mccaskill: exactly. in fact, many of them voice voted without -- we even checked to make sure no one said nay at the committee level. so these were unanimously agreed to out of committee. there were 74 last week. i made the motions last tuesday on the 74. you made a few motions on some that were not in that group that had been unanimously agreed to, and i believe this week some of the group, maybe some of yours, maybe some of the ones that i made unanimous consent motions on, i know that we had 14 that moved. so i think we're around 70 total right now, but of those, 60 of them are this unanimous category and ones that we have no idea who is holding them. mr. whitehouse: and of those -- if i could ask another question, of those who have been cleared, some have been allowed to come forward for votes on the senate floor. i think the last was judge chin who had been held for a considerable period of time, and we actually, if i recall correctly, had to file cloture and take more time. there is a process built

mccaskill: mr. president, notwithstanding rule 22, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive calendar number 581, the nomination of john laub, director of the national institute of justice. that the nomination be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, no further motions be in order, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, that any statements relating to the nominee appear at the appropriate place in the record as if read. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. kyl: mr. president, for the reasons stated earlier, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mrs. mccaskill: notwithstanding rule 22, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive calendar number 589, the nomination of anthony coscia, amtrak board of directors, that the nomination be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made, laid upon the table. no further motions be in order, the president be immediately notifie

so senator mccaskill, let's talk about the republicans.ing on financial reform, or is this something much bigger? could financial reform, wall street reform, be killed? >> you know, for the life of me, i don't get it. i do not understand what they're doing. i guess they're figuring that america is so mad at washington that if they can somehow get us to fail on this, the democrats will get the blame because we're in charge. i guess that's the strategy. you know, i think this is the most ridiculous notion that we are -- you know, this close to a bill, and they won't let us debate. they will not let us debate. this is really unprecedented. this notion -- >> they claim -- they claim that democrats are expanding the bailout culture. what do you say to republicans? >> well, you know, i mean, joe, think about this. in committee, they had filed 400 amendments, the republicans. the democrats worked all weekend to figure out how many of those amendments that they had no problem with. they show up on monday for the markup on the bill and don't even o

mccaskill: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to -- the presiding officer: objection is heard. mrs. mccaskill: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 722, the nomination of judith anne stewart stock, the assistant secretary of state, that the nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table, to further motions be in order, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominee appearing at the appropriate place in the record as if read. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. kyl: madam president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mrs. mccaskill: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 726, the nomination of patricia a. hoffman, assistant secretary of energy, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table, no further motions be in order, th

with respect to congress, when senator mccaskill says that they are, goldman and others are the least regulated entities around, even less than pit bosses at casinos, remember who took winnings, and that was washington. when they were asking earlier, senator coburn said, do you know what a stated loan is, a lair loan or ninja loan, no income, no job. it was the office of the comptroller who told state banking regulators to relax lending standards so this country could meet the political objective of maximum home ownership, so that was a political creation, not one created on wall street. >> this of course also feeds the political heat for financial reform, but the republicans, ron brownste brownstein, seem perfectly willing to go to the mat and time and time again, you wrote cent recently -- >> right. >> are they on the wrong side? >> this may be the bridge too far in the effort which is why many think in the end, there will be a deal. what ron said is correct. both parties have been insufficient in the vigilance with which they have pursued oversight with wall street, but when you ge

it's also good to be here with senator mccaskill. a real rising star.er political rise may be stunted by something i just discovered. let me read a bit of her biography. "clear is the fourth generation missouri and who spent her entire life in the show me state. raised in 11 non and columbia -- 11 lebanon and columbia." claire swears that both of those places are in missouri, but the burirthers are going to go crazy over that. it's not easy following the comedic stylings of nancy pelosi. speaker pelosi mentioned that i am a leader -- i am actually the fourth ranking in the republican leadership did you have me, eric cantor republican whip, leader banner, and then there is rush limbaugh. brush called me earlier today from the doctor's office in costa rica. [laughter] speaking about health care, you have to admit it was a controversial bill. some of the provisions in that bill were just on tellable to the republican leadership. come on, nancy. you had to know that john boehner was never going to stand for that tax on tanning beds. [laughter] i get it. the

