one of them was senator from iowa, tom harkin, chairman of the senate health committee who has spent his life working on health care reform, who was one of the most unselfish people i've ever met in my life. and i revere him as a friend and on behalf of this audience, and myself, senator harkin, good job, my man. >> ed, thank you so much. thanks for hanging in there and really getting the facts out to people. more and more that's what we have to do. get the facts out. now that this is the law of the land no more where there be sort of a speculation. we have the law. now people know what they have. >> and they're going to know more. obviously the republicans are out there saying this doesn't kick in for four years. here's another thing. they're throwing out this number that it's going to cost a trillion dollars. senator, i read the bill, and i also read an executive summary from a lobbying firm that went to an insurance industry agent. and i can tell you that the biggest piece of change for this bill is going to be $4.8 billion that comes from the pharmaceutical company in year number

we were waiting for senator harkin. he has been delayed in the house and the house has a series of votes. okay. tom. we're going to begin then go to javier and jim. they have votes. we have votes on. >> thank you for being here. well, first of all, the stars are aligning for victory, the end is in sight. however, i want to emphasis that we have a terrific opportunity here for a twin victory. we can use the education reconciliation bill which i've been working on as chair of the health committee and which george miller has been working on as chairman of the education labor with committee in the house to eliminate billions of dollars in wasteful subsidies to banks and redirect that monotoneddy students and families in the form of increased pell grants and others. here's what at stake, if we fail to pass the bill, the 8 million students who receive pell grants could see 60% reduction. yes, you heard me right. students could see up to 60% cut in their pell grants. and nearly $500,000 students would lose their aid entirely.

i think senator harkin is on to something. plus senator harkin and i are great respecters of the senate and its traditions. we understand the filibuster and when it was used for great and grand debates on, for example, the expansion of civil rights in our country. under the harkin proposal, you would get four shots at it. i think my colleague from kentucky would like it. he's a baseball icon. you know how you get three strikes, you're out. well, maybe we would get four bites at the apple. the first time you would vote, you would need -- if you don't get 60, it would fail. the second time, you would need 59 votes or it would fail. the third time, you would need 57 votes or it would fail. the fourth time 53 votes, and then we would come back to 51. so we're not for throwing away the filibuster, but we are for modifying it. and hopefully it would bring us to a senate that wants more -- that once more functioned as the greatest deliberative body in the world. now we're the greatest delay body in the world. we don't deliberate. we

. >> thank you very much, chairman harkin and senator carper and members of the subcommittee, i am glad to be back to discuss the 2011 budget for the department of health and human services. this budget builds on many of the themes that president obama laid out in his state of the union address this year, strengthening our health-care system, laying the foundation for future growth, rooting out waste and fraud to make programs even more effective. under this budget we plan to make prudent investments in our nation's health and long-term prosperity, that members of this subcommittee and you, mr. chairman, have pushed for years, in prevention and wellness and attacking health-care fraud, in supporting our children during the formative years, and biomedical research that leads to lifesaving doors, to name just a few areas. today i would like to briefly highlight a few of these priorities and then i look forward to our discussion about the issues in this budget. mr. chairman, as you pointed out many times, what we have today in america is a sick care system. last february under your leader

president, senator harkin wishes to speak next. while waiting for the chairman of the "help" committee, chairman harkin, who wants to give his opening statement, let me just make a few points clear here. the amendment offered by the senator from new hampshire is a killer amendment. it kills the bill. it's that simple. it's basically the amendment -- basically the amendment kills the health care reform bill that just became law, that the president signed this morning. and this is debate we had when we were on the bill. the senate has already considered the arguments made by the senator from new hampshire and others. the senate decided against those arguments. the senate has decided to pass health care reform, as has the house of representatives, as has -- and the president signed it. so this in a certain sense is a stale argument. this is an argument after the bill has already been passed. it would make more sense to make these arguments beforehand, not afterwards. second, what's the effect of it? the effect is -- let me read from t

harkin: i thank the presiding officer. i want to say to my friend from new mexico, i thank him for his kind words an all that he did to get us to this point as a member of the "help" committee. mr. president, i have a limited amount of time. i wanted to respond to the motion to recommit made by the senator from tennessee yesterday that would reduce our investment in pell grants and replace them with low student interest rates. well, now, we all want lower student interest rates. i'm -- i'm, quite frankly, surprised. i don't remember my colleague from tennessee or other colleagues on that side of the aisle raising much contain around here -- cain when the bankers and sally may were charging students over 20% interest. i didn't hear a peep from the other side. we capped all of those interest rates and we're changing that program to a direct loan program to cut the middle man out. by cutting out the middle man, by cutting out the huge subsidies to the bankers, we're able to save over $61 billion over the next 10 years. $61 bi

