mr. lieberman? [inaudible] >> you can't get past the know for cap and trade in the first instance, and mr. rockwell will give you a pass on that question again. >> my advice in that area is it's not worth it. >> i would say that there's a myriad of places for it to go. i think frankly we need to allow the markets to operate and allow the utilities to make the appropriate choice and self. >> i think that money belongs in a technology agnostic guaranty program for whatever innovative technology gets it to secure clean energy. i think that nuclear might rise to the top of the list right now given what we've got, and it should win on its own merits. >> if you put it in a loan guarantee program and everybody makes the right decision as to what they do with the money they get, then it doesn't go out to anybody. might even be used to reduce the national debt. that's not a bad idea either. >> could i make one quick point? i think it's very interesting, and a lot of people don't know it. 50% of the electricit

mr. kerry: i divide it evenly between senator lieberman and senator feingold. mr. lieberman: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. lieberman: i thank the chair. i ask unanimous consent that my full statement be entered into the record as if read and i'll speak briefly. i rise to speak on behalf of of the nomination of harold koh. i speak from a real depth of personal spaoefrpbs with harold koh. i know him and have known him for years as a friend and a neighbor in new haven, connecticut. and based on that and all his professional work, there is no doubt in my mind that he is profoundly qualified to occupy this important position as legal advisor at the department of state. he's a brilliant scholar. he's one of america's foremost experts on international law. he actually is qualified to be the legal advisor to the secretary of state. he has a distinguished record of service in our government, having worked in both democratic and republican administrations, consistently won the highest regard from people across the political spectrum. harold koh wil

mr. lieberman, we will start with you and come across the table. if you could summarize in five or seven minutes? >> thank you. i am a senior policy analyst at the rowe institute at the heritage foundation. i would like to think the senate republican conference -- >> move the microphone a little closer to you. >> i would like to thank -- >> not move you. move the microphone. there you go. >> is this alright? -- i would like to thank the senate republican counsel for inviting me. i would like to speak to our analysis of the american clean energy insecurity -- security act of 2009. this is similar

mr. lieberman's comment. go ahead.it will come to me and then i will interrupt you. >> the public has never been the problem on this thing. the real problem is the darn industry itself who keeps bad mouthing their product. they keep saying we may want to build another plant, but we have to make it safer. we have to come up with some sort of answer to the waste problem. you do not hear that sort of stuff from the competitors of nuclear. i know that i have heard congressmaen say to scientists that they have to make the case. >> i am about to join in with senator bennett on the issue of yucca mountain. >> i just remembered when i wanted to say. it was triggered by one of your comments. i think maybe we should insert it here. you ask a question for which we did not give a definitive answer. if a terrorist were to break into an american plant, could he get ahold of something that could then be used as a terrorist weapon? it is my understanding that the answer to that question is no, that a terrorist could not get his hands

mr. lieberman's comment. go ahead. it will come to me and then i will interrupt you. >> the public has never been the problem on this thing. the real problem is the darn industry itself who keeps bad mouthing their product. they keep saying we may want to build another plant, but we have to make it safer. we have to come up with some sort of answer to the waste problem. you do not hear that sort of stuff from the competitors of nuclear. i know that i have heard congressmaen say to scientists congressmaen say to scientists that they have to make the case >> i am about to join in with senator bennett and you on the issue of yucca mountain.

mr. lieberman is a specialist in energy and environmental issues. he is a senior policy analyst at the heritage foundation. he is trained as a lawyer and an accountant, and he has testified before congress as well as appeared on programs on nbc, cbs, fox, cnbc, and msnbc, commentaries have been published in a major newspaper including the "washington times," "beat san diego tribune," the american -- "the american standard." mr. rockwell has been involved directly with nuclear power for 20 years. he started in 1943. he was in the elite task force at the atomic bomb project in tennessee. he became head of the radiation shield engineering group. then a navy captain hired him to work on the naval nuclear propulsion program, and he has a long list of accomplishments there. he is a fellow of the american nuclear society, recipient of the first lifetime contribution award, now known as the rockwell award, distinguished medals from the navy and u.s. atomic energy commission and a member of the national academy of engineers. he has written numerous books on

mr. lieberman, we will come across the table. if you could summarize in 5 or 7 minutes and we will start a dialogue. >> my name is dan lieberman, at the heritage foundation. i would like to thank the senate republican conference -- >> move the microphone closer to you. >> thank you for sending me the privilege of participating in today's hearing the double discuss the cost of the cats and trade approach addressing global warming at the heritage foundation's economic analysis of age are 204, the secure energy act. as you know, the house is considering this bill which is similar to but has more stringent targets and timetables last the cap and trade bill that was rejected last june. is clear that cats and trade is expensive and amounts to nothing more than an energy tax in disguise. if you sweep aside all the complexities of how cap and trade operates, and this is the nost convoluted attempt at economic planning this nation has ever attempted. the bottom line is that cap and trade works by raising the cost of energy high enough so

