let me tell you, if i may, how compensation worked for me. i spent nearly 30 years with the citi and its predecessors, and over that period of time, certainly when i was an executive with the company, we were paid in fair amount in stock with the company. more than half of our pay was in common stock of the company. and for a period of time, we were required to hold 75% of the stocks we received. in other words, we couldn't cash it out. in my case, i held 100% of the stock, not the 75%. our rules also provided that you have to hold the stock as long as you were with the company. you could sell it when you left. in my case, i held the stock the entire time. as i sit here today, i hold virtually every share of stock i acquired over a nearly 30 year career. and i have watched it go from $50 a share to $30 a share, to less than 1 dollar a share. so in my case, i think my interest were a line 100% with stockholders. i watched the great majority of my personal net worth, built up over 30 years, disappeared. because my company suffered from these pr

let me go back. i did something wrong. somebody help me. at any rate, if you can fix that, the point is simultaneously in early 1968, dozens and dozens of battles broke out at the same time all over the country. and this was another key point in differentiating our experience from that recorded in the other wars. we were never anywhere where we could say they're here and we're there. we were very frequently in one enclave surrounded by them or another enclave, another unit surrounded. and that made a great tactical difference in terms of the medical and surgical care of the casualties. are we back online? so these bursts show the battles that broke out. i make that point regardless of what surgical unit you were attached to, there's no front line, okay? now, i want to talk about the differences between the wars again in terms of casualties. this brief summary shows the number of casualties from the different wars. as you can see, vietnam comes in third. with 58,000 dead and 300,000 wounded. and in terms of the ranking of the wars, it's in f

point us to death thing is wrong, and i think swift, strong action when rules deck at a time it, but let me warn you, the thing that caused the nasdaq to crash was the greenspan 50 basis point surprise hike. i'd much rather see the fed follow more of a taylor rule and let everybody, all participants and stakeholders -- >> i don't think the fed should be thinking about bailing out the stock market or -- >> you're absolutely right. >> they should be thinking about long-term -- in saying zero interest rate, and i'm saying the fed should be unpredictable, unanticipated, peter. >> and if i can get on my soapbox for a minute, i think the most important thing going forward is have a discussion and rethinks just what an inflationary target should be for the fed. historically it's always been the core inflation, which takes out energy and food. if you hit 2%, then that's time to start raising rates, but check it out, larry. i mean, why leave out energy and food today? in the past is because it was volati volatile, but we are until an upward trend, at least for energy -- >> and commodities. >> and ri

let me give you a quote. r when barack obama as a candidate said i love this country too much to let them steal another election by lies like this one, outrageous, phony assertions, swift voting. you know, they did this to max cleeland who lost his limbs in vietnam. they did it to john kerry. they aren't going to stand for this false assertion he's made. you don't get to be a three-star admiral, lead the navy's anti-terrorism unit, command an aircraft carrier battle group without having an distinguished career. arlen specter. it is time whoult a question for the change in politics. i don't think my party leadership -- >> you're optimistic. let me ask you this. do you think people watching the ad we just watched thinks you're section 8? you had a problem? you were relieved of duty for some personal reason? that's what they're saying, you had a problem. what does relieved of duty mean to you? to me it means you couldn't finish the job. you had a problem, mental, emotional, whatever, you couldn't do the job so th

let me ask this question. whatever happened to the tea party contract from america which called for constitutional limits on taxing, on spending, and on ultrabig government. we covered this story last week. it was a national story. the tea party polls are way up, and washington has completely tossed it aside. a pew poll says 80% of americans mistrust washington. what a shock. stunned, shocked at this. read dan henninger's great column in today's "wall street journal" on this very important point. whatever happened to the tea party call for limited taxation and spending and government. that's what i want to know. i've got two guys with the answers. cnbc contributor and syndicated columnist jerry boyer, and matt miller, washington post columnist and host of public radio's left, right, and center. all right, gentlemen. thank you. i want to talk with you, left, right, and center. where are the spending cuts, matt, and why is all this tax hike stuff in the air? mr. obama put that bank tax back on the table today. s

let me correct myself.t's an important sampling of each heart on a yearly basis. right now we have the resources to do 14. >> you would like to do 28 of the 270, is that he compares a? >> these 28 parcs have numbers of those, so we would go to the park office at different times. we go out to a contracting site in one or 272 and actually look at the contracting files can look at the internal controls to look at their training, their qualifications, their certifications, things like that. >> the point is, what are taking what is you would like to do 28 of them. you're able to do about 14? >> yes, sir. >> obviously that is risk that you are accepting, the army is accepting in its systems. we don't want to accept the right now as we build our resources we have to accept it. >> i understand. your testimony, mentions the army, using section a52 has hired 700 people and about five other of them are contracting officers. your office hired any of those? >> sir, we have not in my office, those are entry-level contrac

