in 1946 democrat harry truman cut federal spending dramatically. in 1946 he cut the federal budget from $80 billion down to $35 billion. he fired 10 million federal employees. it was called demobilization. and the result was the entire postwar economic expansion. mr. speaker, it's said that don't learn from history are bound to repeat it. i fear that the majority party is repeating a failed history of economic contraction at just the time when we need pro-growth policies. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm very pleased to yield to my colleague and fellow floridian, the distinguished gentlewoman from florida, ms. wasserman schultz, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i am appalled and my constituents are appalled at the republicans' disrespect and cold heartedness when it comes

[cheers and applause] i just came from the birthplace of another harry -- harry truman. as a lot like harry reid. in 1948, harry truman campaigned across this country, making the case against the do nothing republicans -- do-nothing republicans. [applause] for the last two years, harry has been dealing with the do- nothing republican leadership in the senate, just like character men. -- harry truman. despite their tactics and political maneuvering, he has been making progress. he does not give up. he does not give in. he keeps on fighting duty outlasts them. he has changed -- he keeps on fighting. the outlasts them. he has changed the landscape of america. [applause] we have taken quite a few punches as a nation. about 17 months

harry truman was a lot like harry reid. in 1948, harry truman campaigned across this country, making the case against the do-nothing republicans in congress. they have been dealing with the do nothing republican leadership in the senate. despite all their tactics, despite all their political maneuvers, we keep making progress. he does not give in. he keeps fighting, and he of left them, and he changes the landscape of america as a consequence. we have taken quite a few punches as a nation. i took off after almost a decade of economic policy i that gave e sluggish job growth, falling income, a record deficit -- i want everybody to remember this. a decade of economic policy that culminated in the worst crisis since the great depression. 3 million americans have lost their job in the last six months of 2008. another 750,000 americans lost their jobs the month i was sworn in. the next month, it was 6,000, and these were not just numbers. most of you had somebody in your family who was touched by the crisis, if you were not your

because as you said in the package that opened this segment, harry truman in 1950 didn't bother to goo congress and ask for a war declaration, which the constitution, at least by my reading, requires a president to do. didn't go to americans and explain this war very well. and the result was that the war was very quickly unpopular. trum map might had been defeated had he run for re-election in 1952, the reason would have been korea. and based on that model when lyndon johnson got into vietnam in 1965, he didn't go to congress for war declaration, same has been true of every president who has gotten into a car since then. in many way i think it was a bad lesson. >> colonel look back at the particular experience of what was was it like to be there. >> well, one of the things i'd like to say right up front is that some people call it the forgotten war. the veterans don't call it the forgotten war, they call it the forgotten victory. we were very successful in korea. we were successful in the fact that there was the beginning of the end of the cold war. and so it was not forgotten to us.

. >> when i look at the 11% approval rating that congress has, it reminded me of when harry truman ran against the do-nothing congress to pass the marshall plan that came up with the precursor to the clean water act. i mean i think this congress has gotten a heck of a lot done. >> but i do want -- to throw one quick thing out there. gallop poll out this week showed that americans are now, it's above 50%, want to ke their democratic in control. so what -- >> republicans are below the democrats in popularity. >> but i read that poll and if you look further into it, yes, on a generic ballot democrats shot up 6%. but the enthusiasm gap is huge. 51% of republicans are more enthusiastic about voting and going to the polls where it's 28% for democrats. and midterm elections are all about turnout. so this is the first time democrats have actually been ahead on the generic poll. it's also the middle of the doldrums of summer. no one is a paying attention and the enthusiasm g for us is so high. >> and we're out of time. got to go to the next topic. thank you, that was great. from politics leadin

claire, on behalf of america and missouri, we are proud to have a harry truman democrat in the harry truman seat. i am also proud of the way we been able to make common sense reforms. since i took office, we have frozen tuition at every single public two-year and four-year institute in our state because we know that a skilled and educated work force is the lifeblood of our long-term economic success. we have eliminated the franchise tax for all small businesses and created a program to provide $25,000 of low-interest loans, creating jobs in cities across our state. we balanced the budget without raising taxes. we maintained the aaa bond wr rating. we've expanded job-training programs and local community colleges and made investments to train health care professionals to meet a growing demand for nurses, nurses aides, and a therapist. last month, i signed landmark legislation to expand access to autism treatment and their fees for missouri families and ease the burden. nice to lead. bringing common-sense solutions to long standing washington problems is exactly why we need robin carnah

