james baker went to tallahassee to be the field general for bush. warren christopher was there for gore. >> we are not on the age of a constitutional crisis. we are following rules laid down by the laws of florida. good afternoon. as secretary of state i am chief elections officer and i would like to -- >> this was her first election she shad gone through. all that rises up to the person that ran the elections was catherine harris. >> as of 5:00 p.m. today the unofficial certified results -- >> bret: catherine harris had been elected to position as florida's secretary of state. harris ran the election, imposed deadlines and certified the vote but was also the volunteer cochair of the bush campaign in florida. >> a difference of 1,784 votes. >> and she crossd that line. >> bret: david boyz was gore's lead attorney in the courtroom. >> moved from sympathetic to one side and maybe would shave decisions a little bit to where she was distorting the law and actively trying to prevent the votes from being count. >> she was under intense scrutiny as a repub

henry kissinger, george schultz, james baker, yourself, lawrence eagleburger, colin powell, condoleezzatary of defense william cohen. jim baker is on the list somewhere there. >> yeah, he is. >> doug, mr. secretary, let me go to doug on this question. what's the problem with this? why are you questioning it? >> i think a number of those republican officials that you mentioned also raise questions about the treaty. the treaty establishes a link, what they call an interrelationship between offensive force reduction and missile defense. this is something the russians have been asking for for years. they tried it when i helped negotiate the predecessor treaty. the bush administration said, no, that's harmful to the united states, bullet the obama administration said yes. the other thing, the treaty has counting rules. complex counting rules that have the effect of imposing penalties on the united states if we want to convert long-range nuclear systems into long-range conventional systems. >> the pentagon says it's better to create new rockets. if you're going to use it for conventional purp

james baker, second. and the director of national intelligence, who's responsible for verification, supports this treaty. and lieutenant general patrick o'reilly, head of u.s. missile defense agency, says that -- that the new start treaty actually reduces constraints on the development of missile defense. and so i -- i think that her comments were very articulate but they're not correct, because, again, i would place into the record the many leaders from former republican administrations who are pressing us hard to get this treaty done. as a matter of fact, we've had no boots on the ground, nobody to verify what the russians are doing for a long time now. and this treaty will actually make sure that we can verify. and so whether it's defense secretary robert gates or, again, lieutenant general patrick o'reilly, head of u.s. missile defense, or the director of national intelligence, you have former secretary of defense james schlesinger saying he does not believe this i object hibts missile defense -- inhi

white house has welcomed the support of our prominent republicans, including henry kissinger and james baker. in a op ed, they wrote, quote, it reduces the number of nuclear weapons that each side deploys while enabling the united states to maintain a strong nuclear deterrent. the chairman of the foreign relations committee was optimistic the treaty would be ratified in the lame duck session. >> it's my hope that these conversations that we're having and the process that is in place is going to produce hopefully a positive outcome. >> but jim demint is threatening to filibuster and many colleagues are prepared to block it. the wikileaks release of classified state department cables reveals mistrust. one cable quoted a spanish source portraying russia as a mafia case criminals have access to the kremlin. if russia and nato cannot agree on missile defense, russia will have to counter the nato system and increase its own nuclear arsenal. >> it's not us who are moving forward our missiles to your territory. it's you who are planning to mount missiles at the vicinity of our borrowedder and territ

president clinton, former secretaries of state madeleine autobiography right -- madeleine albright, james baker, george schulze, harold brown, bill cohen, james schlesinger, this is a cross-section of republicans and democrats who have been deeply involved in the very subject matter that is the suggest of this debate. all of whom, every one of whom have said do not miss this moment to get this done. and so for those of us who are knowledgeable or less than knowledgeable about the subject matter -- and i'm not suggesting that merely because others have said this is worthy of our support, one ought to automatically do it, but it is a subject matter that is so critical to our country, to its future, to the national security needs of our nation that we ought to be able to take the time, in my view, despite these interruptions that have occurred on other matters that are important as well. i don't minimize their importance, but if you ask me of all the issues we are discussing and debating, none even comes close, at least over the present list of this issue of arms control in this start treaty. this

