more into n.i.h. in the recovery and reinvestment act. we do want to see better treatment and cures. that takes dollars for medical research and a commitment to the science of biomedical research and some new products and devices. it also takes prevention and it also takes better coordination of care. we -- patients with chronic diseases need access to primary care providers. we need to be able to make sure they get good ongoing chronic disease management. i've introduced legislation, it's house bill 2350, and i have to say it's got enormous support here in the house. 100 co-sponsor, i'm very proud of that and many other looking at it, only introduced it a couple of weeks ago. the idea of that legislation is to make sure that we preserve patient access to primary care and one way to do that is to increase the number of primary care providers by increasing the number of residency programs slots for primary care. we're going to hopefully do that and for more nurse practitioners and more nurses in this c

more reform. the other ingredient is parents. [applause] we need parents putting more emphasis on education with our kids. that is how we're all going to be able to pick up our game. i have time for one more question, and i'm going to go with this young lady. >> we followed you in the campaign rally in september. i took my 5-year-old -- 5-month- old son. you told my son he was adorable, i do not know if you remember. >> i can sign that for you. i'll be happy to sign it, but let's get another question. everyone is pointing at this in the so she must be important or popular. -- pointing at this lady says she must be very important. >> my question centers on wellness and personal responsibility for one's health care. can you talk about how your reforms would incorporate wellness and encouraging people to take more responsibility for their own health care? >> i think that is a great question. [applause] for those of you who still had unclear based health care, one of the things we have been doing is m

but the way this bill is drafted, they only create more government and more bureaucracy, rather than help us to focus on what works. so the idea behind this amendment is to replace the public health council in this bill, which is troubling both in its lack of focus and its unprecedented scope with a more targeted interagency working group to more effectively focus federal programs. the way this is written, we've got 18 federal agencies, most of them not related to health care in the public health council. i won't spend the time to go through that. however, what this amendment does is creates an interagency coordinating committee with similar purposes that includes all of the agencies under the umbrella of hhs, nih, cdc, hrq, and others as well as the more relevant agencies that are also on senator harkin's council, the va, the department of defense, epa, department of education and department of labor. this interagency coordinating committee does not include the department of transportation. the department of housing and urban development, the department of homeland security. prevent

because the more diversity, then consumers are put more in charge. if the price of natural gas is how you can go to a pump and fill up with electricity. it would give you choices. whether we can get there quickly i do not know, but that is the vision. the second question -- i am sorry? host: health care and food. guest: thank you. you are right, the new system we want to have to have health insurance for everyone must include a strong preventative aspect. if people can get in to see their doctors before they're sick and keep themselves from getting sick, that is the best health care we could have. we have a system now of treating illness. we need a system of maintaining and promoting wellness in america. it is about diet, exercise, not smoking, and other things. and also good prescription drugs that help people to stay well and out of the hospital. thank you for those comments which are right on. host: republican from ohio, you are on with senator mary landrieu. guest: hello. caller: i think the whole agenda of the democrats is a backward. host: give

dramatically more. if they go down that path with a standard benefits set and forced insurance mandate -- a government competing with the private market in many other features like that -- they could be creating more access but go the opposite direction in costs. most people want to be in charge of their own health care with a doctor. i think it is the wrong direction in that regard. host: thank you for being with us, governor tim pawlenty. every day the "washington journal" gets under way at 7:00 a.m. eastern. tomorrow, these guests. also, more on the auto industry dave mccurdy, with the alliance of automobile manufacturers. and the national security adviser jim jones will begin a review on a plan to expedite the public release of classified documents. we will have the perspective of stephen from the federation of american scientists on the project of government secrecy. that is all tomorrow morning. thanks for being with us. enjoy the rest of your weekend. [captioning performed by national captioning

you cannot have any more. -- cannot hedge any more.u have to pick one of the other. >> i am a member of the national press club and a freelance writer from buffalo, new york. in your earlier answer, you leave open the door for future participation in a democratic iran. can you tell us, if you have any research today, that tells how many people would support you in iran? in other words, in this turbulent time, what is your approval rating? >> well, people support me because of the very fact we're talking the same language -- freedom,, democracy, human rights. i'm not demanding people to support me today because of me. i'm demanding people support me so that i can best serve them achieve what their goal is, which is to achieve freedom. that is a totally different function. if tomorrow -- for the umpteenth time, i repeat -- if tomorrow in iran there was a choice for people to say "we want mr. pahlavi, after liberation, if we want to be in -- if we want him to be involved," we will hear the answer that. that question is irrelevant, irrelev