mccaskill: i have a favorite president, and it's not president obama. it's in fact president harry truman. i still can't quite get over the fact that i am sitting at harry truman's desk here on the senate floor and that i hold the seat in the senate that harry truman held. and tomorrow when i attend the permanent subcommittee on investigations -- and as we see a parade of wall street executives justifying their behavior -- i will be asking questions that the committee that harry truman made famous when he took war profiteers to task many years ago. harry truman said, "if you can't convince them, confuse them." well, i'm confused. i read today that the ranking member of the republican party of the banking committee said the following at a meeting of community bankers today: i'm quoting exactly what he said. "i think we basically know what went wrong. we've had a lot of hearings. we've been working on it 15-16 months now." now, that's not chairman dodd that said, "i think we basically know what went wrong." it's not chairman dodd saying "we've had a lot o

i want to salute senator mccaskill. she carried the greater part of the burden. i only moved a few. i think she moved over 70 by the time the day was done, and i really want to extend my appreciation to her for that. senator wyden, as i understand it, the rule is that now that these unanimous consents have been made, there is a six-day of session period in has now begun to run, and at the end of that six days, our republican colleagues will be obliged to disclose publicly their holds: who's holding it and what their reason is. and i understand that there is a potential loophole which is that they could pull the old switcheroo, and that at the end of that six-day period, the senator or senators with that hold could all release their hold so at the end of the six hoof day period, they have no hold -- six-day period, that they have no hold to disclose, but they could connive with another colleague to put in a hold since the u.c., the unanimous consent request, so they can start the process all over and hide their accountability. but it strikes me that those are really the only two choi

chairman. >> senator mccaskill, thank you. >>> mr. sparks, i would like to follow up on a question that chairman levin asked you in his first series of questioning. what he said was, do you have a responsibility to disclose to a client when you have an adverse interest, do you have a responsibility to disclose to a client when you have an adverse interest to the client? what's the answer to that? >> and senator, by adverse interest, you mean a position that is different than them? or tlg something that we could effect that could harm them? if it's the positions, our answer is no. if we can do harm to them, then the answer is absolutely. >> so you do have, at least in some contexts, but not all, a responsibility to disclose to a client when you have an adverse interest to the client? >> i mean, senator, i'm just trying to be careful with my words with respect to what "adverse interest" could mean. if we were positioned a certain way, that's one thing. again, we could have positions, there could be other positions at the firm. >> do you

we have a very big friday night show ahead, including senator claire mccaskill joining us.ere we begin tonight is tiny town, usa. it's a very, very tiny town. it's a very close-knit community tiny town. and in tiny town, essentially there is one doughnut shop. we've decided to call it ye olde doughnut shoppe. right next to that is ye olde swimming pool. that's basically all of tiny town. it's the doughnut shop and the swimming pool and then the main drag. this is the main drag here. across the street from both of these institutions, is where -- ah-hah. the mean old man in town lives. he's across the street from the doughnut shop and swimming pool. you can tell he's mean because of his menacing facial hair or something. i don't know. one day the mean old man notices that when the delivery truck arrives to drop off the swimming pool chemicals for ye olde swimming pool, when the driving truck arrives for the pool, it's chlorine and all that stuff, that delivery comes at the same time that the delivery arrives for the doughnut shop. and it's like the flour and the sugar and the

but claire mccaskill -- the clear mccaskill soliloquy was so shattering because it ties in that too smart for you, too smart for wall street and main street language to the suffering of her constituents back in missouri. that is where senators want to keep the discourse. saying what you guys did with all of the smart bells and whistles and digits, in wall street's vernacular, really a band of the day was just plain wrong. to the extent, especially for the democrats, that they keep the debate on those terms, it is a winning equation for them. host: maureen dowd rights and "the new york times" that the people who've testified in the first panel, one of them being mr. fabrice tourre, fabulous fab, that he calls himself and refers to in e-mails the committee read yesterday, she talked about the first panel in her column and said she thought that they came across very arrogant. guest: they did. it is something there that -- iit is a once-in-a-lifetime thing. it is uniformly painful to go in front of these senators who are going to say what they want to say regardless. these guys held on to som