gary, let me kick off with you. >> great, simon. no, look, as we've pointed out here many times, as this notion that when interest rates are going up it's bad for equities. and that is something that the general media likes to make people think. and in fact, i think we've pointed out a number of times, stocks actually do quite well when interest rates are going up, assuming you're in the right space. >> let me introduce the chart of the day, if i may. courtesy of briani associates. this chart plots the six months before the rate rise and the six months after a rate rise on 11 tightening cycles. the yellow line is the average point. and you can see that after you get through the orange line at the middle, after they first move to tighten rates you still get another 3% bounce. >> and that's exactly what you need to focus on right now. you need to be in the names and in the sectors that participate in a tightening rate cycle because that's what's going to be coming ahead. so rising interest rate does not mean negative for stocks, but w

ben, let me begin with you. action to john paul stevens retiring and how will that shape the debate this summer. >> this going to be a partisan issue. you have a very liberal justice. many are going to say, look, we want someone very flamboyant, outspoken to protect that side of the court for us. barack obama is going to be in an awkward situation. do you want a midterm fight, conservatives can capitalize, look how extreme barack obama is, how he's trying to get liberal juns on the court. this is why you need to vote for is. this could be a huge fight politically, special p especially going from 59 to 60 in the senate. >> there's a danger for republicans here, too. would you care to characterize it? >> i agree with my friend here that politics are huge, especially when you look at the time line. early november is the election. early october is the beginning of the term. end of this term is when the justice retires. you're really talking about august september when all of this is going down. august, all the senato

let me stop you right there. the pernicious relationship between high finance and the american borrower is what eisman becomes an expert in. he becomes very cynical about what wall street does. when we get to the 2004 to 2007 period, in that period there were something like $1.6 trillion of subprime loans made, and another $1.2 trillion which are called alt-a loans. they were loans that for some reason lacked documentation. the borrower was not required to prove income. those were likely subprime too. you are talking about $3 billion in loans that were dubious. >> eisman is sitting there buying what? >> at first investing in the stock market with this hedge fund. but then seeing this explosion of lending again in this beast he thought he had killed, he said this is going to blow up again and end badly. it's a sinister business. so he starts to try to learn about the bond market, the market that is creating this credit. he and his colleagues, essentially starting from almost scratch. they don't know about the rati

let me also salute the bipartisan team in front me.dy to me what the elected officials should be like. that are much smarter than i am. they did this, voluntarily. they are bringing real quality to the policy making, and they are focused on completely different challenges in the post-9/11 world. i just think that we should all -- we should salute their leadership. [applause] and so, walter has said that i was one of the big four. we are as big as we need to be. one of the bid for people who was helping to write the final intelligence reform five years ago. another of them is susan collins. and there are also joe lieberman and hoekstra. the females that 98% of the work. that is why the product is as good as it is. let me say a few things. after i read my newspaper, i want for you to know the i actually read the print newspapers. i wanted to show solidarity with the washington post and the rest of you writing for these products that we all need. in reading my newspaper, i was reading about the consulate and i sent an e-mail to our fabulo

but let me at the risk of sounding like a defender of corruption, let me -- let's take a word and say about the -- imagine yourself a provencial governor. until the last year or so you had a few hundred dollars a month. now, forget about the police under that governor who has much, much, much less salary. but you happen to have a wife and three kids. you've got to eat. and meanwhile, it turns out -- and this is the entire international community after 2001 beginning enbang, focused entirely ln organizations outside the government. did not focus at all on building good, effective local institutions of government, the governors, the police and so on. that was not the focus. now, this has changed in recent years, and notice today we hear about in haiti a new emphasis on building governmental institutions first, not working swrout side of or against the government. so it seems to me the conclusion that we have to draw is that we helped build this culture of corruption by our neglect of governmental institutions, and, therefore, we should not be the ones leading the complaints and attackin

david, let me try to get through this. with respect to the goldman deal, many people say the synthetic cdos based on the credit derivative swaps, the default swaps, the so-called insurance swaps were structured in ways that almost ensured their failure or their quick unraveling. >> well, it -- >> what's your reaction to that? >> you can do that with any financial instrument. you can cheat people with common stock. you can cheat people with a cash bond. whether or not goldman cheated the investors is for the courts. i'm not going to comment on it. but the structure itself does not give you any particular opportunity except that it's complex and a complex structure could conceivably give people more opportunity to cheat. the issue professor morici referred to, interlocking structure, has nothing to do with the cdo. it's how much capital banks should put up against it. in the clip you had biden was complaining about structured investment vehicles. the fed allowed banks to own a lot of instruments off balance sheet with much l

