as you say in the gallup, post-gallup, it supplanted the previous method of understanding where populationas, which is necessary in a democracy of taking letters and putting them in the pro pile and the con pile. what happened in the first 30 years and how is it different in the second 30 years? >> guest: it's really the central question. there is a part of this which is let's get real people, you know, into the -- into this bubble and that's politics and washington and this book is not just about politics here. it's also about britain and south africa and israel. how they get people there -- part of what i did, you know, i had 15 minutes a week with president clinton, you know, without anybody else. i would, you know, present him, look, my poll findings other people's findings poll. and things people filled out to president clinton. anything you wanted the president to know. he would read them. it was a kind of unfiltered -- his chance to kind of unfiltered view from the public. it's very hard for the presidency to get that kind of unfiltered view and, you know, i'd pinch myself, you know

gallup supplanted the previous method of understanding where the population was which was necessary in a democracy to put them in the pro and con pile what happened the first 30 years and how was it different the sec and 30 years? >> guest: there is a central question let's get real people into the bubble the politics and this book is not just about politics here by britain and south africa and israel how we get people? part of what i did i have 50 minutes per week with president clinton without anybody else by would present him my poll findings other people's, give him postcards from focus groups of people filled out saying anything you want the president to know, it was then filtered his chance to have the unfiltered view from the public which it is very hard for the president to get that. might pinch myself sitting there doing that. i thank him for that opportunity so there is that role and i value that but the question is at what point* are you trying to reflect public opinion or educate the public and at what point* a manipulative or trying to convince people you are doing the opp

but, you know, the gallup polls for presidential popularity a in the 1950s -- there was still such aference and respect for the presidency there was probably a certain percentage of people who would ever say they disapproved of the president so 22 is probably a pretty generous figure in terms of what harry's popularity was is late '52 and early '53. it was the korean issue which contributed to his unpopularity and in some ways i try to get it across in the book that the road trip in a way helped rehabilitate his personality -- or his reputation or at least his standing, his popular standing. 1969, he was like the number seven most respected man in america according to the gallup poll. nixon was number one. >> thank you. >> hi. a little closer, sorry. >> i know president truman read a lot. in his preparation for the trip, did he read certain books or did he make, you know -- did he sight-see, were there places he wanted to go? >> i do know he did this. he researched just about every town on the itinerary to find out what the local issues were. i mean, he was still a politician at hear

and i would note parenthetically the most recent gallup poll from may 15 indicates that americans are clearly trending pro-life with 51% calling themselves pro-life, 42% calling themself pro-choice. . america is changing, it is evolving in favor of life. in late april, mr. speaker, we received our distinguished secretary of state at the foreign affairs committee and i raised some issues that concerned me with her. i noted that she had recently received the marg rat -- margaret sanger award in houston on march 27, and then in her speech, which was on the u.s. department of state's website she quoted she was, quote in awe of margaret sanger. she said that margaret sanger's life and leadership was one of the most transformational in the entire history of the human race. and that sanger's work both here and abroad was not done. i pointed out that sanger's legacy was indeed transformational but not for the better, if one happens to be poor, disenfranchised, weak, disabled, a person of color, an unborn child or among the many so-called undesirable, the disabled, sanger would exclude and ex-

i think there was a gallup poll where it individuals were passed what is the big issue. the economy was number one on the list. the environment or moving toward climate change -- climate change was no. 20 on the list. if people are still losing their jobs and worried about keeping their home, and now they are scared every time they go to fill out their car, i do not think a cap and trade discussion as much chance of success outside of a small committee room. i just do not see it happening. >> dollar has gone to 78 -- gas has gone to $70 a barrel. the use a repeat of the same political place that we saw last year with republicans calling for more drilling and the democrats looking to rein in speculation when it comes to money-market hedging against inflation? >> i would not be a bit surprised to see a repeat. from eight republican perspective, we would be ok with that kind of a repeat. that method -- we need to be producing more ourselves which would resonate louder with the american consumer. that is opposed to market speculation. i do not think that republicans would be