claire, on behalf of america and missouri, we are proud to have a harry truman democrat in the harry truman seat. i am also proud of the way we been able to make common sense reforms. since i took office, we have frozen tuition at every single public two-year and four-year institute in our state because we know that a skilled and educated work force is the lifeblood of our long-term economic success. we have eliminated the franchise tax for all small businesses and created a program to provide $25,000 of low-interest loans, creating jobs in cities across our state. we balanced the budget without raising taxes. we maintained the aaa bond wr rating. we've expanded job-training programs and local community colleges and made investments to train health care professionals to meet a growing demand for nurses, nurses aides, and a therapist. last month, i signed landmark legislation to expand access to autism treatment and their fees for missouri families and ease the burden. nice to lead. bringing common-sense solutions to long standing washington problems is exactly why we need robin carnah

i just came from the birthplace of another harry -- harry truman.ry truman was a lot like harry rei in 1948, harryruman campaigned across this country, making the case against the do-nothing republicans in congress. they have been dealing with the do nothing republican leadership in the senate. despite all their tactics, despite all their political maneuvers, we keep making progress. he does not give in. he keeps fighting, and he of left them, and he changes the landscape of america as a consequence. we have taken quite a few punches as a nation. i took off after almost a decade of economic policy i that gave e sluggish job growth, falling income, aecord deficit- i want everybody to remember this. a decade of economic policy that culminated in the worst crisis since the great depression. 3 million americans have lost their job in the last six months of 2008. another 750,000 americans lost their jobs the month i was sworn in. the next month, it was 600,000, and these were not just numbers. most of you had somebody in your family who was touched by th

harry truman was president the last time i cut a sponge cake.a to cook. i guess at it, and usually cook too much. a pickle-picker, lemon rind scrapper, melon baller, cookie cutter. this picks the stem off strawberries. i'll keep that. at least it doesn't take up much room in the drawer. to tell you the truth, i don't know whether to throw all these tools away or put them back in the kitchen drawers. i mean, you never know when you're going to need one of these things. >> stahl: i'm lesley stahl. we'll be back next week with another edition of "60 minutes." captioning funded by cbs, and ford-- built for the road ahead. captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org es. i was doing the corporate grind like everyone else. but to be successful, i knew i had to be different. ink, ink, ink, ink, ink. i mean, i love that card. it does things differently too. great customer service, going above and beyond to help me out as a small business. it's accepted in twice as many places around the world as american express and if i ever need to get my e

narrator: this, plus the mounting public pressure of the courier's double-v campaign led president harry trumanmed forces. >> in my opinion, the double-victory campaign was the most important campaign the courier ever conducted, unless we also want to include the fight to desegregate the armed services. after that, things fell into place so that, in fact, when the civil rights movement of the '60s began, there was a well-laid foundation, and that was the work of the pittsburgh courier. >> pittsburgh courier was the biggest black newspaper in world war ii. it was clearly the most influential. the--as a result--and it had a circulation of around 350,000 by the end of the war, which made it the largest black newspaper in history. as a result, it pushed for a lot of black inequalities to be done away with in world war ii. it was highly successful in pushing for a lot of these things to be done away with. it had taken the blacks to a certain point where the civil rights movement picked them up and took them to far greater heights than they had ever been before. the pittsburgh courier deserves everla

and he has or will be serving on the "uss harry truman" in the persian gulf. hi wife is not a u.s. citizen, and they face deportation, and their deportation was advocated for and sought out by the center where you did your studying, your -- where you were a fellow. do you support that kind of deportation of the family of someone who is deployed to serve to protect the united states of america? >> well, not knowing the facts of that specific case, i hesitate to comment directly on that but i would say in general that there are elements in the law that allow exceptions in certain cases, and that may well qualify as the exception. >> but the center advocated for his deportation. do you believe that someone who serves in the united states armed forces should have to worry about their family being deported because they are not -- the wife, the child are not citizens? do you think that's right? or is it government should not be compassionate enough to consider the plight of the wife and the child because that's not our role, as you have articulad in your testimony about the role of gover