mr. lieberman? ? mr. rockwell? >> i would save from an energy security perspective, probably not true >> the market's only work if you let them behave like real markets. >> all right. going to the point that mr. guith made. let's assume that the government does produce cap and trade and it produces a significant amount of income to the government, would it make sense to have that income dedicated to the building of nuclear plants? >> [inaudible] >> you cannot get past the note for capt. trade. -- you cannot get past the no for cap and trade. >> i would say that there are a myriad of places for it to go. we need to allow the markets to operate. we need to allow utilities to make the choice themselves. >> i think the money belongs in the technology agnostic loan guarantee program to secure clean energy. i think nuclear might rise to the top of the list right now and that it should win on its own merits. >> if you put it in a loan guarantee program and everyone makes the right decision on what to do with the money the

mr. lieberman, i hope that you enjoy your first visit to the united states as your country's foreign minister and i look forward to continuing our conversation and working with you on these issues more in the future. >> mad secretary, i would like to say to you the people as a government of israel appreciate your consistent support of israel. very value your friendship greatly. we roecognize the many contributions you made personally even before you were a senator from new york. we thank you for your longstanding commitment to israel and strengthening the america american-israeli special relationship and friendship. i think that we have had a good discussion today covering a broad spectrum of regional and global issues. we also covered a wide range of important bilateral topics. mad secretary, i thank you for your very kind hospitality today and i look forward to our future friendly dialogue both in washington, d.c. and jerusalem. thank you. >> thank you. >> more lieberman, first, ambassad ambassador, the new ambassador to washington is talking about interesting proposals on settlements. coul

mr. lieberman? >> you are absolutely correct that affordable energy is very important. our model showed that higher energy costs river raised trout the economy. -- raise costs throughout the of economy. the whole theme, the whole purpose of capital in trade is to send a market signal. obviously if independent of that there are regulatory restrictions, that is not a market signal. conversely, as we have heard with natural gas stemming from the colorado school of mining, there is much more natural gas than we thought. that cannot be accessed, that is not going to happen anyway, regardless of the market signal that said it might encourage natural gas or nuclear power. it is absolutely vital that we make these energy sources available. that means streamlining regulatory barriers. >> senator alexander? >> thank you, senator bennett. this has been very helpful. i thank the four of you for your comments. mr. rockwell, you said you would speak from the engineering point of view. is it possible to build 100 new nuclear power plants of

mr. lieberman? >> what we saw in our model is that high energy costs reverberates under the economy and under the waxman-markey bill will be $9.4 trillion poorer in 2035 as a result of this bill. my concern with cap-and-trade is that many proponents of it don't even seem to believe in their own product. the whole theme, the whole purpose of cap-and-trade is to send a market signal but obviously if independent of that there are regulatory and legal restrictions on nuclear power, that's not a market signal. and conversely as we've heard with natural gas and the study from the colorado school of mines that finds we have much more natural gas than we -- than we thought, if that natural gas can't be accessed, that's not going to happen any way regardless of the market signal that sent that might encourage natural gas or nuclear power. it's absolutely vital that we make these energy sources available and that means streamlining or eliminating the regulatory barriers to any source of energy. >> senator ale

mr. king and senator joe lieberman were successful in adding a section to the 9/11 commission implementation act public law 110-53 which provides legal immunity to individuals who report terrorists or suspicious activity which they see on trains or planes to law enforcement. it has become a familiar refrain on fox news march 31, 2007 said, the peter king's legislative efforts were encouraging slamaphobia -- islamaphobia. it encouraged other john does who encounter suspicious activity to report it to authorities. care's fund something also a source of interest. a part of the financial link with holy land foundation, there is much unclear about whether and to what degree care is receiving financial contributions from foreign governments. in march of 2007, interview with the "chicago tribune," care's chicago executive director said, quote, neither care chapters nor the national office solicits or accepts money from any foreign government, end of quote. a january, 2007 open letter on care's website says they are, quote, proud to receive support of every individual whether muslim, christian, jewi

mr. chairman. >> thanks, senator mccain. senator lieberman. >> thanks to the three of you for your extraordinary service to our country, and congratulations on these nominations. i want to focus on afghanistan for most of my questions, and say that in nominating admiral stavridis and general mcchrystal to the positions were going to -- the positions you are going to cut the president has put in place not just a start team but an all-star team. you now, general mcchrystal heading our operations, as you describe in afghanistan, with general rodriguez -- that together with the diplomatic and non-military effort there with ambassador holbrooke, ambassador i can very going into -- the ambassador going into kabul with a cruel include several state department personnel -- with a crew that will include several state department personnel -- we are concentrating our strengths because it is important to win in afghanistan. general mcchrystal, do you believe this is a winnable war do you believe this is a winnable war in afghanistan? >> i believe it is w

mr. chairman. i've had a chance to consult with senator lieberman and with senator graham, and they do not feel anything short of a signed scuteive order or the senate amendmentment would be sufficient. so i just wanted to say to the chairman that it is my intention to make the motion that i was planning to make earlier. would you like for me to do that now and have debate or how would you like to handle that? i would be happy to yield to the republican leader if he desires to go forward. >> would the chairman like me to make the motion? i move the senate insist on its amendment, senate section 1305, which as we all know from previous discussions is related to the detainee photograph records protection. >> mr. chairman, of course i would like to thank you and through you the conferees for your patience. we tried our best to expedite it and i think we've done a pretty good job. mr. chairman, i have before me a letter from the white house dated june 11, e 2009 addressed to chairman obee and to me. and it says the following. i am writing to urge you to oppose the mcconnell amendment, which is being offered

mr. durbin: madam president, on behalf of senator lieberman, i ask unanimous consent not withstanding rule 22, that i be permitted to call up amendment number 1290 and that the amendment be modified with the changes at the desk, that once this modification is made, that amendment 1256 be withdrawn. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: i object. i make a point of order -- prosecutes -- the presiding officer: objection is heard. the point of order is well taken. the amendment falls. a senator: thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the substitute amendment is adopted. mr. dodd: the pending matter will be a vote at 12:30, in a couple of minutes, the cloture motion. is that correct? the presiding officer: the senator is correct. mr. dodd: let me just say we'll go to the vote right away. again, i appreciate the comments of my friend from wyoming. i would like the record to reflect that there were no objections on this side to any of the amendments being offered that were germane amendments. my colleague from wyoming is absolutely correct. i

mr. president, the resolution that i, on behalf of myself, senator lieberman, and others, is exactly the same as has been introduced by congressman berman and pence in the house of representatives. it's the exact same resolution, expresses support for all iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and rule of law, and for other purposes. the resolution expresses its support for all iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law. it condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators by the government of iran and progovernment militias as well as the ongoing government suppression of independent electronic communication through interference with the internet and cell phones and affirms the universality and the importance of democratic elections. basically, mr. president, what this is is a resolution that has been introduced in both houses which affirms america's fundamental respect and commitment to human rights to people no matter where they reside in the world. it's unfortunate in a way that th

mr. president, this morning one of our biparartisan breakfasts occurred which we have here every so often. senator lieberman and i and other senators organize this. there were 18 senators there. the presiding officer is often a participant in those meetings. we talked about health care. and one of the things we said, as we listened to the chairman and ranking members of the finance committee and other senior members, is that we agree on about 80% of what needs to be done. but one of the areas where we don't agree is cost. and another area is whether a so-called government-run insurance option will lead to a washington takeover of health care. a lot of us are feeling like we've had about enough washington take overs. our banks, our insurance companies, our student loans, our car companies, even our farm ponds. and now health care would be too much. that's not the best way to extend coverage to low-income americans who need it. the chairman of the finance committee indicated that his bill would be paid for, but on the health and education committee on which i serve, that's not the case. the bill's not even fi

mr. mccain: the war bill including a cash for chunkers incentive will eliminate language to keep photos of detainee abuse during the bush administration confidential. madam president, the graham-lieberman amendment that would classify these photos was accepted by voice vote. in other words, any senator who wanted to object or vote against it could have called for it, instead it was unanimously adopted. now, according to the "roll call" article i quoted, that provision will be removed from the emergency supplemental. and according to that article -- quote -- "one senior democratic aide said that lieberman and graham's threat to hold up the supplemental indefinitely unless their provision was included was unlikely to last and predicted that defense secretary robert gates would likely pressure the two defense hawks to relent so funding for the war wouldn't run out." i think this democratic aide highly underestimates senator lieberman, senator graham and the rest of us. madam president, i had a conversation with general petraeus just the day before yesterday and i believe those conversations are confidential and i asked his -- his agreement to -- quote -- "if these photos are released, it

on the lieberman-graham amendment and that the administration will make sure that these photos will never see light of day if congress fails to act, i will lift my hold. and i yield. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. a senator: when the founding fathers wrote the constitution and gave us our government, they did so out of a deep distrust of the power of government coming out of their experience with king george. and they created a government that limits the use of power deliberately setting up a system of checks and balances, a doctrine of separation of powers and so on with which we're all familiar. mr. bennett: out of that americans have become used to the idea that there are limits on governmental power. and one of the concerns that i hear when i visit with my constituents in utah is that they are afraid there are now no limits on government power. or at least there is certainly not enough limits on government power. i'm asked: where does it stop? the government can take over insurance companies. the government can take over financial institutions. the government can take over an automobile company. the government can dictate who gets to