mr. grassley: can i have the floor? mr. reid: i would ask consent that his remarks not appear interrupted and that he resume the floor when senator mcconnell and i finish. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, senator mcconnell and i have just finished a meeting. we're making really good progress on being able to handle the issues that everyone knows are outstanding. we're not there yet, but we're very, very close. there will be votes tomorrow. there could be votes this afternoon also. i would also say, because this is a question that people will ask, the house is going to pass their bill around 3:00. that is the omnibus. around 3:00. the time is not always exact. there's a ruling from this white house, its predecessors that if one house passes a spending bill as we are doing here, and there's a presumption it will pass in the other body, the time is extended for 24 hours. so everyone doesn't have to worry about the government closing tonight. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, let me echo the remark

mr. grassley: okay. mr. president, th the cornerstoe of congress's anlt to effectively oversue the federal government is the free and open access to information. in other words, congressional oversight, what i just was talking about in regards to "fast and furious." while on another investigation 231 days ago on april 27, i made a very simple request: i requested that the federal communication commission turn over communications regarding its controversial approval of light-squared project. light-squared is a company owned by a hedge fund called harbinger capital partners that is seeking f.c.c. approval to use its satellite spectrum to build tear resterrestrial network. light scared has already spent millions of dollars on lobbyists and made large political donations. the problem is that light-squared's signals would, according to federal government tests, cause massive interference with global positioning systems -- or more commonly referred to as g.p.s. g.p.s., as you know, is a critical tool for everythin

mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from iowa is recognized. mr. grassley: thank you, mr. president. the supreme court in a few months will be addressing four issues in connection with the constitutionality of the obama health care law. previously, i spoke about the unconstitutionality of the individual mandate. today i want to discuss the second issue of four issues: how much of the law must be struck down if the court finds the individual mandate to be unconstitutional? this legal question is called severallability. when a court rules that a law is unconstitutional, it can strike down only those parts that it considers unconstitutional, it can strike down the parts that are intertwined with the unconstitutional provision, or it can strike down the whole l law. its action will depend -- will depend upon whether the remainder of the law can function as congress intended when it passed it. there are rules governing severalability. normally when only parts of the law are held to be unconstitutional, only those parts of the law are struck down by the c

mr. grassley: the president announced mr. eisen's nomination to be ambassador to the czech republic on june 28, 2010. on september 20, 2010, i provided public notice of my intention to object to the nomination. in other words, as i always do when i put a hold on something, a bill or nomination, i put a reason in the congressional record so that everybody knows that it's me, i'm not a secret holds guy. the reason for my objection is not related to the substance of his duty as ambassador. i objected to his nomination because of the way mr. eisen handled the controversial firing of gerald walpen and the congressional inquiry into that firing. mr. walpen was the inspector general at the americorps. mr. eisen was at the white house counsel's office at the time. any effort to undermine inspectors general raises serious concerns with me. an inspector general that does his or her job runs the risk of losing friends at any agency as well as maybe the white house. but congress must not sit idly by when an inspector general is removed i

mr. grassley: mr. president and members of the senate, there currently is is no cap at all on the amount that taxpayers will reimburse contractor employees for compensation except for just a handful of executives, and that limit is already too high at $693,951. and that's far above what the chief executive of the united states government gets paid at $400,000 a year. so that's why we would cap it at no more than what the president can get. and i presume that the senator from michigan is aware of that and willing to help us on that process by adopting this amendment. mr. levin: the senator from california -- mr. mccain: the senator from california yield for pa question. where would the congressional salaries and staff salaries fit on that? mrs. boxer: that's a good question. we would be well below, well below. we'd be about here. mr. mccain: thank you. mr. levin: i am very much aware of what he referred to, senator grassley's question. mrs. boxer: senator, just in conclusion, do the senator from iowa an

mr. grassley: there's no reason to change the rules in the middle of the game. i was relying on the attorney general and other officials at the department to honor their agreement. apparently that's not going to happen. fortunately, chairman issa has the ability to require the witness to appear via subpoena. iif they refuse to appear voluntarily yo under the condits that the department previously agreed to with me. i'm confident le do that if it becomes -- he will do that if it becomes necessary and i will take whatever steps i have to here in the senate to encourage the department to reconsider and stick to its original agreement. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware is recognized. mr. carper: mr. president, i'm delighted to stand before you on this delaware day 2011. this is the anniversary of the day where on december 7,1787, delaware became the first state to ratify the constitution. for one whole week, delaware was the entire united states of america. we opened things up and let in pennsylvania and ne