intelligence of the past, those comments who -- ho those who commented -- those who commented, james bakerstates that the start treaty is weaker than its predecessor, testifying to congress in may of this year, and i happened to be there, testifying that the start treaty does not appear as rigorous or extensive as the one of the diverse obligations under start i. this complex part of the treaty -- i'm still quoting -- crucial when fewer deployed nuclear warheads were allowed than were allowed in the past. insofar as military is concerned, richard perle, former secretary of defense in the reagan administration, he stated on december 2, just a few days ago, "that the new start has very weak verification regime. one that establishes a dangerous precedent and lowers our standard for verification." here's the military way in. he goes on further to say "new start's verification provisions would provide little or no help at detecting -- are off limits to the u.s. inspections or hidden from our u.s. satellites. james woolsey, i think when you talk about the intelligence, i have a bias with james w

as james baker, former secretary of the treasury, secretary of state, said, i really don't think lugar would have been as successful as it was under -- unless the russians liked the legally binding assurance of parallel u.s. reductions through the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. so the new s.t.a.r.t. will secure nuclear materials and without new s.t.a.r.t. seven they, that ability to contain those materials will be weakened. insured, new s.t.a.r.t. will address the lingering dangers of the old nuclear age while giving this important tools of the nuclear age. that is weather such an outpouring of support for this tree. every single living new former secretary of state, republican and democrat, supports this treaty. so do five former secretaries of defense and the chair and vice chair of the 9/11 commission. so do seven former commanders of our nuclear forces and the entirety of our uniformed military including admiral line and the service chiefs and our current nuclear commander all support this treaty as well. it is difficult to imagine an agreement with that from so many individuals who contribute

george shultz, henry kissinger, james baker and on and on our in support of this treaty. plus virtually all at the united states military. there are a few outliers that may have their own reason. so i play it? why do we pass the s.t.a.r.t. treaty at the time when the soviet union was collapsing and when there was major anxiety over where the world would go. and now, when we know russia wants to move closer to the united states, russia wants to develop a relationship with the unit states, this could be positive for both countries. here is a treaty which improve the cooperation between both nations. why would we not support it? >> one quick word about reciprocity. we have a national security working group that senator kyl is a member of. and every time he wanted the briefing, we got the security folks appear to provide that briefing. what we wanted to go to geneva, that was sort no. but there has been real effort on the part of the administration and senator kerry and all of us to accommodate senator kyl throughout here. and reciprocity is got to be a two-way street. the pu

speaking for your party and saying there is no chance no matter what colin powell has to say or james baker or henry kissinger has to say or madeleine albright? is there any chance this is going to happen while this congress is in session? >> the american people deserve a full daebtd on the senate floor of the start treaty. if senator reid chooses to bring that treaty to the floor -- and he could have done that over the last many months. he's chosen not to do that. if he brings that to the senate floor and we have a full opportunity to debate it, then there will be a vote, and if they get their 67 votes, then it will be ratified. >> ifill: senator durbin, there is some talk here in washington -- i heard senator kerry say it last night -- there are just a few pieces to be put in place now to get movement on start. can you tell us what those are and is there any movement? >> yes, there is and there is a positive development, i left a republican senator on the stairway and he said give us some time to debate on it, we can get up to 75 votes or more, maybe much more. that is an encouraging thin

james baker. republican secretaries of state have said the same thing. how can it be that the republican party opposes this critical national security measure? >> well, eliot, again, i think you have to look at what other agreements are on the sidebar there. senator kyl has been involved in this issue and raised concerns publicly and privately about what has maybe been negotiated on the side that maybe we're not fully aware of. >> i know you're in the house and the letter was of course responding to the senators. john boehner has wanted to bring in this whole new spirit of cooperation. i just wonder do you feel that letter kind of undermines that spirit? >> what we're focused on is the house. what we're trying to do is set up to run this house in the more open and transparent way than it's ever been run before. >> why is it not reasonable on the tax cut issue just to raise the threshold of the rich, say, to $1 million? nobody feels sorry for people earning $1 million. wouldn't that be a compromise solution that everybody could agree with? >> i think what

