mr. coburn: i got 71.8%. mr. sessions: 71%. i don't think it's -- do you think perhaps some of us here in washington are overafraid of being frank and truthful with our constituents about the challenges america faces? mr. coburn: well, i would answer through the president that i think we're perplexed. we see, we know intellectually that there is a big problem and we have this challenge of do i go down this path to do the best thing for our country or do i go down this path to do the best thing for me? i look at politics different than most of our colleagues. to the senator from alabama, i would say i don't really care whether i'm here or not. i care about whether america is here or not. but our point ought to be is how do we secure the vote and how do we establish trust with the american people? if my colleague would go with me -- and i know he knows this -- look at the confidence of the people in this country and the congress. why is there a lack of confidence? you know, why is it that 80% of the people in the united states do

mr. chairman. thank you, senator coburn. i want to focus on really the very broad area or issue of trust that mr. davidson raised which i think goes to the core of much of what you do with the consent and acquiesce of consumers and the practice and goal of building wireless network maps, both apple and google are engaged in that business activity, are you not? >> yes. >> yes. >> and in particular, mr. davidson, i want to ask questions about the google wifi experience scandal, debacle, all three terms used to refer to it, in particular as you well know and now we all know, for three years, google interpreted and collected bits of user information payload data, e-mails, passwords, browsing history, and personal information while driving around taking pictures of people's homes on the streets for the street view program. the company first denied that it was collecting this information, did it not? >> it did. we did not know that we were. >> and then it denied that it was collecting it intentionally, is that true? >> i think we still believe we were not collecting it intentionally. >> and, in fact, d

mr. chairman. thank you, senator coburn. i want to focus on the very broad area or issue of trust that mr. davidson raised, which i think goes to the core of much of what you do with the consent and acquiescence of consumers and most particularly the practice and the goal of building a wireless network maps, both apple and google are engaged in that business activity, are you not? >> yes. >> in particular i want to ask some questions about the google wi-fi experience scandal from all three terms have been used to describe it. in particular, as you know and now we all know, for three years, google intercepted and collected bits of user information payload data, e-mails, passwords, browsing history, and personal information while driving around taking pictures of people's homes on the streets and the st. programs. the company first denied that it was collecting this information, did not? >> we did not know that we were. >> and then it denied that it was collecting it intentionally, is that true? >> i think we still believe we were not collecting it intentionally. >> and in fact, this persona

mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. omr. coburn: mr. president, firt i'd ask unanimous consent that the order for republican speakers include myself and senator blunt, and the orders for senators mccain and chambliss be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coburn: i'm pretty amused at one the senate's doing. we sit here with a $1.6 trillion deficit and we're running bills based on political philosophy rather than what the real problems are in front of our nation. oyou know why soil expensive today? it's because the dollar's on its back and oil's priced in dollars. and if you want the price of oil to go down -- like it has this week and the tail end of last week -- is you want the value of the dollar to go up because the world trades oil in dollars. why is the dollar down? the dollar's down because an incompetent congress continues to spend money that we don't have on things that we don't absolutely need. and if you want the dollar to improve in value, what you'd have to do is hold the congress accountable for doing wh

mr. coburn: thank you, madam president. and i would tell my colleague from delaware that he makes some very excellent points and very well said. i've spent a number of years, now almost seven, on the judiciary committee and my observations are painfully awarant to me about our process. goodwin liu is a stellar individual. there's no question about it. he's a stellar scholar. there's no question about it. but my observations have taught me, as we've voted and put judges on the appellate court and to the highest court, that what is said in testimony before the committee really doesn't bear out any impact on what happens once somebody becomes a judge. and my observation is, is people are who they are. i actually spent a significant time with goodwin liu. i think he's a genuine great american. the question, however, is not whether he's a stellar scholar, a stellar intellect or a great american. the question is, is do his beliefs match what the constitution requires of appellate judges and higher judges? and i've come to the con

mr. coburn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma is recognized. mr. inhofe: mr. president, first of all, let me just say that for starters, i -- i will be supporting the bill that we have today. it doesn't go far enough, though. what we ought to do is open up everything. i'm talking about the pa sirvetion the atlantic, the -- the pacific, the atlantic particular, the gulf, i know there are some reasons why they are confining it to the gulf in terms of this legislation. while i respect that, again, it doesn't go far enough. let me make one comment about yesterday's vote. i -- i think when people -- right now the single issue they have in terms of energy is the price of gas at the pumps. i know it isn't just m mine. thethey're all that way. yesterday's bill for was for a major tax increase on big oil. those are the five bifght oil companies, but nonetheless, you know, they -- and i hate to say this, but sometimes you walk on the floor with half-truths and get by with and it people will assume that that's true. and as much as i love my fellows on the oth