mr. grassley: thank you very much, mr. president. it seems the president of the united states has finally acknowledged that the economy is in a terrible state, and there's really nothing that he can do about it. so rather than offer new ideas to grow the economy, the president has now shifted into blame mode. i recognize that the slow economic growth and high levels of employment are having a significant impact on the middle class but rather than listen to political rhetoric and witness finger pointing by president obama, the unemployed would likely prefer ideas, ideas on how to turn this economy around. i presume president obama aspired to lead the country because he felt he had the vision and the ability to lead us to a more prosperous nation. beyond the vision, a president also needs a plan. and the leadership to put that vision into place. where is that leadership? during the past three years, we witnessed president obama's theory on economic stimulus. we saw a massive expansion of government and deficit spending. more than $800

mr. grassley: i ask the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. grassley: soon we will be taking up the nomination of caitlin halligan to the d.c. district court. i oppose the nomination, so this is why the nomination should not be confirmed. nominations to the d.c. circuit deserve special scrutiny. the court of appeals d.c. court hears cases affecting all americans. this court frequently is the last stop for cases involving federal statutes and regulations. many view this court as second in importance only to our supreme court. as we all know, judges who sit on the d.c. circuit are frequently considered for the supreme court. so there's a lot at stake with any nominee appointed to the circuit court, d.c. circuit. ms. halligan has an activist record. there are a additional concerns regarding her judicial philosophy and her approach to interpreting the constitution. the second amendment, for instance, in 2003 ms. halligan gave a speech where she discussed her role in suing gun manufacturers for criminal acts committed with handguns. at the time, co

mr. grassley: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. casey: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: mr. president, i'd ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: mr. president, i first rise to ask consent to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i'm here to speak about legislation that i'm introducing today that will prevent a huge tax hike from hitting working families across america and in pennsylvania. as the clock continues to tick down, it is imperative that we come together, democrats and republicans, members of both parties and both chambers, and pass legislation to provide more take-home pay by cutting the payroll tax as we did in 2010. the legislation that i'm introducing is a compromise offer designed to bridge the gap and to get at least 60 votes here in the united states senate. the legislation is fully paid for and includes measures that have receiv

mr. grassley: today the senate is expected to confirm two adish gentlewoman niece. with these votes we will have confirmed 61 article 3 nominees this congress. i want to note in the first session of the 112th congress we've now confirmed more than during the entire 111th congress, so i think we can declare real progress over 72% of president obama's judicial nominees have been confirmed. despite this record of confirmations, we continue to hear complaints about the way that this president's nominees are being treated. so i'd point out that in only six sessions of congress in the last 30 years have more nominees been confirmed in a single session. furthermore, given the cooperation we have shown, i'm disappointed that the senate majority wants to turn to a controversial nomination next rather than continue on the path of cooperative confirmations. the senate majority leader has scheduled a cloture vote for tomorrow on the nomination of caitlin halligan to be circuit judge for the district of columbia circuit. i will speak more about the merits of that nomination tues

mr. grassley, and facebook comments as well. they have some questions for you.t to calls, what is the mood of the electorate this time around? what are they thinking, feeling, and what are they looking for in those kits? >> considering that the economy is in such bad shape and considering the fact that most republicans feel that president obama is not doing as well as he could, i am not surprised that social issues have been put to the background and other issues foremost. consequently, that is one of the reasons why we have not had the social conservatives really coalescing around one candidates. they are splitting among three or four candidates. when huckabee was running three or four years ago, they were pretty much solidly behind him. host: we know you don't endorse, but who do you like? what are you hearing that you like? can you compare and contrast some of the candidates for us? guest: i think it would be easier for me to say that one aspect of one opponent -- i mean one aspect of one candidate is about the only one where i find total disagreement, and th

mr. chairman. and thank you, witnesses. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you very much, senator grassley. senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and, first of all, my thanks to our chairman, senator kohl, for having this very important hearing and for senator grassley's continuing investigation into this issue which has been very, important. overuse of antipsychotics, as i don't need to tell the two witnesses and probably most of the people who are attending today, is a form of elder abuse, plain and simple. it's a form of abuse of people who often have no idea what is happening and even their families may not have a clear or informed idea about how these drugs are prescribed and applied. and it occurs not just in an occasional or isolated case, but as a routine in pattern and practice as some of the statistics show. i don't know how many of them have been cited here, but 83% of claims for use of these antipsychotics to medicare were associated with off-label conditions like dementia. 51% of medicare claims for these drugs were erroneous and, of course, millions of dollars wasted.