the first is a system of incentives where more tests and services are provided and the more money we pay. a lot of people in this room know what i am talking about. it is a model that rewards the quantity of care rather than the quality of care. that pushes you, the doctor, to see more and more patients, even if you cannot spend much time with each. it gives you every incentive to order an extra mri or a cagey, even if it is not necessary. -- ekg even if it is not necessary. it changes your calling to a business. that is not why you became doctors. that is not why you put in all of those hours in the operating room. that is not what brings you back to a patient's bedside to check in or call the loved one of a patient to say it will be fine. you did not enter this profession to be paper pushers. be healers. that is what our health-care system should let you beat. -- be. [applause] that starts with the way we do need to reform compensating our doctors and hospitals. if you have diabetes, you should be paid well by how you treat the overall disease. we need to create incentives for phys

other countries have more of a system of a more involved government in terms of health care. will say that almost every other developed country, every other developed country is able to provide health care to everybody in their country at a much lower cost than what we do. for the most part, the healthcare results in terms of the population is better than what we have. by do not know how happy people are with their -- i do not know how happy people are with their health care, but you can look at those things. de guest: they are much closer to the happiness of the uninsured -- things. guest: they are much closer to the happiness of the uninsured, and they do it through rationing. they do not provide mri's to a lot of people. they have to wait for even a simple surgery. you talk about wanting to have a hybrid system, but the government is putting its heavy hand in favor of the single payer plan. for some time, people will switch out. we saw this yesterday, with the proposals to cut $313 billion from medicare and medicaid. government is constantly putting more and more mandates

now there's not a person in this room that doesn't want more of the same, more green energy, more wind, more nuclear, more solar power, but i for one believe we can get there without putting the conventional methods of energy out of business. the forbes amendment will do just that. it is creative ideas incentivizing the behaviors that we want as opposed to what we don't that we need. i urge a yes vote on this amendment and no on the cap and tax bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: madam speaker, i want to yield one minute to my co-sponsor of the legislation that's before us, my name came first, his second because i'm older and i'm the chairman of the full committee, chairman of the subcommittee, but the real author of legislation who has worked on this problem for many, many years is ed markey and i want to yield one minute to him. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. markey: thank you, mr. chairman. with our bill we will take back america's position as the technological leader. g

we tend to do that more in this bill to give them more credence into use in their suggestions as to what we ought to do rather than this scatter gun approach. so we're not trying to tell people what they can and can't do by saban r. glen to make it easier to be healthy and get more incentives up front. whether employer based community-based a lot of things we can do and a lot of committees have argued then that. >> senator i also point to his what they have done in oregon. there may be others i don't know about that have set up the structures so that people is easier to be healthy to walk or bike and do different things like that in those cities. one of the reasons we have set up the public counsel that goes across all the departments is so that and all of the legislation we passed on all the rules and regulations promulgated by these departments they will start thinking about this. i mention on transportation that some have suggested when a book of the taxpayers' money into building highways and roads and bridges and things like that that people put in their bypass and walking paths. th

it is absolutely true that there are more -- there are more policy makers, commanders tall levels, who asked for an awful lot of intelligence support and analysts are tasked often to do them. on the other hand, i think it is a positive development to have intelligence analysts close to policy makers so they know -- policy makers so they know -- they know what the@@@@@@@@@ b)@" the sort of difference between analytical skills and expertise. i think it is true the intelligence community realize a great deal for its expertise on going outside the intelligence community think tanks, academia, and yes -- yes, contractors. i am not sure that is all bad as long as we keep contact -- to contact with the world, keep current says current and we can bring them in. a typical example our national intelligence estimates, the premier intelligence community judgments on major and important topics for virtually all of those we sent them to a group of sight readers after the government does its work and these are eckert experts in the field who do spend their whole life worrying about just that one coun

this time you see more split control.eighboring virginia is a good example where you have a democratic governor and senator and republican-controlled house. that means you either compromise to get a plan passed for redistricting, or not in which cases the courts will draw it for you. host: good morning, on the democrats' line. caller: of like to ask him about the republicans. when they were in office they redistricted around and change everything. now they're talking about democrats. here in tennessee our elections have always been [inaudible] guest: what is interesting is that her comments reflect the frustration many have with the redistricting process. whoever happens to be in power at the time it takes place is really able to draw the districts in a way to minimize competition from the other side. i will say that the supreme court of the united states has said that political gerrymandering is something that can violate the constitution. they have never found it to violate the constitution, but say theoretically you ca