let me be quite that -- quite categorical. there are legal issues at stake but what is not at stake is the indian government is getting every bit of relevant information from headley that requires. the issues of access our best handled by the departments of justice which handled the plea agreement and because of the legal nature of this it's really not something that is appropriate for me to be lobbying one way or the other. and my concern is that as you said, the counterterrorism cooperation between the countries continues to deepen and i have to say this is one of the positive stories in counterterrorism in the last few years. i don't think anyone would have believed we could have come this far with india in terms of cooperation as we have. and it is an inadvertent but nonetheless important consequence of mumbai and a recognition that this is a shared threat. as for the issue of a double standard i don't think we have one. we have made very clear exactly how we feel about the groups. they've killed americans. it is a designa

let me thank pete for letting me introduce the president.was a great privilege i had many times during the six and a half years i served in his administration. every time i had that opportunity, it felt a very special and it still does. will not recite from the resume of the president. you know what to well. let me give you some observations from working with him for six and a half years that might go to the heart of why he was such a great leader of our country and also go to the heart of the purpose of today's fiscal summit. president clinton was an outstanding decisionmaker. he energetically sought to understand all aspects of whatever was in front of him and absolutely insisted on hearing from those who had a different view than he did. after thoughtfully weighing and balancing all considerations with the recognition that all these views are about probabilities and not certainties', the -- , he decided and acted. he proved the thoughtfulness and decisive this could be brought together into what and -- -- into one great leader. in order t

now, but let me add one further issue -- point. and that is that running through this entire conversation today and everything you hear in washington this week or in the

down it's too easy ♪ ♪ oh, you let me down think you should be leaving ♪ ♪ you let me down let me on out ♪ ♪ you're acting strange you didn't want to talk ♪ ♪ smiling on your tone ♪ ♪ pick your pocket don't think about them body works ♪ ♪ didn't love me i ain't no fool ♪ ♪ didn't love me no, no, no ♪ ♪ oh, you let me down making this too easy ♪ ♪ oh, you let me down think you should be leaving ♪ ♪ you let me down let me down ♪ ♪ don't you won't string me along you better be moving on ♪ ♪ giddy on up giddy on out ♪ ♪ let me tell you i guess you could say ♪ ♪ that i was blind i was blinded by my love ♪ ♪ did i ever think of you but push has come to shove ♪ ♪ let's call a spade a spade was it worth the price you paid ♪ ♪ now i'm the one that's the lucky one ♪ ♪ to sleep in the bed you made ♪ ♪ didn't love me i ain't no fool ♪ ♪ no, no, no ♪ you let me down thinking this too easy ♪ ♪ you let me down think you should be leaving ♪ ♪ you let me down let me down but you won't string me along you better be moving on ♪ ♪ giddy on up giddy on out ♪ >> yeah. [ cheers and applause ] >>> before

now let me turn to the mag rab. now, let me turn to another priority region for our counterterrorism efforts. to a certain extent which is a good news story. al-qaeda and the islamic magram has failed to meet the objectiv objectives. the group has been unable to conduct major sophisticated attacks since the summer of 2008. this is due in large measure to pressure from algerian forces. furthermore, aqim is in chronic financial trouble particularly in algeria and unable to reach hits recruiting goals. and whether it would establish itself in europe and carry out attacks there. this is a possibility that we always need to be on guard about. but that said we viewed the near term likelihood of expansion of operations is less likely than just a few years ago. this is in large measure to the -- due to the pressure that the group has been under in algeria and the strong counterterrorism efforts by france. in the saw hill, however, the picture is different. aqim maintains two separate groups of fighters in northern mali and

so let me leave you with this. my wife and i have five kids, three daughters, we would have been married 33 years on may 7. in spite of my stubborness and my hard-headedness and my selfish pride and all those things that men can have, i have been married to a saint for 33 years. i am grateful for my wife. she and i have had five kids and today we've got grandkids and, you know, a buddy of mine in congress, dick army, ewe used to say, if i would have known it was this much fun being a parent, i would have kipped -- skipped being a parent. [laughter] but, you know, we have five kids, three daughters, and now that they've all grown up and all of or our daughters, they don't do the doll house thing anymore on christmas eve. and that is -- that makes christmas such a more wonderful time for me because i don't have to stay up all hours of the night trying to put together doll houses. and there's dads and granddads and moms and grandmoms in this room that you can relate to what i'm about to tell you. at 4:30, 4:45, 5:15 i

