early on, he took on as his target, the speaker jim wright. that was the beginning of some of this polarization. it was a better time. since those last couple of decades, the institution has suffered from too much partisanship. >> before mr. gingrich, i would imagine he would argue the republican house members have spent decades in the wilderness and he was the one that found a way to bring them into the majority in the house. how do you balance the pluses and minuses? >> there is not any question that that effort to paint a picture of jim wright's service laid the foundation for a majority. that was a healthy thing. i do not believe it was a good thing -- we have been in that for far too long. appropriations committees work is where either you spend money or you do not. ideally, you are here to work with one another to be as responsive as possible to your own constituents and taxpayers. within the committee itself, the more we can talk to each other as individuals and human beings, the better off the institution will be. >> the kinds of organ

it and republicans said no, it started with newt gingrich or that period -- or it started with jim wrightand what do you say? conventional wisdom because we all lived for it? >> you can look at scalia and you can point to that and say 98-0, and bipartisan support was the largest sweep of u.s. history as we all learned, is an anomaly. it all happened during the cold war from the depression to the end of the cold war with was the heyday. >> do you buy that it started with bork. >> "lincoln" the film proves there's been dirty politics for quite some time. >> and it can be nasty. >> a little bit. a little bit. >> and alexander hamilton had something to say about it. >> yeah. >> you had a point on judges. >> it changed this whole industry of people who research and run ads. >> do you think it's neutered our picks now that both -- whoever is in the white house look for it. >> they look for blank slates. >> they're just, like, pure and whoever doesn't say anything. >> whoever has never said anything ever. >> shameless plug. jennifer, you first. >> great book out "saturday people, sunday people"

>> i think and i am not pointing fingers, when we went after jim wright, newt was the speaker and jim was forced out of office. they went after newt. the combat became very personal. that is one of the things that started this movement. over time, i think it has become political as well as personal. much more political and personal. >> she said raising cain, are -- -- you said raising cain. you will the gavel for the oversight committee and use that to raise the number of investigations especially of the clinton administration. what do you see as your legacy of that tenure? >> i think bill clinton, president clinton and hilary as secretary of state do not like me very much. i was chair of the government oversight committee during the time we were investigating whitewater and we were investigating campaign contributions that came from sources outside the united states and from various people. there was an awful lot to that. we had people testifying like johnny chung, they had contributed money to gain favor with the white house. there were other illegal contributions that we found. and

early on, he took on as his target, the speaker jim wright. that was the beginning of some of this polarization. there is little dout th -- and doubt that in the days of to ill, it was tip o'ne a better time. since those last couple of decades, the institution has suffered from too much partisanship. >> before mr. gingrich, i would imagine he would argue the republican house members have spent decades in the wilderness and he was the one that found a way to bring them into the majority in the house. how do you balance the pluses and minuses? >> there is not any question that that effort to paint a picture of jim wright's service laid the foundation for a majority. that was a healthy thing. i do not believe it was a good thing -- we have been in that for far too long. in turn, it is significant for the american public to know that appropriations committees work is where either you spend money or you do not. ideally, you are here to work with one another to be as responsive as possible to your own constituents and taxpayers. within the committee

>> i think the acrimony that started with the jim wright case and going after newt, that was a payback. i think those were the seeds for a lot of that. we're not friends any more. i still get together with some people for dinner. very rarely is it with my democratic colleagues. there are some democrats are really like, charlie rangel. there is a lot of guys that i like on the other side of the aisle and we get together once in awhile but it is not like it used to be. it should be better. >> any sense of congressional scheduling practices change that? >> when i first ran, i spent 200 tricky thousand dollars or thereabouts my first campaign -- $250,000 or thereabouts for my first campaign. members spend an inordinate amount of time at their headquarters calling people, begging for money. i think you spend maybe one- third to one-half of your time asking people for money. that should not be the main objective of our job. we should be doing the job for the people instead of worrying about raising money. i do not know what the answer is. maybe limiting the terms of the campaign, i do not kn