all this has bred more fear and more mistrust. so long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote conflicts average the cooperation that can help all our people achieve justice and prosperity. and this cycle of suspicion and discord must end. i've come here to cairo to seek a new beginning between the united states and muslims around the world. one based on mutual

what was working so well. >> we played more speed, more energy on the offensive end. we get down the floor, push it. a lot of pick-and-roll, which is our game, on dwight. dwight kicks it out. we get wide-open threes. if they don't double team, dwight goes one-on-one. they were fouling him and he was going to the line and making them. we shot 62.5% and almost lost the game. so we have to offend a way to defend these guys. start fouling kobe on three-point shots and pullup jumpers. that's what we're going to look at film tomorrow and work on. >> chris, on the -- >> rae fer in the corner. stan said that his pep talk to you was, he said play your game and that was it. said it took him two days to come up with that. what about yourself? what did you say to yourself in terms of self-motivation to get yourself going in this game? >> i think i told myself the same thing. especially after game two. disappointed to good out there and not play the style of play i'm accustomed to doing, the style of play that allowed know get to this point in the nba and the style of play that al

i will see more about that in a few minutes. there was also one antitrust decision, and by the time that case was decided, everyone including the parties were in basic agreement on how the case was going to be decided. the only real question was how it was going to be decided. the court was far more active in the environmental areas, although even there three of them were strictly speaking business cases, and i will talk about them as well as the antitrust case in a few minutes. before the end -- before i do that, i want to make some general observations about the seven. five were from the ninth circuit, and two were from dhunna second circuit. in one -- were from the second circuit. in one of those cases, the opinion was written by judge sotomayor. in the other case she was not on the panel. in all seven cases, the court of appeals was reversed. that is not so unusual for the ninth circuit. it is a little more unusual for the second circuit, although this term was not a particularly good term for the second circuit at the court

as i think there's more andened more -- more and more movement towards people becoming more subjected to government control. by government taking over certain situations, the banking industry, car auto industry. the cap in trade. people are becoming more subjected to government control, and once the people start becoming subjected to the government, the government owns them and freedom goes away. and i believe in free trade. if i believe free enterprise. and i believe that the cause of this economic meltdown, and i want your take on this. but this is my concept of the research i've done going back is coming to fannie mae and freddie mac that they had grown in size to holdings greater than even greater than the u.s. treasury. and politicians had stopped tony snow's effort to put in supporting the regulators to get this under control. and pressures were put on banks to give lending practices to people that would normally not qualify for banks. and the books were cooked. and it got into the stock market, and when the stock market started to fail, all these home loans started going bad, t

funding, a little more emphasis, little more input -- we're more of from the department of defense on those priority issues of hours. of our 10, all of them, tend to attend, are being addressed in the review. we think that is beneficial for us. you might as what those issues are, and again, i cannot go into them, but if you were to think of areas where we might like because of the size, because of the various countries with whom we are exercising, that we might like intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, for example, it is being addressed in the review. we are very happy with the role that we have. we have an active voice in the formulation, and it is a singularly important document for us, and we are cautiously optimistic that it will be not just a heavy tome that goes across the street to congress, but that it will have an impact with congress and that the american people will be persuaded by the analysis that goes into it. i am optimistic. >> great pleasure to see you again. question -- i will just use the framework of our strategic relationship with japan and

new concepts of more u.s. sanctions. that being five of the six of to agree in advance on more severe sanctions and let it be known to the iranians. there is a predisposition on the part of some to argue that this formula that all options are on the table ought to be emphasized, which is a way of saying to the iranians, if you do not accommodate, force may be used against you. there is certainly a predisposition which perhaps has been intensified in effect a manner by something obama said, to put a time limit on the negotiations. there is a external pressure in favor of that from the israelis. the president was actually extremely clever in the way he fashioned his acceptance of that suggestion, but it in a manner which is unqualified, that he can't ignore it, if he chooses. there is an effort on the part of some to say he has accepted time limits, but a time limit may be at the end of the year. aund there are still inclination's to combine entry into the negotiations with something which, in terms of diplomacy

if software is more secure, it might demand a little bit more of a premium. there is a combination of incentives. also, the market value with them a little bit more. on the government level, it is having the security people in the same room as the end of asian people. if they're integrated and exchanging information cut the outset. >> the government can help drive information and the sector if they offer incentives. people on the commerce committee are very interested in doing this. this could be a tax incentive. we are looking at all of those options. >> if you want to bring the market to bear, you have to have an ability to high-let them make decisions. you have to have this based on data. >> i like to take one more question. >> the government still has a lot of buying power. if we band together, we can make a market for some of this stuff. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> up next, "q&a" west douglas brinkley and then the british house of commons. following that, the election

an more an more and more in our broken health care system. let's ask ourselves, what is the family value? is it a family value to say to 50 million working americans, you you may not have access to health care in our society? is it a family value to have three generations in a cafe who are doing just fine if only they could afford health care? health care an a good job are essential to success of our families. and if you care about strengthening families, then you've got to care about seeing what we can do to make the system work better. now, our status quo system, it's broken in so many ways. year before last, one of our major health care providers in oregon, their rights went up 26% for small businesses. if you are a small business struggling to get by in america and you want to provide health care to your employees because that is the major way folks get health care how do you do it when health care goes up 26%? and this year the same program went up 17%. add them together. 43%. huge, huge increase. it it's not two years of increase after

pulling more and more people into the clutches of the state data capture. take contact point. it is a vast database that holds the details of everyone under the age of 18 in england, their name, their address, their gender, date of birth, school and health provider. and the government doesn't want to stop with the basic information, they want the most complex, important personal information there is. there are nearly 5 million people on the dna database. now, the government says it's there to help fight crime, but almost a million of the people on it are completely innocent of any crime. tens of thousands of these innocent people are actually children. now, it's a situation that i think would cause concern under the most o pressive regime in the world, but it's happening right here, right now in britain. but labour want to go even further. they want every single person in the country to walk around with an identity card. with that card there'd be over 50 pieces of personal information being transferred from your private control to state control. not just yo

americans want more, there are more jobs possible if we commit more in this bill and that is our job as a movement. a third dichotomy we would like to smash is we either hang together as a movement or all parts. i am a trained ecologist, i believe that the most vibrant ecosystems are the most diverse ecosystems. i believe that of social change ecology as well. we're so proud to be part of a new coalition efforts called unity and 09, it was formed to help pass president obama's agenda and doing a great job, we're building progressive to reduce for the long haul in states that are hard to build in, elevating non-traditional messengers and when seiu waiting on the energy bill to say, yes, we want these jobs that with so much more impact will in many places and hear from another environmental group about why we need a good energy bill and we're using our resources more efficiently because we know what we're doing. excellent effort, very proud to be a part of it and at the same time our primary mandate is to represent our constituents and therefore if there comes a time where our constitu

authority and more power? and the president has not even demanded audits. the same people that brought us to this place, which i believe the money is in foreign banks -- i did not believe it has been lost, i believe it is a scam. host: faye, let me interrupt you for a second. you first called for audits. what are you looking to be audited? caller: well, i think every bank. at the end of 2007, all of these banks presented themselves with profits that paid tremendous bonuses, and then within six months these banks were broke. president bush said we are going to give $700 billion where none of it is accountable. host: let's get an answer. she is calling for more audits of the banks. the fdic just went through a process. do you think it has been exhaustive and expensive enough? guest: i think the fdic has been through an exhaustive process of looking at our financial institutions. but then again, it is those who oppose that systemic risk, too big to fail, which i think the treasury are looking at in the past. look

more jobs will be lost, more plants will close, more dealerships will shut their doors, and so will many parts suppliers. but i want you to know that what you're doing is making a sacrifice for the next generation, a a sacrifice she may not have chosen to make but one u.n. of less call to make so that your children and ours can grow up in an america that still makes things, still strives for a better future. as our workers and communities passed through these difficult times we as a nation must do airport. so i appointed in march and montgomery, director of the recovery for all two communities and workers. he announced a green jobs training program for workers and those hard-hit communities. my small business administration chief travel to indiindia last week to announce new loans. -- traveled to indiana. it will give the industry boost a time when it needs one. i'm calling on congress to pass fleet modernization legislation to provide a credit to consumers who turn in old cars and purchase cleaner, more fuel- efficient new cars in a these are important steps to overcome a problem that d

i think we need to find ways and government to be more effective and more responsive. and it is much more difficult, in some sense, because of all the players, turf battles, debates about how to proceed. but i think it is important to get that right. i see obviously from your question the room for improvement. host: today's "the wall street journal" editorial that focuses on ben bernanke and his role. he will lead political courage we have not seen since paul volcker was chairman, to exit from all of these efforts in time to prevent another bubble. talking, of course, about the housing and credit card bubble. guest: again, i think it is a very good point. first of all, paul volcker did have amazing coverage and strength to counteract a very serious problem in the country. i inflation, loss of confidence in the dollar. he took action plan and was criticized tremendously but stuck through it and then passed a much better situation to his successor, pete successor, alan greenspan, who also did a good job for many years. host: but many point to alan greenspan's policies fo

to more people. you might ask why unions see the need for health reform. most of our members have good benefits that we have seen year after year contract negotiations, this is the most difficult issue to solve. we've tried, you know, we've had more than 10 years out partnering with health plans and other purchasers to improve quality and get better value for our spending. we have tried pilot programs, purchasing cooperatives with unions, but we can't solve it at the bargaining table, we can't solve it on her own. a national solution is what we need. and our folks get that in order to lower their costs, we need to get everyone in the system. we need to, you know, they understand that their premiums are reflected on and on coppery care, they know they spend more money than they need to not get the value for. so we come to the health care for rebate wanting to see everyone covered and lower costs, access to good benefits made affordable to everyone. and two of us a key piece of that is not the only pie

baiz i think more media -- because i think more media outlets are a good thing.since i came to the senate the technology world has exploded, and i no longer think that we need to police that, and now we have the most incredible situation which i don't think any of us ever anticipated in our lifetimes that major newspapers would be on the brink of literally going out of business and not having that avenue for news coverage for the citizens of big communities is now a viable possibility. so my question is, the fcc does still rules against dual ownership, and i think it is important that you look at that and determine if, really, we ought to be doing everything we can to keep newspapers alive in order to have the most outlets for people who like to get their news in different ways. >> senator, very early in my career i worked on a newspaper in college, and then i reestablished the oldest newspaper at the college that i went to. my heart is filled with respect for the role that newspapers play in our society and our democracy, and a little bit later in my career i sp

and pick up more ice. certain props are more susceptible even though i believe that most of them are more than adequate to handle those conditions. but you can't say in it forever and the fact that the first officer -- this will sound strange but there has been such a focus on some a sterile cockpit violations. i am relieved that we know that that first officer in that airplane said i have never seen icing like this before because we have all learned something, that is just as apparent as whether the cpr we have learned something. she felt she was not prepared to. >> what you are saying is you can have violations and things go wrong but that she said this is such an indication of that there are problems in training that you don't need anything more than that? >> at plus sharing information between pilots, knowing what is going on. we talk regularly so that we know you know what i am thinking. you have to voice some of the things going on in your head so that you're first officer or captain knows what you a

question that i will go to the audience for questions even though i have about 30 more here and 40 more in my head. you also have at this point* the interesting predicament that saudi arabia and egypt and other water called moderate arab states are increasingly concerned about iran's growing power in the region, the possibility they may have nuclear weapons or iran will continue to expand it has hezbollah allied with hamas and lebanon growing in power, hamas increase in me as a proxy on one side of israel, syria as a client state. is there any sense that each of your saudi arabia or the gulf states up this point* would functionally align themselves with israel against iran? or is it the enemy of my enemy can be useful what that does not make him my friend? >> guest: right now we see unquestioned support for the fatah on the west bank. i would argue the hamas fatah conflict is a microcosm of larger things in place you have the iranian access cause the, the state supporting the west bank, the fatah faction. but in terms of the suni states getting in bed with israel, this is the adm of the

there is more standardization. people are thus likely to be taken and vanished during their moment of weakness. if you look at what happens with the core proposals with the credit card reform passed a few weeks ago you can see the basic element of our efforts. consumer credit and generally was the focus of another bet practices -- bad practices. we want to change that. >> we only have a couple of more minutes now. we have a couple of different types of questions. are you and larry summers still could buddies? >> we have a good relationship. he is one of the most talented people in the world sitting around the table looking at options figuring out how to think through options and make choices. it is my privilege to work with him. >> if you were the cfo of the financial system, what would you decide? what is his job? >> his job is to help make sure the president is getting the best device across the entire spectrum. he is doing a great job of that. >> you had a rocky beginning in this job. and the time you were annou

if you want for us to do more work through hearings, and if you want us to be able to have more officials in front of us, bankers appearing in front of us, we cannot do this without subpoena power. i should say, there is plenty that we can do without this. we will be able to write a report to expose misrepresentation about the value of transactions, this has been valuable. and we have been able to deal with the other parts of the program. the treasury is not operating in the same way that it was operating before. let me turn your question, i want to say something about this. glass-stegel was about rest manipulation. they understood after the depression, that we have gone through these cycles every 15 years, and the banks were part of this, the banks were the risk takers and they would roll the dice and as long as they made money, the investors got rich, and then they took down everyone with them, taking down a lot of local communities. the basic understanding was that we cannot keep doing that, that is not going to work for us. you are not just hurting yourself, the one little business, t

and they are finding more and more of these types of places throughout the country. we've got lots of natural resources. unfortunately there are policies in washington holding us back. host: oklahoma, jay on the republican line. caller: the morning. a couple of comments on energy use in this country -- good morning. a couple of comments. first of all back in the 1970's, you mentioned it several times this morning, after that ended, what did congress do? what did they do with cafe standards? every time someone came up and there was time for one to be enacted, what did congress do? my question is, with that history, going forward, how do we know that anything is going to be done? secondly -- i think that is something congress will have to deal with, they will have the show the public they are serious about this. because we are watching now. it is on everybody's mind. talking about natural gas, i don't think the american people are really informed as to how natural gas can be used. when i was a boy, 16 years old, and i am over 60, i was driving tractors powered on propa

so instead of paying for more services, more intensity, there's another point on your. to increasing value and that does mean more responsibility for providers, or patients on getting better results. you heard about that from some of your other speakers as well. there have been a lot of discussions about whether this is really going to save money, whether this kind of accountability and payment reform can really save money. i want to come back to that. what some of the proposals are doing to get the support of the congressional budget office, that they really are likely to lead to savings is building in some other kind of traditional approaches to saving money and medicare and other public programs by reducing update rates, by giving providers somewhat smaller payment increases from year to year. but giving them an opportunity to not have to deal with that just any traditional way, despite dealing with a lower payment rate per service by increasing volume or seeing more patients, things that don't really do anything to improve health care. moving another way forward to

and more out of pocket.an average family now with health insurance, based on the report we are releasing today, is spending $4,000 out-of- pocket. your percentage of your premium is going up. your deductibles are going up. your copays are going up. the number of your services that you get through your office insurance is going down. the cost of health care is making it harder and harder to -- for families that have health insurance to afford health care. certainly, small businesses are increasingly unable to provide health care. more than one-third of the uninsured work for small businesses. the insurance coverage that you get from small businesses is often not adequate. more than half of americans last year reported that they had to skip a doctors appointment or cut down on medications that they were taking because they could not afford it. you're absolutely right, one of the goals in the president's plan is to provide health insurance, or access to health insurance and affordable choices for people who buy

but every time you get more isr, you get more precision. every time you get more precision, you can reduce civilian casualties and reduce the impact of the city in population. -- reduce the impact on the civilian population. if you go after a single individual and don't affect the whole village, you don't have a negative impact on everyone else. while isr is not a panacea for everything, the more you have got, the smarter you are as a force and the more precise you can be. everything we can do to increase that will be valuable. >> general fraser, you have an area of the world that is very close to us, and one of the lessons we learned worldwide is that government of capacity is such a critical element -- governmental capacity is such a critical element of stability. i wonder if you will undertake an assessment of the government a capacity of the countries in your areas of operation as a leading edge indicator of where problems but exist? >> thank you for that question. as i have studied what southcom is doing, they already have a robust pro

tough-minded or rigid or assertive more selfish and the british and certainly more so than the germans or the russians. how that might affect the negotiating process is hard to judge but sarkozy certainly doesn't want to be a wallflower in the process. he wants france to play a role. he alluded to that recently in djibouti commemorating the opening -- i'm sorry, not in jeopardy, the gulf, commemorating the opening of a new french military base in the area. the germans and the russians clearly are not prepared to push the envelope very hard. i don't think they are prepared to commit themselves to very drastic sanctions the kind some would like. and their position from the outside probably will be supported by the chinese who are not a party to the process but who have a role to play and the rule is not insignificant in the long run. this sort of, on durham of issues is complicated by the fact as of now there is no sense of clarity on the side of the five were six, however you count them, regarding what is actually the status of the iranians who nuclear quest. what are they actually seek

clothing and a touch more here. in his books and essays pico iyer ins is a question that most journalists i think failed to answer and is a very simple question, what is it like there? what is it really like their? and a journalist travel to afghanistan and iraq and to their stories and get home and their friends ask i have heard your story from iraq, what is it like there? pico iyer tells us what it is really like there. he gets to the essence of a place and he does that by reading and talking to people, always the right people it seems by doing research. most of all he does it by listening and observing. all of us listened and observe a course but pico iyer does a better than most of us. for some writers to see their objective is to know something, to know something new and to uncover and to share it with us. for pico iyer in his objective is to see something coming to look to the same places that perhaps we have all travel to and if you haven't to see them in a fresher and more nuanced way. pico iyer could see so

will not be more expensive, their school supplies will now be more expensive. if you haven't noticed, people are hurting around the states. adding costs today is absolutely the wrong direction. it will destroy $1,400 in wages for the average family in my district. $1,400. that's a $2,000 swing. people in michigan who are already under assault wants to know what they'll get for that new swing. they will not get a new nuclear plant. they won't get the electric grid to deliver clean energy. they will not get that. and they will not get a level playing field for china and india. and make no mistake, they want to steal the jobs that make up our middle class. they're active and addressing in doing it. if you pass this bill you won't be able to building anything in the united states of america. their jobs are going overseas. they'll also see their gas prices rise on average 70 cents a gallon. 70 cents a gallon to families who are already under financial crisis. and who gets their money? wall street will. this bill takes millions, billions out of families' budgets and

maybe they want more. maybe china which had the huge trade surplus a few years ago, maybe they don't have it anymore. they don't. and maybe they're deciding they're not going to buy so much treasury bills in the united states. babmaybe they decide to invest n their own economy which has not done as well as it has done in the past. same with the middle east. they used to have huge reserves of american money as a result of the high price of gasoline and the price of "on th oil on the d market but that has dropped and perhaps they don't have the money on the treasury bills either. so who will buy them? we're not talking a little bit but about going from $5 trillion in total debt today to $10 trillion, really, $11 trillion in just five years. and $17 trillion in 10 years so we're talking about over -- over $10 trillion in new debt we have to sell somebody in the world market. also, what is the impact of the federal reserve, that entity we've created by law, when they buy treasury bills? what occurs there? i re

rich people they pollute more, destroy the economy more -- they should pay more taxes. host: i want to ask your thoughts on how secretary shall of -- secretary geithner back from g8 meeting, how is he viewed by other european finance ministers? guest: i think they respect his experience, his time of the new york fed. the fact that he has personal appearance and asia, having lived in both china and japan. they respect his links to larry summers and the white house. my guess is -- and i have not talked him personally about this -- that some of 7. geithner's initial uneasy public performances were not that settling for them. you want the treasury secretary of the united states to come off as granddaddy who inspires confidence. but don't think you see those kinds of performance is any more. and i think it has been reassuring. host: a buehler and princeton, new jersey -- guest: i don't know, i am not in a stock market -- in the stock market's sudden i'm a good advisor on that. host: bruce on the republican line. caller: i just wonder where uc -- i am from wellington where dh

president, whether it is more energy efficient facilities in the park system or more teachers or more cops and the street, construction cranes and hard hats, will see a lot more this summer. we accelerated our efforts across the federal government. the end of this 100 days we feel confident we will be able to demonstrate we created another 600,000 jobs. fairly ambitious, mr. president, but asked the cabinet to bring what is realistic, what they can get done. as a consequence we are also starting up a new web site today. www.whitehouse.gov/recover, an individual agency websites and the overall website. this will have an individual aspects, because what we want is average americans as they are watching this summer -- visiting, whenever -- we want them knowing that what we are doing is fully transparent, fully accountable, and we want them to watch us closely and we want their input. we want them to tell us whether they think it is working or not working and how it is affecting them. mr. president, by the fall i think we are going to be much further down the road to recovery and i can sa

and more crowns. it is unfortunate that the siege -- basij as a whole still has to demonstrate, but many many more forces are showing their discontent. there was a specific report i received today, and i cannot name names for obvious reasons, but one of the higher echelon members of the privilege and regards, who was specifically assigned to make sure that he is in charge of the questioning any kind of unrest, recently said in his report, his account, that after what happened last week, even he said "i can no longer morally or consciously stick to a system, and for any ideas that i thought the revolution was supposed to before, after what is happening to the people." there is an amazing reflection that is happening not just for the people, obviously, but in the regime. this is what i hear, the kind of reports i receive. you ask about what the u.s. and specifically the administration -- i was encouraged but delayed its position of -- i was encouraged by the latest position and words of president obama.

or is it still more clinical? >> still more clinical. for some disorders you can see things, brain damages. you can see changes in those images as well, understanding mechanisms of action. lot of the more common mental disorders, we don't have objective tests. we have some basic conditions. for migraine, somebody has to describe, there are a lot of symptom based conditions. some of those are very challenging for complex reasons. there is a lot of concern that people use the diagnosis for their own purposes. there is a concern that a lot of vietnam vets who are getting to retirement age who seemed to have been able to work for the last there years, decide they have ddsd. they describe the symptoms, you can go on google and learn about the symptoms. can we prove they have the symptoms or not? there is a big push, can we get an objective test for that reason? we are just not there yet. >> what happens? if you play that out, this is an issue we will be confronted with, we are having a lot of troops returning home. if they say they have it, i

it is more subtle. the other point i would make is the rules of the engagement our troops operated under was in afghanistan and iraq. i don't know how the rules of engagement have changed. that is not something you want to tell your adversary. if they were very robust through this conflict. they could do what they needed to do as we saw in many parts of iraq and afghanistan. the fare point -- the third point would be in the end we do have to have the moral high ground. we are the most powerful nation in the world. every time we strike a target we have to make sure that to the best of our knowledge the target is proportional to what gain we are going to get and if there's going to be collateral damage, the facilities or innocent civilians, that we take that into account, do hour calculus and say is this -- is this a tougher problem than just going in and what the not the enemy? absolutely. if the enemy would present themselves on mass, which they have on occasion, we take care, dispatch them as we did in

harm you suffered, the more damaging the industry to you or your child, the more of this problem weask you to bear by doing this. it is, i think, very poor social policy and a very unfortunate way of responding to this problem. >> mr. chairman? if i might respond to the impassioned and extraordinarily strong lawyerly like presentation from the former attorney general of rhode island. as if he were presenting his case before a jury. >> he's great. >> it was excellent. but the point is this. this isn't so much about containing costs, although if this approach were taken as it has been in california and texas, it would contain costs. it's about access. it's about access. it's about giving a mother the ability to see a doctor in a reasonably prompt way without having to travel a great deal of distance. it's about access which saves lives. i would have more confidence in putting a doctor in the room than putting the lawyer in the room and i think most mothers would probably approach it that way. they want to see a doctor in a reasonably prompt way, reasonably near where they live. in rur

this is why our proposal to do more renewables, more american-made oil and gas, more nuclear, take the money from the royalties of the oil and gas and pump it back into renewables, so lar, geothermal, wind, and actually speed up the development of these, this will do more to actually clean up the air and bring down the cost of energy and help reduce the dependence we have on energy from overseas. it's the most common sense way to approach this issue rather than this. >> -- had a busy week not only with the energy bill, a couple of appropriations bills. do you feel as though the republicans [indiscernible] down or had any impact on your own or are they running over you? >> they're running over us. they're in such a rush to spend the american people's money, they won't allow us to offer our cost-cutting amendments to try to reduce spending in these bills. that's why they've gagged us, they've taken away most of our amendments. because they want to spend this money. they want to spend it as fast as they can before anybody notices. just like moving this crazy idea, this national energy tax

well, it got more extreme. gorbachev permitted a unified germany to join a hostile military alliance run by the global superpower. that is astonishing in the light of history. germany alone had practically destroyed russia twice in the century. now, there was a quid pro quo. this is bush number one and james baker. it had been thought up until a couple months ago that bush and baker promised not to expand nato to the eastern european former soviet satellites but there was the first careful study of the original documents came out by mark kramer, a cold war historian. he believes that he's refuting charges of u.s. duplicity but, in fact, what he shows is that it's much more cynical than what had been assumed. itfn turns out that bush and r promised gorbachev that nato wouldn't even fully extend to east germany. i quote them, they told gorbachev no nato forces would ever be deployed on the territory of the former german g.d.r., east germany. nato forces would not move eastward. they also assured gorbachev that

the first is a system of incentives where the more tests and services are provided, the more money we pay. and a lot of people in this room know what i'm talking about. it's a model that rewards the quantity of care rather than the quality of care. that pushes you, the doctor, to see more and more patients, even if you can't spend much time with each. and gives you every incentive to order that extra mri or ekg, even if it's not necessary. it's a model that has taken the pursuit of medicine from a profession, a calling, to a business. that's not why he became doctors. that's not why you put in all those hours in the anatomy suite or the o.r., that's not what brings you back to a patient's bedside to check in or makes you call a loved one of a patient to say it will be fine.