i'm sure you have all seen the list of priorities, i don't remember what -- i think it was a gallup poll when individuals were asked, you know, what your big issue. the economy was number one on the list, and basically environment or moving towards a climate change, excuse me, climate change was number 20 on the list. and give people, again, are still losing their jobs and worried about keeping their home, and now they're scared every time they go to fill up their car, i don't think a cap-and-trade discussion has much chance of success outside of a small, small committee room. so i just don't see it happeni happening. >> just following on his question. obviously oil has gone from $30 a barrel to 70. i was just wondering following on his question do you see a repeat of the same political fight that we saw last year with republicans calling for more anwr drilling, and the democrats on the other hand looking to rein in what they called speculation, especially when it comes to money markets, hedging against inflation by putting their money in oil? >> i wouldn't be a bit surprised to see a re

registered nurses are the precaution most trusted by the american public has shown consistently in the gallup poll on this question. nurses are on the front line of what economic folly patient care crisis. as a critical care nurse at san diego medical center i see patients conditions who are much worse because they avoided earlier treatment although they leave quicker than they should because insurance companies will not approve care. i can tell you from more than 34 years of experience insurance companies ration care the current system ration care based on the ability to pay. some patients do not get the life-saving treatment they need and she needed a liver transplant the signal would not approve it until i and others protested i was with natalie's another that said they had approved the transplant but it was too late. she died one hour later. it does not have to be this way. we agree with obama's who called healthcare a basic right now we agree with a president who says health care reform is not a luxury but a necessity. the same is true of healthcare. right now and the only nation on eart

how do you deal with a federal budget deficit that seems gallupping out of control. all these big issues. but in the middle of that, all of these issues that we're required to address in order to put america on a better course towards a better future in. the middle of all of, that this piece of legislation, the travel promotion act of 2009, might be one small glimmer, just one small bit of hope for more bipartisanship rather than less. because this piece of legislation is so persuasive about the interests of this country that we have republicans and democrats who have come together to say let's do this, let's do this in the interest of this country's economic future. mr. president, i yield the flo floor. and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. roberts: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. roberts: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. roberts: mr. presid

- staunchl defending the lonely six of but they also reflect the american opinion, according to a gallup poll, that the u.s. is against closing the guantanamo prison by three to one and they don't want the prisoners released in the united states. both sides have engaged in a little bit of rhetoric here. i would respectfully request my colleague from illinois to go over what he said and perhaps come back tomorrow and think about rephrasing it. i don't think it is fair to characterize the position of the senator from kentucky of being fearful of trying people in the united states. fearful, for example, that terrorists -- fear -- afraid of giving terrorists rights and so on. i don't think that's the issue. i think the issue here is the question of whether or not as a general rule it is better to keep prisoners in guantanamo prison than to put them somewhere else. i, for one, don't fear trying some of these people who are appropriately charged and tried in federal court in the united states. but i would also say it is loaded with problems and headaches. and i think that my colleague from ill

in fact, a may 15 gallup poll showed this practice is opposed by 75% of the american people. i came to congress just a short 5 1/2 months ago but i came to this chamber to represent the american people and my constituents. therefore i do not believe we should be using taxpayer dollars, hard-earned taxpayer dollars, for something that faces such widespread opposition that being said, it's equllly important that we provide the support that's required to bring that child into this world and only then are bewe going to be able to prevent the root cause of abortion in america and throughout this world. so i'd like to see us use our taxpayer dollars not to fund abortions but to use this money for the moms and for the babies for health care and other services that they need. i was really proud during my first few weeks here in washington in this chamber to vote for schip. this legislation provided critical health services for our nation's babies and just as importantly it provided crucial assistance for pregnant moms as well, the first time we have done that in this country. what a

a senator in no way told us after about a month george gallup came and told him it was only one person in the u.s. but in on the senator and it was president nixon because the whole country was riveted to that set of hearings in this room. in case senator kennedy is listening which i hope he is, i would like to say to him how much we wish you were here because we know how i'm for this bill is two him and he is important to us and we hope he is doing well. out like to express my appreciation to senator dodd for his courtesy is since he suddenly took over this proceeding in the midst of his other responsibilities, he does that as carefully and well as any member of the senate. i appreciate that very much as i appreciate the opportunity to let us see what we have to say in these opening comments. and i appreciate the work of the kennedy's staff and the republican staffs as well but just because i admire senator kennedy and senator dodd and the staffs doesn't mean i have to admire the bill and so i am going to be direct and what i have to say about. i believe that the bill we have been pre