>> i think and i am not pointing fingers, when we went after jim wright, newt was the speaker and jimas forced out of office. they went after newt. that is one of the things that started this movement. over time, i think it has become political as well as personal. much more political and personal. >> she said raising cain, are -- you will the the gavel for the oversight committee and use that to raise the number of investigations especially of the clinton administration. what do you see as your legacy of that tenure? >> i think bill clinton, president clinton and secretary as secretary -- hilary as secretary of state do not like me very much. i was chair of the government oversight committee during the time we were investigating whitewater and we were investigating campaign contributions that came from sources outside the united states and from various people. there was an awful lot to that. we had people testifying like johnny chung, they had contributed money to gain favor with the white house. and they came into the kitchen at hong kong and said we wonder -- we like your president

early on, he took on as his target, the speaker jim wright. that was the beginning of some of this polarization. it was a better time. -- there is little doubt that in the days of tip o'neill, but it was a better time. since those last couple of decades, the institution has suffered from too much partisanship. >> before mr. gingrich, i would imagine he would argue the republican house members have spent decades in the wilderness and he was the one that found a way to bring them into the majority in the house. how do you balance the pluses and minuses? >> there is not any question that that effort to paint a picture of jim wright's service laid the foundation for a majority. that was a healthy thing. i do not believe it was a good thing -- we have been in that for far too long. appropriations committees work -- in turn the, i think it is significant for the american public to know the appropriations committee work is where either you spend money or you do not. ideally, you are here to work with one another to be as responsive as possible to you

that when i served there under the leadership of speaker o'neill, majority leader michel and then jim wright and michel, a republican, there was no way they would consider doing a vote with the majority the majority. they wanted to get 218 votes. that's what they did on reforming social security. that's what they did on virtually everything. get democrats and republicans together and get 218 votes. that's the challenge i gave to the speaker today, speaker boehner. let the house vote. if they voted overwhelmingly, mr. president, one republican suggested, one republican house member that more than half of the republicans in the house would vote for giving the tax security to people who make less than $250,000 a year. so i say let's have speaker boehner call upon the republicans in the house to add 25 or so votes to what the democrats would do, and you'd have 218 votes and we could go on to taking care of the fiscal cliff. mr. president, my friend protests too much. the senate is broken and needs to be fixed and we need to change the rules. we change them all the time. last year we changed the

. >> holloman, wright, and laudone, himself, were immediately locked up in administrative segregation. after questioning holloman, gang intelligence coordinator lieutenant jimox now moves on to the alleged assailant, jason wright. >> you probably know why you're here, huh? >> i don't, actually. >> you don't have any idea? why were you locked up? >> why was i locked up? >> why did you miss super bowl? >> i don't know. >> come on, dude. guess. give me your best educated guess. >> they didn't want me to see the game? >> that wasn't a good guess. that wasn't a good guess. >> no? >> no. >> you're here for threats on another inmate, or actual assault on another inmate. how much did you have to do with that? or did you have anything to do with him? >> i had a little bit to do with him. i just told him, hey, put that in your house and everything's going to be good. >> so you told him to hold the hooch? >> yeah. >> you didn't threaten him, beat him up? >> no, he was all for it. he was like, i'm going to get to drink? i was like, yeah, and he was good to go. i didn't have to threaten him at all. that old dude, i'm not going to hit him. >> why did he get so scared? >>

patrice and i were thrilled when barney and jim got married, another way of showing you can be a leader in times. i just recently saw a program on a sheryl wright, a country an western singer, she went through how difficult it was for her to come out. i was moved by that show, it reminded me of what it must have been for barney or anybody else in public life to have to come out not knowing what the reaction of your own family or friends or colleagues or anybody in public is going to think about that and take the risk to do it. and that is certainly one thing that this body and this country will always remember. whether it's our fishermen, the gay and lesbian community, are going to remember barney frank for all they did and they'll remember john olver. we wish you the best in your future, john, i know you'll keep busy, you and rose, and barney, i know you'll keep busy too, but i hope you come to dipper with us. one nice thing about barney, he was good about telling patrice, you can make what you made last time, that's fine but yim and i won't be cooking. i yield back. mr. markey: i thank the gentleman from salem and recognize the gentlelady fro