps as good an explanation as any of how a splinter group of seventh day adventist came to be the longest stand off. but how did it come to this. the armoured assault and fiery end on april 19, 1993? it actually began in 1935, 24 years before david koresh was even born. victor hoteff founded the devidian and focused on end of the world prophesy. he moved his followers to the rolling pasture lands outside waco texas and established a following of believers. in 1981 a young man named vernon howell would join the group. by 1986 he would change his name to david koresh. preaching the acopalypse, and ordering all women, including those who already had husbands and girls as young as 12 years old to be his wives. a friend said androtti was

the fbi is bringing a substantial, very, very substantial federal resources to bear with our federal partners, atf, gene from the boston atf office has been a key al eye, all the law enforcement agencies will be bringing tremendous resources to bear. all federal resources that can be brought to bear will be brought up here to the boston area. so that being said, i will turn it over, i think u.s. attorney ortiz wanted to say a few words, then commissioner davis. >> yes, good evening. i just want to echo what the governor has said and what many others have said throughout the day today. this is a horrific tragedy in our city of boston. and we, on behalf of the department of justice, are here to provide all the resources necessary to this investigation. there are a lot of questions. and questions that we wish we could answer at this point. but what i can assure you is that this is a very thorough and active and fluid investigation. and i ask that you help with that. quite frankly, i know that there is a lot of information that is being sought as the govern every said. there's been a bit

i think there's a commitment in the federal level to doing our level best on these issues. >> tom, you talk about tools. ruslyn, what kind of tools, part of this is raising awareness, looking at best practices, sharing those best practices. what kind of tools is your agency offering, what kind of tools is the federal government providing municipalities, community leaders, advocates and the like? >> i can talk about some. we need more. this is why these kind of conversations are so helpful and we no doubt learn more from you than we could ever impact. that is because there is no one size fits all to this. this is about, it is what gives rise to cultures that promote a bullying and harassment on a regular -- are about community and it's about what feeds into community. now, some of those tools, as tom mentioned, as we've been talking about, are very much the civil rights laws. in my mind, having had the privilege of working on education issues for a very long time, i have come to realize that the civil rights laws are the most, have been historically the most sorely underutilized tools f

that's a federal situation.t's not a heavy drug dealer. >> bill: that's not who who is in jail. 98, trafficking. >> that's trafficking that's possession. >> if you take an ounce of cocaine and cross the border. >> bill: that's possession. >> anything above five grams is considered to be dealing. >> bill: they will plea it down and you know it. >> this is what you don't know. >> nonviolent crime? violent crime to an extent. people dealing this stuff to keep their habits up. >> he? have no right to be in federal prison. ill. >> bill: can you kill my kid. >> these are not people killing your kid. >> bill: you o.d. on what they sell. >> i have seen a lot of people o.d. >> who sold it to them? >> people selling small. as these drugs. >> bill: that's not a nonviolent action. >> i don't think it's a nonviolent action when they're put in jail for repeated use and some trafficking. frankly i'm getting a little tired of people talking about this who have not experienced it. >> bill: bob beckel, everybody. next on the run

president obama has announced a new federally funded scientific initiative to map the human brain and some republicans are even going along with it so should we be investing even more in scientific research for the benefit of all americans that and more in tonight's big picture rumble also we all know that the japanese people will face decades of health issues as a result of the fukushima nuclear disaster but could americans be facing similar issues to what is new research suggests about the radiation fallout from fukushima and its effects on americans living on the west coast and in tonight's daily take tom we'll tell you about an easy and straightforward method to reduce gun violence in america. all right and we begin tonight with the big picture rumble joining us are marc harrold libertarian commentator and attorney and vince cohen a senior online editor at the daily caller market thank you both for joining us and i thank you so let's start off by talking about the brain yesterday the president proposed this one hundred million dollars project to basically map the human brain it's

companies and even from our federal government. that's why it's essential that the business community and the federal government work together to share cyberthreat information for the purpose of protecting the american people from the fallout of cyberattacks and cyberhackers. while it's important that we protect against cybersecurity, the threat of cybersecurity, it's equally as important that we recognize the responsibility to protect the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. and though i support h.r. 624, both for the fact that it is important that we address these issues and because i believe it needs to be moved on and we can get it in conference committee with the senate bill, i remain somewhat concerned that the bill, as drafted, could lead to the broad sharing of consumers' information which in turn could be used in ways unrelated to combating cybersecurity threats. and i emphasize could. could be used. already the chair and the ranking member have accepted and we've incorporated a series of provisions in this bill

and federal authorities will be here as well. the fbi taking the lead in this investigation, still is the lead in this investigation, but they've determined apparently that they have enough evidence collected at boylston street, that they can move forward and give this part of of the city back to the city. >> and it's been a very momentous day. you had first of all the charges against bomber number two, dzhokhar tsarnaev, filed against him. and then you also, of course, had roughly two hours ten minutes ago a moment of silence honoring the victims of this horrible terrorist attack. chr krystle campbell and lingzi lu, martin richard and of course officer collier. you had a moment of silence for them here in boston and throughout the country. >> the mayor will receive an american flag that flew over the finish line at the boston marathon exactly one week ago. the fbi will present the mayor with this commemorative american flag that has flown at half-staff over the boston marathon finish line in a ceremony that we are about to see l

so the state are not going to participate in the federal exchange which means the federal government's going to have to come in and learn the intricacies of 50 different state insurance systems. john roberts should have done them the favor of throwing out obama care. and my prediction is in hindsight she's going to wish that they had. >> i don't know how in the world -- they haven't got these federal exchanges set up -- the states that opted out, the fed has to step in and create exchanges as of october 1. they're not set up. but i mean, it's stunning that they're even surprised that there's a problem. and why they thought that the government was so efficient and could handle these things is beyond me. there's relatively little history of it. >> well, i don't want to seem on, vrtly political, and i don't want to seem more cynical than former prosecutors are. you had to get past the election in 2012. it's not politically popular. so -- >> come is appalling. >> well, i'm just -- i'm being honest with you. the more people get to know obama care the less they like it. we're going to put it