another investigation, commissioned by bp, was led by former secretary of state james baker. >> bp isgoing to approach process safety.... >> narrator: the reports concurred. >> bp has not adequately established process safety as a core value. >> narrato at e enof baker's press conference, browne apologized via satellite from london. >> bp gets it, and i get it, too. this has happened on my watch, and as chief executive, i have a responsibility to learn from what has occurred. >> narrator: $71 million in federal fines were paid, but no bp official was ever charged with a crime. >> what bothers me most is that here we are, five plus years after that blast, and not a single person has been blamed for the incident or the conditions that caused it. >> narrator: today, the refinery continues to be one of bp's most troubled and dangerous. four people have died here since the 2005 accident. and in june 2010, t.j. aulds of the galveston "daily news" reported that bp texas city released toxic gases over a 40-day period this last spring. it resulted in more than half a million pounds of pollutio

kissinger, george shultz, james baker iii, laurence eagleburger and colin powell. these are secretaries of state for the last five republican presidents. joining together in a detailed analysis of the new start and why the u.s. senate should ratify this treaty. now there are some who may say it's not an issue of the substance but rather we just need more time to consider the provisions. consider this: the treaty was signed on april 8 of this year. the treaty went through extensive and thorough hearings and briefings on the foreign relations committee. the committee favorably reported it out with bipartisan support september 16. in the 34 weeks since the treaty was signed and the 10 weeks since it was reported from the committee on foreign relations, every member of our body has had an opportunity to read the testimony, to explore the content, to consult with the experts, to consult with the administration and to reach a conclusion. in fact, we have had more opportunity to review this treaty than the 100th congress did for the intermediate range nuclear forces treat

secretary of state james baker who testified said the verification mechanism in the new start treaty does not appear as rigorous or as extensive as the one that verified the numerous and diverse treaty obligations and pro hicks under start i. this complex part of the treaty is more crucial when fewer deployed nuclear warheads are allowed than were allowed in the past. of course that's obvious. the more you get down to a smaller number, the more important cheating is, me dramatic its effect can be, and therefore the better verification you need. senator mccain, my colleague said, and i quote -- the new start treaty's permissive approach to new verification will result in less transparency and create additional challenges for our ability to monitor assnd futur rueia c e former c.i.a. director james woolsey said -- "new start's verification provision also provide little or no help in detecting legal activity at ther otherwise hidden from our satellites." and senator bond made a comment that i have quoted before, which is that new start suffers from fundamental verification flaws that no

as james baker, former secretary of treasury, secretary of state, said, i really don't think nunn-lugar would have been as successful tass it was if the russians backed the assurance of parallel u.s. reductions through the start treaty. the new start is going to strengthen our ability to continue to secure loose nuclear materials. without new start, absolutely to a certainty that ability to contain those materials will be weakened. in short, new start is going to help us address the lingering dangers of the old nuclear age while giving us important tools to be able to combat the threats of the new nuclear age. and the sooner we approve it, the safer we will become. that's why there's such an outpouring of support for this treaty, mr. president. every single living former secretary of state, republican and democrat, supports this treaty. so do five former secretaries of defense and the chair and vice chair of the 9/11 commission. so do seven former commanders of our nuclear forces and the entirety of our uniformed military, including admiral mullen and the service chiefs and our current