mccaskill: mr. president, i came to the floor on tuesday of this week to do something that i don't think had been done before under the rules. we had a new law that went into effect in the early part of 2007 that gave us a mechanism that was supposed to stop secret holds. and we are all waiting to see by moving all of the nominations by unanimous consent, if, in fact, the owners of the secret holds step forward. while we wait to see if the rule that was designed and passed in law works, a bunch of us have been talking. and the folks that have been talking about this are the newest members of the senate in the democratic party. there are 21 of us that arrived in the united states senate sometime between now and january of 2007. it's a pretty big group of senators. and in discussing the secret holds with my colleagues that have been here for a fairly short period of time, we decided, well, why don't we just quit doing them? let's quit worrying about whether you're identifying yourself in six days or w

you see pictures of there senator mccaskill on the floor.eading some of the names saying why can't we get the people approved by the committee in? this happens in both democratic and republican administrations. >> my cousin works for tsa and i'm sure he'd love a promotion. the system is completely broken and broken both administrations and gets worse. the senate needs to fix this because people need to get these jobs. the government needs to run. >> yeah. well, you know, this is where partisanship becomes dangerous because these people are important jobs. tsa is an important part of our security. this is where partisanship perhaps gets a little dangerous and we need to pull back. >> this one is right up your lane. more proof language matters. how you ask a poll question can have a big difference in the results. recent gallup poll asked should the government regulate large banks and major financial institutions. 46% were in favor. 43% opposed. but when the question changes should the government regulate wall street banks essentially the same

one of the most animated, energetic senators was claire mccaskill.anguage. >> i don't know why we need to dress it up. it's just a bet. this is the same one your folks called [ bleep ] later. this is the same one, okay. did you tell ikb that? >> suggestions from different parties. >> let's stop right there. that's a good one. so what do you guys think of that? >> it's interesting because i sit behind focus groups, panels all the time. and she looks exactly like those middle american women out there when talking about sort of their frustration with what is going on with wall street and the banking industry. i think she is giving perfect voice and face to that right now. >> that's perfectly aligned with a lot of the frustrations a lot of americans feel. i don't know if you play poker, i would love to play poke were claire mccaskill. you would always know whether she has a good hand or a bad hand. she has a hard time hiding her emotions. that's a good thing in politics sometimes. >> how do you she can do that at the hearing? >> i'm going to take my chan

senator mccaskill. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to talk about the spectrum.i see how my life has changed over the last ten years as it relates to the usage of broadband and recently got jury recently my husband got a.m. ipad for his birthday and i have had my hands on it more than he has, and i will tell you i am confident that there will be massive changes in the way that we are entertained and where we are entertained in how we are entertained by products coming over broadband and i looked out a few minutes ago and almost every head was down because they were all typing. the entire audience is transcribing this hearing and sending it to whoever they work for and whoever the company is interested and clearly this is finite. now if we have time we can talk about where this 300 are coming from and how we accept the tv stations are about the idea some of it is when to come from them. but at the end of the rainbow, we are all being used and when there is no more left what happens? to poor people get squeezed out and rich people who can afford to do with my famil

senator it sessions and mccaskill have proposed the president's language.ch was not included in the president's freeze. nobody expected to be included in the freeze. it will come to us in a supplemental. if it needs to be adjusted, it will be adjusted up. nobody is suggesting that the freeze will impact troops in the field. what they are suggesting is that we have a freeze with the president's number. he could do this a minute to your numbers. you have said you want a freeze to your numbers, so let's do it to the chairman's numbers. >> but substituted and do it that way so that the chairman's concerns are addressed. i would ask that the senator be allowed to withdraw his men in an offer the amendment to the chairman's number, because it will essentially be the same thing, but address of freeze again. you cannot have it both ways. you cannot argue that you cannot have a freeze because you might adjust numbers and then claim your budget has a freeze. >> let's be clear. this freeze that the president has proposed and is in this budget, we have a freeze for thr

we started talking to people like claire mccaskill who tells the stories about obama coming to campaign tour in 2006. he would come to saint louis to have to get an overflow room because not only do they have had a fundraiser for the 2000 or 3000 people who would pay a lot of money, but also have to get a separate report 10,000 or 15,000 people because everybody wanted to see this guy. his fund-raising ability was at the core of what as we talk about how the democratic establishment was secretly behind him, that was part, they could see his political appeal. anita dunn in some sense along with david plouffe was maximizing, initiating a similar strategy for patrick in massachusetts if they started think about how this could be capitalized on to build what became the grassroots army. when people would come to obama events they would ask her e-mail address and that was the beginning of building a database for hopefund that became the core database tha data to go ino this massive online army that obama exploited in the 2008 campaign and also became the core of what became their massive fund