the win is a victory, obviously. >> well, let me address it. safety is utmost importance for our company. and that is why i've found, i reread that only recently and then found that it was a little embarrassing. and it is so inconsistent with the guiding principal and personal belief. therefore, although they try to impress me with the bigger numbers of money that they said they saved. but i would like to really in my position to rectify if there's any element of that thought in our organization. >> does anyone at toyota responsibility -- been made responsible for this presentation or related safety lapses? has toyota been reprimanded for their lapse? >> may i? [speaking japanese] [inaudible conversations] >> okay. sorry. i just wanted to understand your english for a bit. i have told the washington office since i have found it later on that this is not our, you know, company sort of policy. the cost comes first, you know, then the safety. and i reaffirm them that safety comes first. and this is, you know, a top priority of a company. that's al

first, let me say, bertha, very classy.seriously, bowel movement thing, fr very classy, especially from an organization receiving your and my tax dollars. good to see america doing business with upstanding groups and upstanding people. in fairness, i don't want to imply in any way, shape or form, far be it for me to imply that the president has any kind of connection between him and acorn. i don't want to imply. that i'll instead let the president just tell you himself. >> i definitely welcome acorn's input. you don't have ask me about that. i'd call you even if you didn't ask me. since being in thenate i've been a partner with acorn as well. i've been fighting with them on issues you care about my entire career. >> glenn: maybe why he didn't call me, he may be on the phone with acorn. we are talking about bertha lewis and her comments to the young democratic socialists of america. listen this. >> this rise of the tea party, so-called movement, bowel move memovement. >> glenn: again, classy. this is where the media's focuss

and my colleagues would elaborate on all of these points with far greater expertise than i, but let med the conclude by saying, the world will not be a safer place if the united states is perceived as having week, let alone mortally damaged its nuclear deterrent posture. and for reasons that william will be discussing with you today, i believe that is what is afoot. and we welcome the chance to discuss this with you to hopefully, through the miracle, of the television and the internet, media as well as through the good offices of those of you here, in form and catalyze the kind of debate that these momentous national security decisions demand, especially in this kind of a dangerous world. so with that, let me welcome vice admiral robert monroe to pick up the baton and run with that. >> thank you, frank. and glad to be here this morning. thank you for coming. i believe this administration's nuclear weapons policy and programs are seriously misguided, and dangerously ill-advised. those of us who hold these views must speak out so mistakes can be corrected. i will limit my comments here t

and so -- >> well, let me -- >> sorry. go ahead. >> let me understand.bviously, the market can be big. the companies that have to pay for this are utilities. now, a lot of the utilities in our country say they're strapped, they can't -- you hear constantly moaning and groaning from the utilities. are you able to demonstrate a very quick payback to them so it's worth it for them to continue to install your product? >> the payback period that we used to have with amr, which was just one-way communication, really was in the neighborhood of about, you know, five years. if you start looking at the solutions for a.m.i., you know, one of the contracts that we've recently received in california showed that the biggest reduction of improvement was going to be demand response. so yeah, you can get efficiency improvements through, you know, improving -- reducing meter readers, but at the same time if you have demand response you can also, you know, justify a business case by having less generation capability, or capacity that's needed. so what we've done is that we

let me ask you about another part that concerns me greatly, madame secretary.-- and i think you said the majorityçf people moving into the system would be ensured by private insurance. i'm not 100% sure that is accurate because i thought about half would be medicaid patients. at best it is pretty close as to whether they willç be purchasi insurance. as i understand it, frankly those younger people are going to have an option -- well, while if is mandatory they can pay a penalty asç opposed to buy insurance. the penalty is cheaper than the insurance and i suggest a lot of they will will do what most people in the 20'sç and 30's d is take the cheaper road. whether that wise is debatable butç i think that is true. how confident are you that the new people showing up to be insured, given the fact many are medicaid and many of them have a way out when they are young and healthy are going to provide the revenue stream that the bill envisions? >> well, congressman, the experience in massachusetts, which is one we looked to and there are other states who have -- w

member of the team that didn't know that this was one of the deepest problems of this country. >> let me back to my question. is it doable which may be at the heart of this. thinking about this, and it reminds me of the israeli-palestinian endless problem. where there is a road map, there's been a road map since president clinton was in office and everybody knows the answer and to some extent this is what you are confronting. everybody knows you have to raise taxes and cut things and big things like putting restrictions on social security. everybody knows that. so what is your commission about? is it going to be a negotiation more than looking for the answer because the answer is pretty clear isn't it? >> it's going to be some of those. i don't know anybody who i think is less -- or has been kinder to me than pete peterson and i think that we are all blessed that he would give this opportunity to educate the american people. [applause] >> leslie, it is about trust. if both sides and hopefully we will end up with no sides there will just be american citizens but if both sides don't believ