james baker said the same thing. he said that -- when testifying just recently, that the new start verification program does not appear as rigorous or extensive as the one that verified the numerous and diverse treaty obligations and prohibitions under start i. this complex part of the treaty is even more crucial when fewer deployed nuclear warheads are allowed than were allowed in the past. do your math and it figures out. if you have 10 warheads, you are -- that you are going to be inspecting and they hide one, that's just 10% of them. if it gets down to two and they hide one of them, that's 50% of them. that's what they are saying, that we need to have more, not less. of course, this is less. in fact, if you do the math a little bit further, the -- as was said by the senator from massachusetts, he said, and i'm quoting him now -- quote -- "so i think it's one thing to ask our strategic forces to do that ten times a year or less than once a month. it's another thing to be waiting for 30 inspections a year." we have

president bush 43, all major secretaries of state who are republican, george shultz, henry kissinger, james baker, and on and on and support of this treaty. plus, virtually all of the data military. there are a few outliers that may have their own reason. so why delay it? why do we pass the s.t.a.r.t. treaty at a time when the soviet union was collapsing and when there was major anxiety over where the world would go? and now when we know russia wants to move closer to the united states, russia wants to develop a relationship with the united states, this could be positive for both countries. he is a treaty which approves the cooperation between both nations. why would we not support this? >> one quick word about reciprocity. we have a national security working group that senator kyl is a member of, and every time he wanted a briefing, we got the security folks up here to provide everything. when he wanted to go to geneva, that was worked out. so there's been real effort on the part of the administration and on the part of senator kerry and all of us to accommodate senator kyl throughout your. .--

james baker, secretary of state for president george bush, and he writes, "new start appears to take our country in a direction that can enhance our national security. it can improve washington's relationship with moscow regarding nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. a relationship that will be vital if the two countries are to cooperate in order to stem nuclear proliferation in skufpbts as iran -- countries such as iran and north korea." he says, i agree with secretary of defense bob gates when he wrote last week in the "wall street journal" that the new treaty provides verification that has been needed since start i expired in december. he says -- this is james baker -- an effective verification regime is a critical component of arms control, and i believe the world is safer when the united states and russia are abiding by one. i ask unanimous consent to place some other statements in the record. and i will close -- the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. boxer: -- with a couple of democratic individuals who wo have also joined their republican friends in this. president b

and then in may of this year themer senate foreign relations jame committee, former secretary james bakerummarized the new s.t.a.r.t. verification regime is weaker than its predecessor new testifying to congress that the new s.t.a.r.t. verifications program does not appear ashat rigorous or extensive as the one that verified the numerousions a treaty obligations and provisions under s.t.a.r.t. want eve to read this complex part of the treaty is even more crucial whenlear warhes are he were deployed nuclear warheads are allowed the and so t were allowed in the past. so i think we have the unanimityunanimit of people who believe that as level the level comes down the inspections become morehe critical.nd and i think we also have to look at the fact and i know it's not nice to say and this offends a lotpl of people across the streets t in every arms control we've had-- w we hade a recent -- i am glad it came out i think it was in the summer of this year with theign report on foreign country compliance and this is what the out report said. it starts out there are a number of longstanding comp

respect, president bush 41, president bush 43, all major secretaries of state who are republicans, james baker, and on and on, are in support of this treaty, plus all of the united states military. there's a few outliers who may have their own reason, so why delay it? why do we pass a s.t.a.r.t. treaty at the time when the soviet union was collapsing and when there was major anxiety over where the world would go, and now when we know, russia wants to move closer to the united states. russia wants to develop a relationship with the united states. this could be positive for both countries. here is a treaty which improves the cooperation between both nations. why would we knot support it? >> one quick word about reciprocity. we have a working group that senator kyl is a member of, and every time he wanted a briefing, we got the security folks up here to provide that briefing. when he wanted to go to geneva, that was worked out. there's been a real effort on the part of the administration and on the part of senator kerry and all of us to accommodate senator kyl throughout here, and a reciprocity h

jack mcgillis, nicole marchman, inichi rodrigo, mary baker, greg sullivan, andrea fishburn and james baker. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. baucus: mr. president, about two years ago, our economy was on the brink. so one of the first things we did with our new president was to enact the american recovery and investment act and we did so to jump-start our economy and we did so to create jobs. in the two years since, our economy has created and sustained more than 3.5 million jobs. 3.5 million more than would have been available had we not taken that action. 3.5 million. the economy is now starting to move in the right direction but we have a long way to go. the positive momentum in the economy is fragile so we need to work tirelessly to protect it, and our first priority must be to create jobs. more jobs. the lower tax rates enacted in 2001 and 2003, along with a number of other tax provisions, are set to expire at the end of this year. if we do not act, taxes will go up. in addition, last month, the emergency federal unemployment insurance programs expired. if we don't act th