the other historical example that some have cited is to go back to harry truman, who did not expect to lose congress in 1946 and was widely written off as a candidate for reelection himself, but in his campaign manager to turn the tables on what he called the do nothing congress. a conservative congress. although it was elected in 1946, it had managed to alienate many of the voters, particularly organized labor. truman ran unsuccessfully against congress in 1948. the danger, susan, with looking for history to repeat itself is we have a tendency to see these events out of context and context is everything. in 1948 america had basically become a democratic nation. there were strong memories of the great depression. while truman had lost congress in 1946, there was an underlying majority in the country for a more activist government, particularly in terms of providing economic security. he was able to tap into that in 1948. the other thing that is different between now and when bill clinton was successfully moved to the right, somewhat, stopped in think -- stop and think about what has ch

equipped ironically to do that he's not franklin roosevelt he's not teddy roosevelt he's not harry s. truman he's brought up no drama obama and that that is his world view because you're seeing it played out as an interesting parallel that i think change i think those two words which essentially got him elected are very very you know largely encompassing i mean that that's what got everybody riled up because you say this is hope we're going to bring change and everybody gets excited and all of a sudden now they're getting back to all the details which is what is wrong how do you he's got to sell his message again to connect to the american people i think very briefly be very point on this the when you're running a political campaign like his it was based on hope and change you know stimulating the cerebrum when you're in office and people are out to get you you have to learn how to harness the rip kilian brain republicans have always been good at harnessing the reptilian brain the one that controls road rage i guess that is something that might be. only into him and some of his underlings ap

now as i understand it, president harry truman argued as far back as 1947 that a ban on independent expenditures would be "a dangerous intrusion on free speech." the notion that spend and speech are necessarily related is hardly new and hardly confined to the supreme court or one political party. do you recognize -- or excuse me, do you reject the idea that spending is speech? >> senator hatch, those- the quote you read, i believe, was not written by me in my voice, it was a set of talking points i prepared for -- i'm not sure if it was for the president,or president clinton, or if it was for the press office, but it was meant to rlect the administration's position at the time, the administration was trying very hard to enact the mcain/feingold bill. and those talkng points were in service of that objective and so they weren't, you know, my personal constitutional or legal views or anything like that, but was just a set of talking points i prepared for i think it was for the press office, may have been for the psident himself. >> you were listed as the creator. >> i created a lot of talking poin

harry truman stated this. quote, the foundmental basis of this nation's laws was given to moses on the mount. isn't it ironic, when this hall of representatives was built and decorated, above every door up in the gallery is a pro pro file of all of those that our predecessors believed were the greatest law givers of all time the greatest. hammarabi. why is napoleon up there? the napoleonic code. the justinian code. but in the middle is the only face that's not a side profile. that's because he was considered to be the greatest lawgiver of all time. as it said under his face, moses. that's the moses truman was talking about. truman goes on, quote, the fundamental basis of our bill of rights comes from the teachings in exodus and st. math thusethue, isaiah and st. pule. -- st. paul. i don't think we emphasize that enough these days. if we don't have a proper fundamental moral background, we will end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state. john f. kennedy s

a princeton political scientist studied income growth from the administrations from harry truman to george bush, and he found that "when a republican president is in power, people at the top income distribution experience much larger real income gains than those at the bottom. by contrast, democratic presidents generate higher income gains for all income groups." and 2008, "the new york times" asked this question, i think this is such a compelling comparison -- imagine that starting in 1929, you had to invest exclusively under either democratic or republican administrations. how would you have a fair? -- have fared? you make the choice in your head right now. you are probably not surprised by what the conclusion was. under republican administrations, your $10,000 invested exclusively in republican administrations, include a herbert hoover administration, would have netted year to date set -- $11,733 -- would have netted you today $11,733. let's take out the herbert hoover administration. that was the worst. if you are charitable and take that out, to $10,000 investment exclusively under re

every president since harry truman has wanted to have the capacity to carry out covert actions, the abilityo carry out actions that influence overseas arguably without the hand of the united states shall win. although it is frequently revealed after. and the other operation that you referred to did occur. there is a lot of history to all of them. in any case, the cia carried out acts like that, only when there is a binding document that the president has to sign while one can cite all kinds of history like that, it is also possible to argue about the pros and cons, consequences of operations like that. you would also have to list some of the other ones which are more recent, less storied, to include the covert operations that the cia carried out in afghanistan when the soviets invaded, which clearly helped to defeat the soviets. it was this the way, only 15 days after 9/11, through essentially a covert operation, had people on the ground in afghanistan taking on people on the ground. the first casualty in afghanistan was a cia officer. so when you talk about history about the cia, it is a m