i mean, let me just give you one example. my daughter is applying for college. do you think she's going to apply to one college? she's going to apply to 10, hoping to get one. that's the kind of options that we need in this country. and let the businesses with the right policy, with the right sort of signals, with its price array of choices knows poll, pick those which make best business sense. so i think the government can be the front end and the r&d that needs to be done, and tweaking it in the right business that train moves as fast a possible. so that i think is what we really need specs of document fast as possible. let's turn to this clock speed question, so we have his way in which markets can move very quickly when, and capital can move quickly. consensus in a 310 million person democracy is perhaps sometimes less is left. let's talk about, let's talk about clock speed. how do we speed up innovation and change in technology, and government policy and whatever they have to be, what do we have to do to speed up the clock speed? >> one thing i would say is

let me let you respond. a signal to market participants that a firm that the fed probably need to be failing should be treated as just another counterparty. that is my concern. could i have your observations? let's get back to the capital, capital, statement you made earlier. >> i agree with where you started. we cannot design a system that relies on this -- was some of regulators to act preemptively and a few pockets of risk in the system. that may be possible. we will do our best. you cannot build a system that rests on requiring that pre- emptive level of foresight. it is not possible. the only way i am aware of to design a more stable system is to use capital requirements to enforce constraints and leverage on institutions that can pose a catastrophic stress on firms. that is the essential, necessary reform that we all have to support. it is not sufficient, but it is necessary. you have to make sure that that system can manage those failures without collateral damage to the innocent. that is what the bil

, let me finish.hat spurred this demand for homes. once that goes away, once the fed starts jacking up interest rates, now that the income credit, the buyer credit's gone away, what's going to happen to those artificially inflated prices? it's got to go down, again, by definiting, there's your bubble. housing prices have to go down. >> brenda: hold on mark, one minute. i want pat in here. what's your view on this? >> well, certainly, i mean, the fha is replicating some of the worse excesses of the prime bubble back in '05, '06 bingo. >> i would hesitate be so bombastic to call it a bubble. >> brenda: a baby bubble. >> hang on, there's not a systemic crisis that's going to blow aup whole lot of banks like a few years ago to make sure we're clear about that, but it's unsustainable demand and when that goes away house prices will come down. >> it will only blow up the fha. >> only blow up our government. >> brenda: wait, i've got to give ten seconds to mark before he goes. >> eight seconds, mark. >> okay

let me make a second point. -- in order to provide higher yield. all right? this troubles me enormously. creating something that's designed to fail. you know what? if it's not legal, it appears to me to be unethical and i must blame goldman sachs for this. why sell it to customers if it's going to fail? why go there in the first place? now, there's nothing wrong with creating a neutral security that will have buyers and sellers. that's free market capitalism, and the buyers and sellers do not have to know who they were. but if in fact these goldman sachs cdos were designed to fail, then there's something very wrong with this whole system and it must be changed. the phrase from this sophisticated investor who had put together -- he put together many, many of these things was that it was designed to unravel quickly. that troubles me a lot. whether goldman sachs lied about mr. paulson's equity stake or not is another different issue. there's two sides to that. if they lied, then it is material misrepresentation, and the s.e.c. is dead right, but there are differe

chairman. >> let me just art with that letter. let me read the past -- last paragraph. kbr is willing to discuss the cost efficiencies in a briefing on december 8. if kbr said it is eager to discuss this, willing is a striking word. the fact that they basically ask you to tell them to stand down, that is stunning. tell me why i should not be stunned. >> i think it is just all a matter of perception and how you take that letter in its totality. when i read the letter, i took it for its totality, the points being made. and already recognizing i was not going to stand down, and on that process it did not have the same effect on me. >> the challenge that the commission is dealing with is that we don't think the inspector general's and dcma are getting the respect from dot that they need to. -- respect from dod that they need to. this seems to fit into that. >> i wanted to ask general pillsbury, you have a long and distinguished career in the u.s. army. if you give a command to a subordinate to stand down, i take that to mean it cease and desist. is that correct? >> yes, sir

let me try. i think it is very important to recognize that the dimension of the non state actor and the treaties that we have been discussing, they are directly related to that one we have the number of states -- the fact that all these countries are coming to washington on monday and tuesday to discuss these matters indicates that there is cooperation of the cross border relevance of these items. they are critical for today for dealing with the legacy of the past, but also for being able to deal with the energy challenge of the future. many countries are now preparing themselves to expand their production of energy and to use a bigger share of nuclear power in that energy mix. these questions are critical for that to be successful. we have to recognize the the treaties that are relevant, but also to recognize that this goes across the border. it is a horizontal issue. thank you very much. [applause] >> finishing up at the woodrow wilson center right now on c- span2, the financial crisis inquiry