>> there's that famous quote from james baker the former secretary of state under president george h. w. bush who said they'd ship of state is an unusual state. it is the only one that leaks from the top. and i think daniel schorr once, and with david gergen brought into the white house jim baker said leaking at the high level, they need somebody to leak at the mid-level. >> you know what i find ironic of course is the umbrage that some will take about some leaks but i guess it is not their leaks. they were good leaks and bad i guess is the bottom line. >> mr. nader? >> congressman, part of this goes back to the integrity of the civil servant and protecting it and leading civil servants and people who work in the armed forces and the executive branch take their conscience to work and if you look at the civil service oath of office it is not to the cabinet secretary. is not to the president. it is to the highest moral standards. a lot of this idiocy and overclassification comes from the lack of internal self-confidence that they will have reasonable protection by civil servants who wou

>> there's that famous quote from james baker the former secretary of state under president george h. w. bush who said they'd ship of state is an unusual state. it is the only one that leaks from the top. and i think daniel schorr once, and with david gergen brought into the white house jim baker said leaking at the high level, they need somebody to leak at the mid-level. >> you know what i find ironic of course is the umbrage that some will take about some leaks but i guess it is not their leaks. they were good leaks and bad i guess is the bottom line. >> mr. nader? >> congressman, part of this goes back to the integrity of the civil servant and protecting it and leading civil servants and people who work in the armed forces and the executive branch take their conscience to work and if you look at the civil service oath of office it is not to the cabinet secretary. is not to the president. it is to the highest moral standards. a lot of this idiocy and overclassification comes from the lack of internal self-confidence that they will have reasonable protection by civil servants who wou

secretary of state james baker, who testified earlier on this treaty, said -- and i quote -- "the verification mechanism in the new start treaty does not appear as rigorous or sentence safes the one that verified the numerous and diverse treaty obligations and provisions under start i. this complex part of the street even more crucial when fewer nuclear warheads are allowed than were allowed in the past." my colleague senator mccain said, "the new start treaty's per miss cybill approach to verification will result in less transparency and create additional challenges for our ability to monitor russia's current and future capabilities." and senator bond said, "new start suffers from fundamental verification flaws that no amount of tinkering around the edges can fix." and he also said this. "the select committee on intelligence has been looking at this issue closely over the past several months. there is no doubt in my mind that the united states cannot reliably verify the treaty's 1,550 limit on deployed warheads." and in very simple terse, the reason he is saying that is that there is no overa

and then in may of this year, the senate foreign relations committee, former secretary james baker, summarized the new start verification regime is weaker than its predecessor, testifying to congress that the new start verification program does not appear as rigorous or extensive as the one that verified the numerous and diverse treaty obligations and prohibitions under start i. this complex part of the treaty is even more crucial when fewer deployed nuclear warheads are allowed than were allowed in the past. so i think we have this unanimity of people who believe that as the level comes down, the inspections become more critical. and i think that we also have to look at the fact -- and i know it's not nice to say and this offends a lot of people -- but russia cheats. every arms control treaty we had with them -- we had a recent thing. i think it was in the summer of this year with the report on foreign country compliance. and this is what our report said. it starts out with the start, it says there are a number of long-standing compliance issues, such as obstruction to u.s. right-to-inspect w