. >> democratic senator tom harkin took aim at the recent republican corus for repeal of the bill basicallyaring republicans to do what they say they want to do. >> in the near term, however, it is disappointing that some republican legislators may be taking their cue from the more extreme voices on talk radio or fox tv, are pledging are repeal this new law. in fact, the distinguished minority leader, republican leader, a couple of weeks ago as a press conference said their motto was going to be this year, if we pass this bill, their motto would be elect republicans. they'll repeal it. this strikes me as bad public policy and quite frankly bad politics. do republicans really want to repeal the ban on denying insurance coverage due to pre-existing coverage? do they want to repeal the ban on insurance companies canceling your policy if you get sick? >> senator baucus conceded to roll call that one or two parts of the fix package might have to be changed which would send it back to the house. that would cause problems for senator michael bennett to revive the public option by inserting it in t

senator tom harkin of iowa got some of that language in the senate bill. he's to be commended for that. we need a lot more of that. how can we as a society encourage people to make better lifestyle choices, zis courage them from making worse ones? how can we change medicine so that our health professionals are trained to use lower costs interventions? this is the real problem. how can we bring the cost of health care down and make our health outcomes better. they're terrible at the moment compared to other developed nations. >> ben stein, let me pick up on your complaint that you like to process how they did it. they've been doing it for 13 months now. went through the senate, house, back and forth, there were committees, all sorts of debates in the committees. and then on the floor, what is so unconstitutional about this legislative process? that's the way the founding fathers wanted it. >> right. article one section eight says you must -- i hope i have the section. it says the bill must be identical passed by both pouhou before it is eligible for signatu

because when he ran for president and the first time tom harkin was a candidate. so everybody else stayed out of the iowa caucus. in 1996, there weren't any. he never had a network in iowa. obviously she had a bill name. but people in iowa, even at the beginning of the complain were skeptical. they did not know what to make of her. they were not warm to her. they did not feel she was a warm person. and she had a very difficult time in iowa. she never liked the quay cushion process. the quay suggestion -- caucus process is demanding. it is a process by which you have to go everywhere and meet everybody and develop individual relationships with people who were going to come to the caucuses. and it required time on the phone and time on the ground. and she resists some of it. it was hard for her. she didn't like parts of it. she thought too much money was being spent for too few voters. so she was struggling in iowa. in late october 2007, she has been cruising through this complain. there was a debate in philadelphia, the last day or next to the last day in october.

tom harkin, senator from iowa, durbin, hoyer. all democrats in that picture.tells you crystal clear this is the democrats going it alone on huge social policy legislation. one of the republican arguments is, it shouldn't have to be this way and it shouldn't be done this way. let's go back in time. president bush here signing major changes to education spending. this is 2002. no child left behind. stop right there. ted kennedy and george miller, two of the most liberal members of the united states congress. one a senator, one in the house at this event. further back in time, bill clinton signing the balanced budget act in 1997. the speaker of the house newt gingrich. several other republicans in that picture. james and mary, does it matter? >> go ahead. >> it sure does. you can go back to reagan. you can go back to bush. johnson. there is never a scene like that in modern history. >> does it matter to us? does it matter to voters? >> it very much matters to voters if polls are to be believed. >> in the president's defense, they had the summit, was -- when clint

and you could have as senator udall reported of senator harkin's proposal as a sliding scale.here are various things you could do with that. finally, here's another sort of radical proposal. you could readopt the previous question motion and include it in the rules of the senate and instruct the parliamentarian to say which other items in senate rules and precedence must be struck to be consistent with that but, of course, that would very quickly potentially turn the senate and the house and it's probably a too radical change. okay. final point is, of course, the procedure and politics of filibuster reform. is it required as someone said -- norm argued that you have to have two-thirds. that is is in the rules of the senate. no one disputes that but there is a contrary argument that no new legislative body can be bound by its predecessors. and i think -- i think -- i think a majority could do it, okay? a majority could pull it off at the beginning of the congress. but is there a majority in favor of doing much? that's really the question. because it's partly partisan. that is t