. >> let me answer. it is true that north american member was not officially included in our recall decision-making process. : we realize as you pointed out our old system may have caused some concern for suspicion on the part of the united states or the north american marketplace and therefore in order to improve as we have decided to include someone who is very well familiar with the north american market situation to become a panel member, an important panel member that it be involved in the recall decision making process and this inclusion it is an official one. >> when will the system starts? >> [speaking japanese] >> translator: our north american entity has already selected candidates for this particular position so although i hope we wouldn't have to come to that in the near future however should we have to come to this then this new system will be deployed immediately. >> let me ask -- we have two members mr. sasaki and the mr. inaba who are full board members can actually special board members

let me read you a bit of it. this section deals with an arrested illegal aliens by state and local officers. specifically authorize the state and local offices to "enforce criminal laws and make arrests for violations." there was also a general federal statute which authorizes certain authorities to make arrests for violations of federal statutes. the fifth circuit of appeals has held that this authorizes local officials to issue processes of the arrests to be executed by law enforcement. rule four provides an arrest warrant shall be executed by a martial or some other authorized by law, which includes state and local offices. section 439. also mentions local offices being able to pick up illegal aliens. here is the best one of all. the u.s. versus holiness calderon, a 10th circuit case. it persons appeared to be illegal aliens, the u.s. court of appeals held as follows. a state trooper had general investigative authority to inquire into illegal immigration status. it goes on to the ninth circuit court. their own

let me just say this to you.ells us it will not be used, we do need to find a fence before we end this mark up so we have an assurance that money goes to pay down the deficit. senator gregg and i insisted that any tarp money that remains be applied to the deficit. we insisted that that money go to pay down the deficit. that is the law. but i do think before this markup ends, we want to make certain that is fenced. >> this money should be taken off the table. they are just holding it there as a piggy bank. there is no purpose for it other than they might come up with some great idea of how to spend it. >> this is a pretty good rule for washington, just generally speaking. they did not know what they are going to do with the money. they are going to spend it if we let them keep it. let's take it away so we know it will not be spent on something we do not know where it is going. i am not sure that have a good plan to spend it, so let's just take it off the table and use it for something we all know we need. >> i am

let me make one final point. when a natural disaster hit louisiana and new orleans, i was one of those who cared a lot about reaching out to say you're not alone. and it wasn't just me. it was all of my colleagues. but chaired the subcommittee that provides the majority of the funding for this. we provide all of the funding for the corps of engineers. the fact is we have put -- listen to this $14 billion - this $14 billion -- $14 billion into new orleans and louisiana. i'm proud of having done it. it's what we ought to do as a country. but i must say it wears out the welcome a bit for someone to come to the floor to disparage the corps of engineers and the efforts of the corps of engineers that $14 billion, much of that runs through the corps of engineers and i wonder where that city and state would be without the corps of engineers to be engaged with them in these battles. so i -- let me just say to my colleague from louisiana that demands being made of the corps of engineers that the corps cannot possibly comply

let me say that again. the six largest banks in this country now have combined assets equal to 63% of this nation's g.d.p. so all of my conservative friends who come down, oh, government is too big. government is awful. what about banks that have trillions of dollars in assets? why aren't we talking about that reality? the truth is that today when we are seeing with these huge financial institutions is not only the ongoing problem of what happens when they fail and whether the taxpayers will be having to bail them out again. but when you have that kind of concentration of ownership, you have a very, very dangerous situation. mr. president, the four largest banks in this country, four banks, issue two-thirds of the credit cards. now, what do we think about that? everybody in the world has a credit card. all banks issue two-thirds of that. now, how does that hollywood rhetoric i hear from my conservative friends about a competitive economy, competition is what drives prices down. well, maybe one of the reason

they're upset they can't buy it. >> but let me ask you did youlá? >> with the kindle?>> yes. >> i didn't -- it didn't even cross my -- i didn't even think about it because i didn't realize there was that big of a market for the things. i didn't -- i don't have -- it's my publisher who makes those decisions. i'm not in control over it. >> explain what we're talking about. >> all right. the kindle is amazon's e-book. it's a device that allows you -- enables you to download electronically books. you can buy them cheaper as a result. >> for 9.99. >> yes, for 9.99 instead of paying 15 bucks foró% hardback. so the publisher decides when to release the e-book version. and the publishers just generally have been often delaying the e-book version because they'd rather sell the hardback. and it's curious why they make this decision. i haven't figured out exactly what's going on in my publishing house. but i make as much money when they sell a kindle book. it doesn't matter to me. they make as much money. i think they're worried about amazon's market power. i think they're worrie