mr. coburn: thank you, madam president. and i would tell my colleague from delaware that he makes some very excellent points and very well said. i've spent a number of years, now almost seven, on the judiciary committee and my observations are painfully awarant to me about our process. goodwin liu is a stellar individual. there's no question about it. he's a stellar scholar. there's no question about it. but my observations have taught me, as we've voted and put judges on the appellate court and to the highest court, that what is said in testimony before the committee really doesn't bear out any impact on what happens once somebody becomes a judge. and my observation is, is people are who they are. i actually spent a significant time with goodwin liu. i think he's a genuine great american. the question, however, is not whether he's a stellar scholar, a stellar intellect or a great american. the question is, is do his beliefs match what the constitution requires of appellate judges and higher judges? and i've come to the con

i look forward to productive discussion and senator frank and, senator coburn, i thank you both. >> thank you again, mr. chairman, for this opportunity i want to express my pleasure working with the ranking member of this committee, senator coburn. thank you for your friendship and for working on these critical issues. before we turn to the business of today's hearing, i want to take a moment to explain where it think this -- what if the subcommittee is about and where we are heading. the subcommittee is about addressing a fundamental shift that we have seen in the last 40 or 50 years in who has our information and what they are doing with it. when i was growing up and people talk about protecting privacy, they talk about protecting it from the government. they talked about are unreasonable searches and seizures and about keeping the government out of our families and bedrooms. they talked about the government trying to keep tabs on the books i read and the rallies i attend. we still have to protect ourselves from government abuses and that is a big part of the digital privacy debate. we also have rela

coburn, blumenthal, sessions and cornyn. so senator franken, you are up next. >> thank you, madam chair. mr.pportunity speak to you in my office and read your writings. and i really believe you're one of the finest minds of your generation, and i hope that we as a nation can be lucky enough to have you as a jurist and a public servant. what i think is remarkable about your nomination is not its strength but its diversity of support. a lot of people mentioned ken starr -- ken starr's letter supporting your nomination, and i will get to that in a moment. but the one that caught my eye was a lengthy blog post that went up today from the university of minnesota professor, richard painter. this guy is a great law professor, and he is no liberal. he works to support the confirmation of john roberts and samuel alito, and served as president george w. bush's chief ethics officer. and anyone who has any doubt about your nomination should i think read this article. so, madam chair, with your permission, madam chair? with your permission i ask that article be entered into the record. [inaudible] >> i w

independent mont omplet in order to clarify a number of questions on this matter, senator coburn and i sent a followup questions. mr. cole's reply clarified that d.o.j., s.e.c. and -- and the new york state attorney general's office were aware of his practice of seeking input from a.i.g. and making modifications to the report. he indicated that the changes a.i.g. made were often factual changes such as a.i.g. employee names, dates of materials, and events. he also indicated that some of the changes requested by a.i.g. were included in a section of the report entitled quote, unquote, a.i.g. response. however, he said that quote, unquote, on a few occasions, a.i.g. would -- quote -- "suggest a stylistic change of phrasing in the analytical section of the report." he stated that while included the edits made by a.i.g., he -- quote -- "did not believe that a detail press taiftion this factual -- presentation of this factual review process was necessary to an understanding of each party's position." as a result, the report did not necessarily show which edits a.i.g. made that were incorporated. instead he said that thos

mrs. mccaskill: i've listened to the last couple of speakers, and while i certainly respect senator coburn's commitment to fiscal responsibility and he and i have worked together on a number of projects in that regard and have the same view of many of the spending habits around here, i've got to say i'm a little confused by the opposition to this legislation by my friends across the aisle. you know, we have two ways to spend money around here. one is through the appropriations process. the other is what i call tax goodies. and what these goodies are, they're called tax expenditures. what these do is they basically say to whatever group has successfully lobbied for them you're not going to have to pay all your taxes. so there's two ways that we deny the treasury money. one is by spending money. the other is by telling people you don't have to pay the money that the tax code says you owe. and -- and we put into the tax code special deals. now, many of the special deals are done because the case is made that they spur economic development or they spur some kind of activity in our country that w

mr. coburn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma is recognized. mr.inhofe: mr. president, first of all, let me just say that for starters, i -- i will be supporting the bill that we have today. it doesn't go far enough, though. what we ought to do is open up everything. i'm talking about the pa sirvetion the atlantic, the -- the pacific, the atlantic particular, the gulf, i know there are some reasons why they are confining it to the gulf in terms of this legislation. while i respect that, again, it doesn't go far enough. let me make one comment about yesterday's vote. i -- i think when people -- right now the single issue they have in terms of energy is the price of gas at the pumps. i know it isn't just m mine. thethey're all that way. yesterday's bill for was for a major tax increase on big oil. those are the five bifght oil companies, but nonetheless, you know, they -- and i hate to say this, but sometimes you walk on the floor with half-truths and get by with and it people will assume that that's true. and as much as i love my fellows on the othe