senator harkin. >> thank you for your great leadership and your deputy secretary. good to see our budget officer again, as he is every year for a long time. first of all let me congratulate you and thank you for the tremendous emphasis that you have put on child nutrition. long overdue, but i can sense the refocusing of the department's efforts in this area under your leadership. truly as you said in a statement it is an historic investment in improving the quality of the food that kids get in schools, improving nutritional level and getting the market start of course. again we have that meeting with the first lady. i know we are going to be all working together with this committee and another committee i'm on, the education committee and subcommittee to make this a coordinated effort. at just think you for having that in the budget. the increase in the fruit and vegetable vouchers. something long overdue. i am glad you are addressing that also. on the food safety issue, as you know, we have a food safety bill that the house has passed. we have it about ready to go

for his observation; as well as the senator from -- as well as other senators on the bill: senator harkin, senator dodd and others, and ranking members too in many respects. mr. president, i yield five minutes to the senator from louisiana from the time under our control on the bill. ms. landrieu: thank you, mr. president. i thank the chairman and want to add my compliments to him for his extraordinary leadership over the last several months in managing this very important piece of legislation through the process. a major piece of legislation that garnered 60 votes on the floor of the senate. mr. president, you know because you've worked on many pieces of legislation, even in your short time here in the senate but your longer time in the house, how difficult that is, and particularly on an issue like this, that has eluded our country time and time again. even though great attempts were made by extraordinary presidents and wonderful congresses in the past, this victory has eluded them. but we are close to capturing it now. and so i want to thank the chairman of the finance committee. he pr

i want to commend senators dodd and harkin for the great work they have done in the help committee and all the members of the help committee as well as the finance committee and, of course of course, majority leader reid, who has been solid as a rock and steadfast, in his own quiet way. is he more responsible for this bill passing than just about anybody else, so i thank our leadership for that. and i rise today to talk about this historic accomplishment of health care reform. congratulate all of my colleagues for their hard work and dedication. congratulate the president. he, too, was like a rock. he never budged. the day after the massachusetts election, when so many others were saying, we can't get this done, trim back, he was steadfast. i saw him, and his steadfastness, his internal gyroscope got us over the goal line. now, i'm going to today address where the future is in this bill in terms of average americans. we all know that the american people are still try to digest health care legislation we have just passed. that's understandable. it's a large and complex piece of legislat

harkin: mr. president, first of all, this program has never been authorized. it was put into an appropriations bill in 2003. it was extended once. we had the department of education, not this one, previous one, and this one do studies of whether or not this was really successful. after three years, no statistically significant achievement impacts were observed for students who came from the lowest performing schools, which was the target of the program or for students who entered the program academically behind. no achievement impacts were found for male students and there was no statistically impact on math scores. already d.c. parents have a choice. we have over 60 charter schools here in the district of columbia and it's growing all the time. so there is a choice for them to go to charter schools which are public schools open to everyone and they don't discriminate. so, again, there's no reason for this authorization here. the kids who are in those schools on those vouchers can continue. there's to this problem with that. but why open it for vouchers when w

you have a great leader in tom harkin in this committee.a long history of ideas and thoughts of how to do this. we are motivated now by costs. we know without question that if we do not address this issue is going to mount as a cost issue, not to mention the hardship and heartache that families and individuals go through as a result of obesity. thank you. >> thank you, senator dodd. another senator who is physically fit and exercises all the time, a personal example of fitness, senator byrd. >> we thank you for being a part of this hearing. i think you for highlighting the north carolina study in your opening statement. you have a lot of fans and a lot of colleagues who think a lot of you in north carolina. i know you already know that. this is a very difficult issue to solve. we can plan an after-school program, but for most communities that means a child is left at a program without a bus to get home. we have to rethink our entire education system if we want to integrate education and physical fitness together. without that, we will come