let me switch subjects. according to your budget submission, in 2009, there were 88 cases argued and 84 cases disposed of by opinion. back in the 1970's, 1980's, early 1990's, there were well over 100 cases arc you'd per year and disposed of -- argued per year and disposed of by opinion of the court. so one could ask the question, then, is the court less efficient than in previous decades? or it could be other factors. so i'm just curious, can you describe how the court, number one, decides what cases it will accept and do you consider this decrease in cases argued compared to earlier decades to be significant? just interested in your thoughts on these trends. and whether you expect it to continue in future years or not. >> well, first of all, with respect to the future, i don't know. i think each of us, when i went on the court in 1991, we had about 120 cases a year. i like that number. some members of the court may not agree with it. but i think 100 to 120 will be good. but the question is, what's in our p

let me say this.illion that cbo tells us will not be used -- we do need to find a fence before we end this markup so we have an assurance than money goes to pay down the deficit. i would say senator gregg and i in deliberations insisted any tarp money that remains went to pay down the deficit. >> any tarp money that came back? >> and tarp money that came back. we insisted that money go to pay down the deficit. that is the law, but i do think before this markup ends, we want to make certain -- >> i also think senator gramm is exactly right. this money should be taken off the table. they are holding it there as a piggy banks for no other purpose other than they might come up with a great idea as to how to spend it. >> this is a great role for washington. they did not know what they were going to do with the money. they are going to spend it if we let them keep it. let's take it away so we know it will not be spent on something we do not understand where it is going. if they do not know what to do with i

let me give you an example. if you have a house and a big hole in your roof, and it is raining and snowing through the roof, and there are some people whoe are -- who are nice and warm, but family members who are shivering and cold -- if you repair the roof, it costs money. the water damage in the heat -- you count all of the savings over time, and it may turn out that you are saving money and all of those been in -- all of those family members are now war, too. that is what we are trying to set up. -- all of those family members are now warm, too. the savings we anticipate -- we do not count these when we are making sure it reduces the deficit. here is how we make sure we pay for it. number one, we are eliminating a bunch of waste, fraud, and insurance subsidies that were being paid out under medicare that are not making our seniors any healthier. it is a pretty sweet deal for insurance companies right now in a program called medicare advantage were they get $18 billion a year -- where they get $18 billion a ye

let me start with mr. heid. >> yes. especially under the 2mp program which has been mentioned earlier. >> so you would do -- >> that would be required. the other thing i'd say is in the 50,000 principal modification forgiveness that we did as a first lien holder, we did not condition that. >> but not everybody's as nice as you maybe. so you would accept a proportional on the second if there was going to be reduction of the first? >> yes. >> mr. lowman. >> yeah. as a part of the 2mp program we would consider the same. >> [inaudible] >> actually we were using the fdic program prior to the 2mp program so obviously we will, but in the fdic program when we modified the first that was on our books, we automatically modified the second. >> my time's expiring, i would ask you all to let me know in writing of any circumstances in which there was a reduction that was going to be made in the first but you would not accept a proportional reduction of the second. i would like to know if there are any category of cases where there is

let me give you an example. all investors start with an identical asset that pays the same dividend generated from a known probability distribution at the end of each trading period. what this means is all participants know the expected values of the dividend stream with certainty. the bridges of bids are allowed to buy and sell these assets from one another -- that participants are allowed to buy and sell these assets for one another. trading should occur only entrance it values based upon the dividend stream. this is not what happens in practice. in 14 of 22 runs undertaking, prices rose a significantly above fundamental valuations, and these price bubbles were followed by crashes. when traders in these experimental runs were experienced, meaning they participated in the experiment before, the probability of a bubble was not reduced -- was reduced but not eliminated. what we learned from this particular experiment is that a common dividend and common knowledge there of is insufficient to induce an initial comm

let me give you the bottom line of front assessment. when it comes to the activities in which the hand of the u.s. government must be hidden, we must in knowledge it has changed in fundamental ways. there are many more tools available to attack problems in areas of the world where previously only covert action could be applicable. secrecy over time is now much more difficult than the past. national consensus on national security issues has diminished with the end of the overarching threat of the cold war. my vision for covert action is that it should be an important component of an overall integrated government approach involving the military, economic, actions all integrated to the same goal. the recommendations can only be discussed in classified such things, and this and ministration is ensuring -- classified settings, and this administration is insuring it is linked three of we still need to worry about measures of the effectiveness. enhanced coordination using these available instruments and that coordination should take place with