here's how democratic senator claire mccaskill put it -- >> all of you were loving life.ing each other. what you worried about most was a bad article in "the wall street journal" not a regulator. you were chasing compensation. you were chasing your colleagues and other investment banks. and you were trying to make a killing. but let me just tell you, you think it's so complicated and you think you're so smart, any street gambler would never place a bet with a bookie or a house with the record that is revealed in the documents that this committee has gathered. >>> now, goldman for its part said it didn't mislead anybody, and by the way, it lost more than a billion dollars on its own housing-backed investments. we expect to hear soon from ceo lloyd blankfein, but in his prepared testimony he says, i'm quoting, we didn't have a massive short against the housing market and we certainly did not bet against our clients. >>> christine romans is with me in town for this as well. we've been sort of in and out of the hearings. >> right. >> coverage ing it all. there's a lot more to

and people like claire mccaskill who would tell these stories that obama coming to campaign for her in 2006 when he would come to st. louis they would have to get an overflow room not only did they have to have the fundraiser for the 2,000, 3,000 people who would pay a lot of money and they would have to get a separate room for 10,000, 12,000 people because everybody loved this guy. his fundraising ability was at the core why the democratic establishment was secretly behind him. that was part of the way he demonstrated to them that he was someone who could be a serious candidate. anita dunn along with david puth who was initiating a similar strategy for duvall patrick in massachusetts they started how this could be capitalized to build their grassroots army. so when people come to obama events they would ask for email addresses and was that the beginning of building a database for hope fund that eventually became the core database that eventually built into this massive online army that obama exploded in the 2008 campaign and it also became the core of their massive fundraising machine

we talked to people like claire mccaskill who would tell stories about obama campaign for her in 2006when they came to st. louis, not only did they have to have the fundraiser for the 2000 were 3000 people, but it would need to get a separate room for 15,000 people, because everybody wanted to see this guy. his fund-raising ability was at the core of why, as we talk about the democratic establishment being behind him, that was part of the political appeal, part of the wheat they demonstrated that he could be a serious candidate. anita dunn, in some sense, along with david plouffe, initiating a similar strategy for deval patrick in massachusetts, started to think about how this could be capitalized on to build the grass-roots army. when people came to obama events, it would ask for e-mail addresses, and it was the beginning of building the database for hope fund, and it became the core of what became the mass of a fund-raising machine. as they used the internet in i totally novel way to build this fundraising machine unprecedented in the history of american politics. anita dunn and the

don't think until we reported in the book we have a clear set we started talking to people, claire mccaskillwho would tell the stories about obama coming to campaign in 2006 and help when he would come to st. louis they would have to get an overflow room because not only did they have to have the fund-raiser for the people who were going to pay a lot of money they would also needed to get a separate room for 10,000 or 15,000 people because everybody wanted to see this guy. his fund-raising ability was at the core of why as we talk of the democratic establishment was secretly behind him that was part of the could see the political appeal, part of the way they demonstrated he was someone who could be a serious candidate and anita dunn in some sense along with the fit plough initiating a similar strategy for deval patrick of massachusetts, they started to think about how this could be capitalized to build what became the grassroots armies of people would come to the obama events and ask for e-mail address and that was the beginning of building the database for the health fund that eventually be

in addition to the three senators that i mentioned, begich, mccaskill and mikulski, there are 19 of our democratic colleagues that have also joined in supporting this legislation. and i think this outpouring of support on short notice is indicative of how beneficial the bill will be for the families of our armed service members. now, we've had our disagreements with the other side of the aisle on how best to reform our health care system as a whole. but i think there are certain areas of common interest i think we can still find and come together to improve the lives of the people we're hear to serving. i think this is one of those instances. i would offer my hand to our republican friends and hope they'll join the group of us in cosponsoring this important piece of legislation. i sit on the armed services committee here in the senate, and i served on the armed services committee in the house. and i'd like to think i have learned how to spot a good deal for our nation's soldiers and their families, and that is good deal. mr. president, again i want to just encourage all 100 senators to