chairman harkin who led the health committee down the homestretch deserves thanks for the work he hasirman conrad who as the head of the budget committee will continue to guide us through the budget reconciliation process to read a fiscally responsible final piece that will further reduce the deficit and insure more americans can afford health insurance and close the doughnut hole. i know the other side watched the house vote last night as we did. as they did i hope they learned that the strategy of delay, myth and fear might slow progress but it cannot stop it. i hope that this week when we to get the final revisions of what will soon be long overdue law republican friends will act on the interest of their constituents and not just the entrance of the insurance industry or political party. the other side made it clear they will try to stop progress based on a technicality. but with substance, mr. president, they are powerless. this budget process is all about simply making a good wall and we passed on christmas eve even better. and they're still talking about the number of pages in t

for your proposal/" many senators have expressed a desire to reform or end the filibuster senator harkin and senator bennett have both introduced resolutions to change the cloture requirement. all the proposals have merit. the reality is none stand a chance of passage without the constitutional option as the foundation for reform bill each time the requirement has been changed, it was the constitutional option that provided the impetus for the senate to act. let me make clear. my proposal is not the nuclear option despite the assertion by some. the nuclear option was a threat by republicans in 2005 to declare the filibuster rule on constitutional in the middle of the congress. to me, that is like a baseball team that is losing in the fifth inning trying to make the home runs stop counting from the opposition. through the 111 congress, we are bound by the current rules. we cannot change course mid stream and declare a rule on constitutional because we do not like the way it is being used. the right way to make the changes for the senate is to exercise its responsibility and examine the ru

something i fought with senator harkin for many years. the small program offers a unique opportunity for hud's housing and community development programs to partner with rural development at usda. it's a mistake for the administration to ignore the housing needs in our rural communities. everybody knows the housing programs city, because people see them all the time. i live in the rural areas, i see them, i travel to rural areas and i know the need is great. and this budget does not recognize it. and in addition to the dollars and cents, rural versus urban questions, i have overall concerns about the proposal we've received from hud. not to keep using a tired old analogy, but the proposal i received from the department of transportation and the budget group blue brint has left me feeling a little bit like bill murray in "groundhog day." in other words the budget blueprint asks for congress to write a big check, fails to provide details in the programs we're supposed to fund. i've been there, i've seen that before. i've done that. and at l

harkin, mrs. boxer, mr. begich, and mr. burris. this is the amendment proposed by senator baucus. the sanders amendment i ask be called up now. that's 3353. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i would note, mr. president, this is for senator sanders, mr. dodd, mr. whitehouse, mr. leahy, and mrs. gillibrand. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. ride, for mr. sanders and others proposes an amendment numbered 3353 to amendment numbered 3336. mr. reid: i ask the reading of the amendment be waived, mr. president. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i would ask the clerk call the roll. there appears not to be a quorum present. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. mcconnell: the republican leader is recognized. the presiding officer: are we in a quorum call? mr. mcconnell: i ask that further proceedings on the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, most americans breathed a sigh of relief in january w

plito's reporting this afternoon that senator tom harkin has told them senate democratic leaders have to go the reconciliation route. the house, he said, will first pass the senate bill after senate leaders demonstrate to house leaders that they have the votes to pass reconciliation in the u.s. senate. meanwhile, on the u.s. house side, congressman charlie rangel announced today that he's asked for leave of absence from his post as chairman of the house ways and means committee until the ethics committee has finished their investigation. we spoke to a capitol hill reporter for some background. greg hit of the was "wall street journal." charlie rangel said you bet your life he would stay on as chairman. what changed last night and the announcement this morning? >> i think political reality set in. it was obvious i think for those who were willing to look out across the landscape in the house that the political support for the chairman was eroding within his own caucus. >> any indication there was a final straw, a final member that said you got to step aside here? >> i don't know if it

i also hope that senator harkin and senator sheriff brown and commerce and kucinich say that they will revisit -- congressman kucinich say that they will revisit the public option. that they will revisit this after they pass legislation. at this point, i cannot get on the bus. i'm happy for the things that are in the legislation that will help others. here is what i'm really amazed by. we call ourselves a religious nation. i grew up in the catholic church. i am amazed people who go to church on sunday and could not want health care. everyone will be able to access healthcare. the contradictions are just outrageous to me. i am just hoping it is going to pass. i encourage everyone to call in and call in. host: the washington post includes a chart on various aspects of the bill should be passed. there is a section under what it would mean for people. ohio up next, republican. caller: good morning. i have a question on the health care bill. i have watched countless numbers of hours of the debate on c- span. i think you all for bringing it . 32 million americans are going to be covered unde