>> let me say this.a first of i had a sit-down with the amtrak ig just this week. we discussed some of his findings on the report. we welcome that. you know, that is the purpose of the ig is to uncover potential areas of problems. whether the problems exist today or whether it is the potential of developing. they did identify one that they have concern with regarding the extraordinary measures that fra is requiring. >> double overtime, i understand. >> and i think the key is what they said was it has the potential. we are comfortable that through our discussion with amtrak and threw the oversight that we are providing that we are going to achieve that appropriate balance between the need to quickly create jobs. that was the intent of these projects while also ensuring that there isn't any way. >> what did you do in advance? you are talking about the ig. have you ever turned down a grant? >> i don't know, but i can get you that answer. in the past year i have not. we can get an answer of what at ras histo

let me think feet -- let me thank the mass media committee. please join me in thanking them for this great program. it does look to be an excellent program and i do want to get right into it. i do hope this becomes an annual event, to focus on health and future of the first amendment. i think i can pledge to the fcba during my tenure to plan for that and hopefully we can make that happen. as you see from your schedule, we have three panels today. it is an absolutely incredible line up and we are pleased to have for a moderator today, stuart benjamin, a visiting scholar at the fcc. robert cochran and glenn robinson, a former fcc commissioner and professor of law emeritus at the university of virginia. i cannot say enough how pleased we are to present this program in conjunction with the freedom forum and the aba forum committee. it is one of at least three events we're doing this spring. the next one is coming up at the nab convention. i cannot go to one of these events with out offering in small commercial -- and many of you are members of the

let me give you an example -- >> will you match our funding on the police? the answer is no from your manifesto. this is not question time. >> let mr. cameron answer your point. >> it's answer time, david. >> what matters is what comes out. i went to a hull police station the other day. they had five different police cars, and they were just about to buy a 73,000 pound lexus. there's money that could be saved to get the police on the frontline. the metropolitan police have 400 uniformed officers in their human resources department. our police officers should be crime fighters, not form- fillers, and that's what needs to change. >> i'm just slightly surprised that there's any discussion going on between you about what money you can put into public services, because i read your manifestos this week. in neither of them are you coming clean with people about what anything costs, because you haven't got any figures in your manifestos. we've set out clearly not only what we will do, but how we will pay for it. >> mr. cameron, on that point? >> on that point, let me

snyder, let me ask you about your son, what was he like, let's talk about a good guy now, your son andt he did for his country. >> he was a very good kid. but before i do that, can i just thank michael. michael was there for me the whole time. michael was one i leaned on when it all came down and michael, thank you, very, very much. as far as matt goes, matt was a good kid. matt was a really good kid. i think the one thing a lot of people remember most about matt was his ears. he had really big ears and they stuck out. but he, he had the type of personality and he truly lived by the phrase -- if you don't have something nice to say about somebody, then just don't say anything at all. he loved soccer. he was, he was very good at soccer. he liked baseball. and he was a very loyal brother and a very loyal friend and a very loyal son. >> what were his feelings about serving his country? what were his -- >> he loved it. >> what were his feelings about going off and facing the horrors and dangers of war in iraq? >> we talked about, he came home the christmas before he went over there. and we

i am grateful for these people for letting me into their lives and letting me write about them as i did. i don't blame them for not wanting to be on tv. some people have that bug, but it doesn't change your life a bit to have your face known. >> do you have that bug? >> to be on tv? no. i get offered every now and then the chance to have a tv show, and it doesn't interest me. i did do -- i tell you, my interest in television was caught rised by the bbc. about 10 years ago my wife and i lived in paris for a year, and i did a series of documentaries for the bbc baskly to pay for a house renovation, and i had to wander around and be on camera all the time. it was a documentary, and i loathed it. the interesting bits of what i do is learning about something and communicating it in words. then having to get the pictures to go with it, and stand up in front of the camera, it is unbelievablely tedious. if you don't have a picture of it, you can't communicate it on tv. i would rather create the picture out of words. i don't particularly like it. i have had to get used to it, but when you go on

let me tell you why. first, it's not a bailout. the bank would get liquidated. secondly, it's not taxpayer-funded. because taxpayers don't fund it; the banks do. i really don't know how to make this any clearer to my colleagues across the aisle. yet tonight we find ourselves where we're. let me be clear. we cannot afford not to pass this bill. americans are demanding that we act to hold wall street accountable. without further protections, it would be easy to have another crisis like the one we have just went through. and yet tonight, despite the urgency and importance of this bill, my colleagues across the aisle are filibustering our attempt to reform wall street. and not just the bill itself. they've blocked us from even starting debate on the bill by filibustering the motion to proceed. they have done this despite the fact that many of them actually agree with substantial portions of the bill. they're doing this because they want to stop government from actually being able to accomplish anything. i've s