mr. issa has sent and senator grassley has sent i have read. >> let me say on july 12, 201 the e-mails i >> i might not have read the attachments. >> shannon: that was congressman trent frank's questioning attorney general eric holder regarding operation fast and furious. we h heard from several lawmakers calling for the attorney general's resign 86. now, they are working to pass a resolution saying publicly they have no confidence in holder. joining us, republican trent frank of arizona. thank you for joining us today. >> thank you. >> shannon: the attorney general has testified now a number of times on capitol hill about operation fast and furious. have you gotten the answers you are looking for? >> well, shannon, we really haven't. you know, to say this this attorney general has been less than candid is probably the kindest phraseology i could possibly use. a lot of times people simply don't understand what the whole term fast and furious really entails but this was a project on the part of this administration to force gun dealers to coerce them into selling thousands of high powered

mr. weitz did not say fast and furious in his letter to senator grassley. >> i just want to be careful. >> did lanny breuer nknow? >> he had engaged in gun walking in the wide receiver operation. >> soviets would be yes, that lanny brewer knew that any state that atf makes any ever to interdict guns and not allow them to go to mexico, he knew that state and would have been false? >> he said he made a mistake in not connecting that which he knew about wide receiver and did not apply that knowledge to what happened in february. >> what about jason wine stain and james trustee -- jason weinstein? in arizona,t ausa's these are senior doj officials, and i cannot believe that they just learned recently that a demonstrably false letter had been mailed to a member of congress. why not correct it the moment he realized it was wrong? >> they admit that they made mistakes with regard to what the level of knowledge was and what they should have done in the preparation of the letter. they relied on people who they thought had the best knowledge in arizona and did not bring into their calculation infor

mr. chairman. and thank you, witnesses. >> sure. >> thank you very much, senator grassley. senator bloomen thal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first of all, my thanks to our chairman, senator kohl, for having this very important hearing and for senator grassley's continuing investigation into this issue which has been very, very important. overusage of antipsychotics as i don't need to tell the two witnesses and probably most of the people who are attending today is a form of elder abuse, plain and simple. it's a form of abuse of people who often have no idea what is happening and maybe their families may not have a clear or informed idea about how these drugs are prescribed and applied. but it's a routine pattern and practice as some of the statistics show i don't know how many of them have been cited here but 83% of claims for use of these antipsychotics to medicare were associated with off-label conditions like dementia 51% of medicare claims for these drugs were erroneous of dollars were wasted. so the question is, at the outset, if there is off-label marketing, which is plainly a violation of current law, as op

mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. senator grassley. >> yes. thank you, director mueller, for coming. my first question is about the letter authorizing targeted killing of anwar al-awlaki and because, and another u.s. citizen. the reason i ask this question is i'm getting a lot of mail from iowans wanting to know the authority for the united states to take that action. and i assume this letter gives that authority. do you support congress having a copy of that letter? >> it really is not my, sir, it's not my role. it is -- whatever may have been developed would be developed by the department of justice. we would not have played a role in it. some of our information may have been used if there was such a finding, but i ask that you perhaps direct that to the department of justice. >> the department of justice settled a civil lawsuit for dr. hatfield for violation of privacy act for leaking details of the investigation. it cost the taxpayers $6 million in settlement. i've repeatedly asked both the department as well as your agency to identify the individuals who leaked information on th

then your underlings on february 4, the assistant responded to senator grassley and that letter ended up being withdrawn. as mrissa has said, lying to congress is a federal felony. i don't want to say that you have committed a felony, mr. attorney general, but obviously there have been statements so misleading that a letter had to be withdrawn. i think that some heads should roll, and i do agree with senator grassley that the assistant attorney general for the criminal division should be fired, and i know that that decision is not yours, but it is the president's, but i think that merely getting the head of the a.t.f. director at the time is not sufficient since it's obvious that there was now within the justice department. what are you going to do to clean up this mess? >> let me make something clear. nobody in the justice department has lied. >> why was the letter withdrawn? >> the letter was withdrawn because there was information in there that was inaccurate. the justice department letter of -- >> tell me what is the difference between lying and misleading congress in this context. >> well, if you want to

you are underlings on february 4 responded to senator grassley, denying that the atf had walked bonds. that letter ended up being withdrawn. as mr. issa has said, lying to congress is a federal felony. i don't want to say that you have committed a felony, mr. attorney general, but obviously there have been statements so misleading that a letter had to be withdrawn. i think that some heads should roll, and i agree with senator grassley that assistant attorney general for the criminal division should be fired. i know that decision is not yours, but it is the president's. i think merely getting the head of the atf director at the time is not sufficient, since it is obvious that there was knowledge within the justice department. what are you going to do to clean up this mess? >> first, let me make something very clear. in response to an assertion you made or hinted at, nobody in the justice department has lied. >> why was the letter withdrawn? >> there was information in there that was inaccurate. the justice department letter of february -- >> tell me what is the difference between lying and misleading congress in this context? >>