jack mcgillis, nicole marchman, inichi rodrigo, mary baker, greg sullivan, andrea fishburn and james bakerthe presiding officer: without objection. mr. baucus: mr. president, about two years ago, our economy was on the brink. so one of the first things we did with our new president was to enact the american recovery and investment act and we did so to jump-start our economy and we did so to create jobs. in the two years since, our economy has created and sustained more than 3.5 million jobs. 3.5 million more than would have been available had we not taken that action. 3.5 million. the economy is now starting to move in the right direction but we have a long way to go. the positive momentum in the economy is fragile so we need to work tirelessly to protect it, and our first priority must be to create jobs. more jobs. the lower tax rates enacted in 2001 and 2003, along with a number of other tax provisions, are set to expire at the end of this year. if we do not act, taxes will go up. in addition, last month, the emergency federal unemployment insurance programs expired. if we don't act ther

>> there's that famous quote from james baker the former secretary of state under president george h. w. bush who said they'd ship of state is an unusual state. it is the only one that leaks from the top. and i think daniel schorr once, and with david gergen brought into the white house jim baker said leaking at the high level, they need somebody to leak at the mid-level. >> you know what i find ironic of course is the umbrage that some will take about some leaks but i guess it is not their leaks. they were good leaks and bad i guess is the bottom line. >> mr. nader? >> congressman, part of this goes back to the integrity of the civil servant and protecting it and leading civil servants and people who work in the armed forces and the executive branch take their conscience to work and if you look at the civil service oath of office it is not to the cabinet secretary. is not to the president. it is to the highest moral standards. a lot of this idiocy and overclassification comes from the lack of internal self-confidence that they will have reasonable protection by civil servants who wou

we were told the story of james fraser years before in bad baker county.in bad baker county, he had been beaten to death and put in jail. mr. paige who was an officer went to pick up the body for the funeral home. when he lifted the body, and i was told this story, his breaken bones clicked like dice. the u.s. commission on civil rights listed the death as the last recorded lirchg lynch -- lynching in the u.s. since 1963. there have been more sadly. there's more cautionary tales. there have a lynching tree in lee county where four men and one woman had been lynched in one day. in baker county, black people weren't supposed to drive through town after sunset. white mother chapters in -- white mother merchants sold not coke just pepsi to black customers. i mean, i don't know why. one night penny patch, another white volunteer and i were alone in the dark in the freedom house and an intruder smashed the window. we crotched on the floor while through the curtain, he ran his hand over our beds groping through the shattered glass trying to reach us. we called th

james hardin on the break. i've got some advice for j.j. hickson, get out of the way. the thunder beat the cavs. the only thing soft about jordin tootoo is his last name. down goes bakerere were 17" of snow in minneapolis this weekend. most of it ended up on the turf. the roof collapses and the game had to be moved and could not play. >>> de la salle's bart houston to lucas shapiro makes the incredible catch with the defender draped all over him. they win their 19th straight n c.c. s title. >> bowl season has begun. not the one you're thinking of. that was 5 bowls on the head of wrong nu. hand down the best half time show in the nba. >> wow. >> a local girl. >> coming to a studio soon. >> what was the insurance for snow? >> we'll be back at 11:00. the strongest itch relief medicine now has three vitamins and seven moisturizers. feel the heal.

and then in may of this year, the senate foreign relations committee, former secretary james baker, summarized the new start verification regime is weaker than its predecessor, testifying to congress that the new start verification program does not appear as rigorous or extensive as the one that verified the numerous and diverse treaty obligations and prohibitions under start i. this complex part of the treaty is even more crucial when fewer deployed nuclear warheads are allowed than were allowed in the past. so i think we have this unanimity of people who believe that as the level comes down, the inspections become more critical. and i think that we also have to look at the fact -- and i know it's not nice to say and this offends a lot of people -- but russia cheats. every arms control treaty we had with them -- we had a recent thing. i think it was in the summer of this year with the report on foreign country compliance. and this is what our report said. it starts out with the start, it says there are a number of long-standing compliance issues, such as obstruction to u.s. right-to-inspect w