leader frist i'm going to harkin back -- welcome, good to see you, senator. >> great to be with you again and the left, moveon.org and the huffington post had big headlines and said, frist will vote not reform and you said you wouldn't vote for the bill. so we're confused. today, are you a happy man, a sad man, a concerned man? where are you after the historic move yesterday? >> it was an historic vote, 32 million people over ten years, it was about the same size a as medicare. and my real concern with it i'm probably to the left of where most republicans are. because i do think we ought to have every american have affordable access with insurance in this country. but this bill fails from the cost standpoint. from the spending standpoint. there's really nothing in the bill from a market-based standpoint. the only real way that we're going to be able to control costs over time. there's nothing in the bill to slow down costs and when cost escalates, spending escalates and health care eventually ends up dumping more people to the uninsured. so in ten years, i predict 15 to 18 to 20 million p

chairman harkin, who's led the "help" committee down the homestretch and deserves our thanks for the work he's done by making college more affordable. and chairman conrad will continue to guide us through the budget reconciliation process, a fiscally responsible final piece that will reduce the deficit and ensure more americans can afford health insurance. i hope republicans finally learned a strategy of delay and fear might slow the process but cannot stop it. i hope this week when we take up the final revisions, our republican friends will finally act in the interest of their constituents and not in the interest of the insurance industry or their political party. the other side has made it clear that they'll try to stop progress based on a technicality. but with substance, mr. president, they're powerless. what this budget process is all about is simply making a good law that we passed on christmas eve even better. the other side is still talking about the number of pages in the bill. we won't stop talking about the number of lives that we'll save. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the

original purpose of this report was to inform congress in the 1970s, congressman fraser and congressman harkin introduced legislation linking human rights to a policy. and they needed information about how do you make those decisions. it's now much more than that. it is used throughout the executive branch, throughout this building, but also other agencies of government. it's just by journalists like yourselves, and import a, it is now a great source of information for people living in countries around the world who are often learning about things in their own countries by reading the report. we are doing much more to translate the reports, to disseminate them throughout the world. there is a huge international readership of these reports. the reports are predicated on three broad assumptions, which secretary clinton and the president have repeated in assessing or in promoting our human rights policy. one as she just said, we believe in a principled engagement. part of that engagement requires us to be informed and have an understanding of the world. that's what this report is seeking to do. s

senators harkin and bennett of colorado have both introduced resolutions to change the cloture requirement. all of the proposals under discussion have america. but the reality is, nonstandard chance of passage without the constitutional option, as the foundation for reform. each time the cloture requirement has been changed since its enactment in 1917, it was the constitutional option that provided the impetus for the senate to act. but let me make clear, my proposal is not the nuclear option, despite the assertion i some. the nuclear option was a threat by republicans in 2005, to declare the filibuster rule unconstitutional in the middle of a congress. to me, that's like a baseball team that's losing in the fifth inning, trying to make the oppositions home runs stop counting. i understand that to the 111th congress, we are bound by the current rules. the ones we asked to in 2000. we can't change course midstream and simply declare a rule unconstitutional because we don't like the way it's being used. the right way to make the change is for the senate, is to exercise its beginning o a new

i -- i think, though, that, i'm speaking to my chairs, harkin, baucus, dodd, conrad, they agree unanimously we just need to continue on this. we -- the house of representatives worked all weekend moving this issue along, and i think we need to move this along and find out if they have to take any action on this tomorrow, which is today, so i say to my colleague, my counterpart, the republican leader through the chair, that i think it's -- we would like to know what the plans are. we -- we're not going to offer any amendments, and we would like to know if there is some indication from the republican side as to how many more amendments we're going to deal with this morning. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i would say to my friend, the majority leader, i agree i think the process has been well-handled today. the top number of amendments that have been offered on past reconciliation bills is 53. we've offered 23. we've had a number of discussions off the floor, i would say, for the benefit of everyone here in the aim per,