mr. president want to begin by thanking the ranking member of the judiciary committee's senator grassley. his service on the committee has been a w champion of theven limited government that is proving himself a strong advocate of constitutional government. of others. 47 to be exact. earlier today senator cornyn highlighted diminishably the threat that our debt poses to the liberty and prosperity of all of american citizens and though he has not spoken yet i know in advance of my colleague from utah, senator mike lee with whom i worked closely in drafting s.j. res. 10 will deliver powerful remarks in support of his amendment -- or this 578d, excuse me, and about the importance of restoring meaningful limits on the power of the federal government. mr. president, today we are engaged in an historic debate. you might not know it from the amount of time dedicated to the subject, but i am confident when the history of our country is written today will be marked as a turning point. today was the day every republican in the senate stood up for a strong balanced budget amendment that will begin t

grassley called for holder's criminal chief brewer to resign. >> he has failed to do his job of ensuring the government operate property including holding people accountable. because of that mrrican people that the justice department isn't serious about being honest. >> so that will be just one of the topics that holder will have to answer today. a discussion about whether his criminal division chief is fit to serve him in that capacity. >> what other questions does he face? >> a big one will be who exactly provided false information to congress. in a letter from the justice department when the scandal first broke and denied any gun-walking had occurred and late last week the justice department turned over more than a thousand pages of e-mails and subpoenaed documents that the justice department played a role in drafting in niche letter to congress. >> some officials -- they originally discussed using the gun-walking case to press for new gun regulations? >> that's right. new e-mails we have add to documentation we already had that showed government officials never planned to reveal their role in letting the guns fall into hands of mexican drug cartels. the planned result to

grassley. >> i give a short statement, then a couple of questions for mr. corzine. you of all the best repeatedly about where the money went and whether you authorize the transfer of hong the segregated customer accounts. i share -- transfer upon the segregated customer accounts. i am baffled the top three executives can not answer basic questions about what happened to the customer's money. you're supposed lack of knowledge as to what happened inside the walls of mf global it is alarming. i want answered, and iowa farmer's wants -- want answers. i'm not going to belabor the point since it is apparent none of you are able or willing to offer an explanation today. i guess we will have to see what we learn through the ongoing investigation and subsequent proceedings. now, mr. corzine, i have some questions regarding some of the interactions with regulators of the time of mf global. it has been reported that you were not required to retake your series 7 where you're serious 24 exams before assuming your role with mf global and best -- mf global. investment professional

grassley. i take seriously their -- >> it's hard for me to -- anyway, let me skip to ask you one more question here. mr. isa also asked if i had given all the pertinent emails here and noticed none of them had your name on them. none of them. and this probably is one of the most significant scandals facing your tenure over the justice department. and not one email, general, was from you? not one of them? >> well, we have produced a really substantial stuff around the january 4, letter. but with regard to document thoose go dwhrooned from that time on, those materials have not produced them. >> so the answer to his question would have been no that you hadn't given him all the pertinent emails it's just very simple in my mivende that either if there are no emails from you that had been given to mr. isa, we're left with three options. either it's not that big a deal to you, which i know it is or you for some reason for particular reasons that you don't write emails, because you don't want for there to be a record or you just won't give us what we asked for. >> well we have always produced materials and ac

grassley called for holder's criminal chief to resign. >> he has failed to do his job of insuring that the government operating property including holding people accountable. because of that, mrle that the justice department isn't serious about being honest. >> brewer has said he didn't teld tell holder when he learned aff guns were walked into the hands of the drug cartels and he wish he had. a spokesman says brewer acknowledged his mistake and that holder still has confidence in the head of his criminal division chief and therefore that implies there's no reason for him to resign despite the call from the senator charles grassley for him to step down. >> what other questions does he face, potentially? >> a big one is who exactly provided false information to congress in a letter from the justice department when the gunwalker scandal first broke. it denied any gunwalking occurred. and late last week the justice department turned over 1,000 pages of e-mail subpoenaed documents to shed new light on who the justice department played a role in drafting the initial letter to congress. >> meanwhile, you investigation said officials used the gunwalking case to push for new gun regu

whitehouse, senator durbin, senator lee, senator grassley, senator sessions and myself that there is a big interest in this, and i am one to believe mr. goodstein pointed out this would be best if the supreme court made the decision. hopefully they are watching c-span and they see all of us here in the arguments instead of having it legislative but one of the reasons that we are focused as senator specter point about it has been 25 years and waiting. the idea is likely to senator sessions talked about the importance of the dignity of the court and the majesty of the court which i think we all can understand. on the other hand, we want other people to be able to see that besides the 250 people that are crammed into a room to watch the people that justice katie's home state should be able to tune in and watch this and watch important issues of the data i believe while senator sessions pointed out we have a lot of things going on. a lot of those things and that in the supreme court in one way or another, and i think that is what this is about giving it understanding that we want to respect the decision making process not given to the pr

mr. president, this is a bipartisan piece of legislation, extremely importa important. it's senator leahy and senator grassley have worked very hard to get this to the floor. it's, i repeat, it's bipartisan. i hope we can have a productive couple of days and pass this and move on to other matters. note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: