mr britain that was in canada and in seoul we expect the visit of mr rove this will be next week which is very important in the event mr hague was. in brush or you know the negotiations were very productive and we expect the visit of mr cameron this year i mean the embassy we're studying preparing this visit so the the texture of the political context a very important but i would like to see what is even more important that you know of course the. as you said the. the connections between the people and the russian culture is the probably this is the test for that and we know that a lot of events are going on in london a lot of people are coming russians feel comfortable in london we have thousands of them who doing business who just simply leave here and what is very important that the economic relations are going very well and the recent deal between the b.p. and the rusty after was just one of the examples but if you look at the in a broader sense what's going on the to the business this the good indicate is the level of the trade i mean we had the maximum twenty three billion dollar

mr. speaker, with respect to roving wiretaps it's only available after the government is able to prove to the court that the target may engage in countersurveillance activity such as rapidly changing the cell phone number. it doesn't allow the government to make a general, boilerplate application. it requires them if they can't identify the individual, the very specific individual to describe to give some particularity in the request to identify that person as much as they possibly can. it is a -- it is also required that we put into law that once they have actually utilized this roving wiretap on different instruments of communication they have to report to the court within 10 days as to what took place. we have refined this as much as absolutely possible. what we're trying to do is keep up with technology. we know that some of these targets will buy 100 cell phones and use them for a single conversation and throw the -- throw that cell phone away. you can't just think that's going to happen, you have to prove to the satisfaction of the court that is a reason to believe that they're goin

mr. dreier: i yield myself an additional 30 seconds. in response to my friend on the roving wiretap issue, it's fast mate nating. as i began -- it's fascinating. as i began my remarks, mr. gohmert showed me the ipad which had the headline that the secretary of homeland security, janet napolitano, has indicate the threat that exists today is greater than it's been at any time since september 11 of 2001. that technology didn't exist back if 2001 or certainly back in 1980, the roving wiretap was designed to focus on the potential terrorist and not on some antiquated technology we have. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes theentleman from colorado. mr. polis: the gentleman from wisconsin mentioned that he's not aware of abuses under section 215. i would remind my colleagues that most of the uses are classified under 215 and there's not been a briefing for members of congress this congress to determine if there's been abuses. i have not had a briefing, nor has one been offered to the members of the 112th congress. i thin

business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until december 8, 2011. senate amendment, mr. smith of texas moves that the house concur in the senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 9 , the motion shall be debateable for one hour with 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on judiciary and 20 minutes equally and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence, the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, and the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. rogers, and the gentleman from maryland, mr. ruppersberger, will each control 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that miche -- that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the g

business records, individual terrorists as agents of foreign powers, and roving wiretaps until december 8, 2011. senate amendment, mr. smith of texas moves that the house concur in the senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 9 , the motion shall be debateable for one hour with 40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on judiciary and 20 minutes equally and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence, the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, and the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott,ach will control 20 minutes. the gentleman fr michigan, mr. rogers, and the gentleman from maryland, mr. ruppersberger, will each control 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that miche -- that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentl

mr. dreier: i yield myself an additional 30 seconds. in response to my friend on the roving wiretap issue, it's fast mate nating. as i began -- it's fascinating. as i began my remarks, mr. gohmert showed me the ipad which had the headline that the secretary of homeland security, janet napolitano, has indicate the threat that exists today is greater than it's been at any time since september 11 of 2001. that technology didn't exist back if 2001 or certainly back in 1980, the roving wiretap was designed to focus on the potential terrorist and not on some antiquated technology we have. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: the gentleman from wisconsin mentioned that he's not aware of abuses under section 215. i would remind my colleagues that most of the uses are classified under 215 and there's not been a briefing for members of congress this congress to determine if there's been abuses. i have not had a briefing, nor has one been offered to the members of the 112th congress. i th

mr. lungren and others on dealing with the questions of the lone wolf and roving wiretaps and all that. we need to have that addressed as quickly as possible. let's do it. let's do it now. let's pass this thing in a bipartisan way. with that, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is order. the question is on dotchings the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it, the resolution is agreed to. mr. polis: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are ordered. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having amendment number 223 printed in the congressional record offered by the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pascrell, had been postponed. and the bill had been read through page 263, line 9. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in the congressional record on the committee will be in order. the chair: committee will be in order. for what purpose does the g

mr. lungren: there should be a warrant. two provision the business record provision and the roving wiretap provision, require the government to go to the fisa court to get permission to carry out those elements directed at any individual. . let's just make sure we know what we are talking about here. we are talking about two provision that is require the government to go before the fisa court to get permission to utilize those provisions in their investigation. the third part deals with the lone wolf definition. and the lone wolf requirement is needed now more than it was when it first passed. because of the difference in the threat to us that has been recognized by our intelligence agencies and by the 9/11 commissioners, and most recently, by secretary napolitano. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i'm proud to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from california, ms. woolsey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. woolsey: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. woo

roving wiretapping until december 8, 2011. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. ship, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. smith. mr. smith: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on h.r. 513 currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman may proceed. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: mr. speaker, next september 11 will mark the 10-year anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on the u.s. in history. america is fortunate not to have suffered another attack of such magnitude in the past decade but we must not take this relatively secure country for granted or let our safety become complay seasoncy. america is safe today not because terrorists an spies have given up their goal to destroy our freedoms and way of life. we are safe today because

roving wire tap on a child pornographe >> no. they could not. i will deal lot more with you in the closed session. >> mr. ferguson, i would like to echo what the chairman said about the programming. our committee has not been fully informed of the matrs on the the program. by law, we are required to oversee that. we need to get this resolved amicably. it is important for the department of defense to know that we feel strongly about this issue. we but like to get with the wall and resolve this matter. >> yes, sir. i discussed thisast night at seni levels. we are very willing and take a serious approach to have an exchange with you. that is our role on the inlligence commission. it is very important to us. we have the patriot act. it is an issue that is very controversial. it was defeated just this last week. the bill is coming up again for a vote probably this week or next. if the bill fails again, what will that do to your capabilies? how will it affect our national security? >> the privacy issues are generallraised in terms o this piece of legislation. it requires a communications carrier to provide us

mr. kroger, to the effect that certain decisions are wisely left for congress. the courts lack the authority to be a sort of roving commission on all things constitutional. we have to make a number of these decisions on our own regardless whether the courts are going to do them for us. i wanted to ask a few questions of mr. dellinger if that's ok, professor. do you agree, first of all, with james madison's assessment that mr. corn inquoted a few minutes ago, that while the powers of the federal government are few and defined, those that are left to the states are numerous and indefinite? >> i do agree. and i think senator cornyn correctly cites federal list 45 or that proposition. as i said, senator lee, within the area of congress' authority to regulate national commerce, what has grown is the interdependencey of national commerce, not our understanding of the constitution. >> sure, sure, it has grown but they had interstate commerce then. they were interconnected. in fact that was the whole reason why we needed to be a union in the first place, right? >> correct. >> we couldn't survive. so they understood this i

roving commission on all things constitutional. we have to make a number of these decisions on our own. i wanted to ask a few questions of mr. dillon jarrett if that is ok, professor. dillinger if that is ok, professor. those that are left to the state are -- >> i do agree. i think the senator correctly cites it for that proposition. within the area of congress and its authority to regulate national commerce, what has grown is the interdependency of national commerce, not our understanding of the constitution. >> but they did have interstate commerce. that was the whole reason why we needed it, to be a union in the first place. we could not survive. this is not new. it has been facilitated by jet airplanes and the internet. >> if you got sick in north carolina in 1787, it had no effect in utah. [laughter] >> still a lovely place. >> it had no effect in pennsylvania. >> ok, ok. but there were interconnected. the changes that we have had have been changes of degree. you would still agree that the powers of the federal government are few and defined while those to the states are numerous and indefinite. >> yes. >> if this lot i

mr. kroger, to the effect that certain decisions are wisely left for congress. the courts lack the authority to be a sort of roving commission on all things constitutional. we have to make a number of these decisions on our own regardless whether the courts are going to do them for us. i wanted to ask a few questions of mr. dellinger if that's ok, professor. do you agree, first of all, with james madison's assessment that mr. corn inquoted a few minutes ago, that while the powers of the federal government are few and defined, those that are left to the states are numerous and indefinite? >> i do agree. and i think senator cornyn correctly cites federal list 45 or that proposition. as i said, senator lee, within the area of congress' authority to regulate national commerce, what has grown is the interdependencey of national commerce, not our understanding of the constitution. >> sure, sure, it has grown but they had interstate commerce then. they were interconnected. in fact that was the whole reason why we needed to be a union in the first place, right? >> correct. >> we couldn't survive. so they understood this i

roving wire tap on a child pornographer? >> no. they could not. i will deal lot more with you in the closed session. >> mr. ferguson, i would like to echo what the chairman said about the programming. our committee has not been fully informed of the matters on the the program. by law, we are required to oversee that. we need to get this resolved amicably. it is important for the department of defense to know thate feel strongly about this issue. we but like to get with the wall and resolve this matter. >> yes, sir. i discussed this last night at senior levels. we are very willing and take a serious approach to have an exchange with you. >> that is our role on the intelligence commission. it is very important to us. we have the patriot act. it is an issue that is very controversial. it was defeated just this last week. the bill is coming up again for a vote probably this week or next. if the bill fails again, what will that do to your capabilities? how will it affect our national security? >> the privacy issues ar generally raised in terms of this piece of legislation. it requires a communications carrier t

mr. kroger, to the effect that certain decisions are wisely left for congress. the courts lack the authority to be a sort of roving commission on all things constitutional. we have to make a number of these decisions o our own regardless whether the courts are going to do them for us. i wanted to ask a few questions of mr. dellinger if that's ok, professor. do you agree, first of all, with james madison's assessment that mr. corn inquoted a few minutes ago, that while the powers of the federal government are few and defined, those that are left to the states are numerous and indefinite? >> i do agree. and i think senator cornyn correctly cites federal list 45 or that proposition. as i said, senator lee, within the area of congress' authority to regulate national commerce, what has grown is the interdependencey of national commerce, not our understanding of the constitution. >> sure, sure, it has grown but they had interstate commerce then. they were interconnected. in fact that was the whole reason why we needed to be a union in the first place, right? >> correct. >> we couldn't survive. so they understood this in

mr. kroger, to the effect that certain decisions are wisely left for congress. the courts lack the authority to be a sort of roving commission on all things constitutional. we have to make a number of these decisions on our own regardless whether the courts are going to do them for us. i wanted to ask a few questions of mr. dellinger if that's ok, professor. do you agree, first of all, with james madison's assessment that mr. corn inquoted a few minutes ago, that while the powers of the federal government are few and defined, those that are left to the states are numerous and indefinite? >> i do agree. and i think senator cornyn correctly cites federal list 45 or that proposition. as i said, senator lee, within the area of congress' authority to regulate national cmerce, what has grown is t interdependencey of national commerce, not our understanding of the constitution. >> sure, sure, it has grown but they had interstate commerce then. they were interconnected. in fact that was the whole reason why we needed to be a union in the first place, right? >> correct. >> we couldn't survive. so they understood this inter