you had politicians like harry truman whene signed a particular statute acknowledged that he thought the provision on cporate restrictions was unconstitutional. justice douglas supported the position that the majority embraced. you could like citizens united, you could not like it. it's a free country. you could say what you want. but to say that's a conservative opinion is surprising. when there were so many liberal supporters embracing it -- embracing the position that the supreme court ultimately adopted. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator hatch. >> well, thank you. mr. chairman, i appreciate it. i appreciate each one of you folks who are here today. professor goldsmith, i'm happy to have you there. i think you're a great addion to harvard. captain, you have to respect what you say. dean clark, ei've watched yo for years and i've enjoyed your testimony. it's very frank. you mentioned some concerns you ha, but on the other hand, it's important testimony. i've had a lot to do with a number of you guys here, so i feel very deeply towards all of you. i've read professor rotunda, cons

and he has or will be serving on the "uss harry truman" in the persian gulf. hi wife is not a u.s., and they face deportation, and their deportation was advocated for and sought out by the center where you did your studying, your -- where you were a fellow. do you support that kind of deportation of the family of someone who is deployed to serve to protect the united states of america? >> well, not knowing the facts of that specific case, i hesitate to comment directly on that. but i would say in general that there are elements in the law that allow exceptions in certain cases, and that may well qualify as the exception. >> but the center advocated for his deportation. do you believe that someone who serves in the united states armed forces should have to worry about their family being deported because they are not -- the wife, the child are not citizens? do you think that's right? or is it government should not be compassionate enough to consider the plight of the wife and the child because that's not our role, as you have articulated in your testimony about the role of government

a princeton political scientist growth andhe eco administrations from harry truman to george w. bush and he found "when a republican president is in power, people at the top of the income distribution experience much larger real income gains than those at the bottom. by contrast, democratic presidents and generate higher income gains for all income groups." in 2008, "the new york times" asked this question -- i think it is a compelling comparison --"imagine that starting in 1929, you had to invest exclusively under a democratic or republican administrations. how would you have fared?" you make your choice in your head right now. you are not surprised at the conclusion. under republican and ministrations, your $10,000 invested exclusively in republican administrations, if you include the hoover administration, would have netted you $11,733. but that's probably not fair. so let's take out the hoover administration, which was arguably the worst. let's take this out in all fairness. if we are charitable and take that out, then you're $10,000 investment exclusively during the course

when harry truman established the school lunch program, he realized that a strong nation is only as strong children. that is why he established the program. i am told that i am to speak to you today about ways in which governors can assist our efforts at the national level and how we can assist you at your state level to deal with childhood obesity and nutrition, and to do so without asking you to pay any additional resources because of the scarcity of revenue that states are experiencing. so, i will quickly offers six ideas and thoughts that i think maybe of benefits, and then i will be happy to answer questions. first of all, this year is the year that we hope that congress will reauthorize the childhood nutrition act, which gave rise to the school lunch program, the wic program and the summer feeding program. we want to expand access and improve quality. we hope that our nation's governors will be strong proponent and encourage your congressional delegations to significantly increase the investment in this program, recognizing that we will work with congress to find the appropriate offs

and he has or will be serving on the "uss harry truman" in the persian gulf. hi wife is not a u.s. citizen, and they face deportation, and their deportation was advocated foand sought out by the center where you did your studying, your -- where you were a fellow. do you support that kind of deportation of the family of someone who is deployed to serve to protect the united states of america? >> well, not knowing the facts of that specific case, i hesitate to comment directly on that. but i would say in general that there are elements in the law that allow exceptions in certain cases, and that may well qualify as the exception. >> but the center advocated for his deportation. do you believe that someone who serves in the united states armed forces should have to worry about their family being deported because they are not -- the wife, the child are not citizens? do you think that's right? or is it government should not be compsionate enough to consider the plight of the wife and the child because that's not our role, as you have articulated in your testimony about the role of govern