mr. norton here. people who are in office now ran for office knowing the rules of the game.y, when you ran into one, you knew you were going to get paid $500 a month. the fairest way to do this is to say, if you run again, you get it. but right now, you know what you are signing up for. to grant this in the middle of the term, i don't favthink it is just. i have a number of questions articulate it, but i can talk more about that next week. >> we will have some opportunity for comments next week. i did not get a copy of the amendment before coming to this meeting. supervisor kim: our office will definitely call the department of elections and hopefully, someone from sfpuc about the cost of the collection if we were to have only one city measure on the ballot. and the likelihood of the stake being able to pay back the deficit. just quickly, in response, there is a time that the board of supervisors would consider part- time employment. i know that it applied to the existing supervisors. they know how many hours we worked. regardless of how much we are paid. we do it because of

commissioner norton: mr. martin, a kind of wanted to get your response -- i kind of wanted to get your response. i am looking at the auditors' report. the line saying from the auditor that there is substantial doubt about the station's ability to continue is a concern. i wonder if you can respond to that and give your response to that statement. >> i think we have a great opportunity? this question does come from a couple of years. we have been in a position where we go on the air, we ask listeners for support, and from that have been able to run a very successful operation. the situation has changed to where that is not adequate to do what we need to do to serve this community. in the past year, we have been working on developing relationships with the major donors, at being in a position to identify foundations as their copper's comeback and they are in a position to take on grants. -- as their coffers come back and they are in a position to take on grants. the work we are already doing -- when it comes to

i think mrs. norton asked to testify, and if she wanted to be the democrat witness, that would have been all right. >> uh-huh, but the author of the bill who i presume is here today, we're in the first few week of the hearing, of the 112th session, and this is a major piece of legislation, and he's not here. >> mr. conyers, the author made the decision not to testify. we don't know the reasons. >> okay. well, let me ask ms. ruse this question. the title of this bill is no taxpayer funding for abortion act. do you know of any federal funding for abortion that goes on in this country presently? >> the potential funding of abortion and the potential subsidies of abortion are numerous. the debates last fall over the birth amendment opening up military facilities for abortions to be done then is impacted by hr3. that's still an open question. we may see a reversal under that policy, and under the clinton administration, that was reversed and opened up to elective abortions on military hospitalsment -- hospita

i think mrs. norton asked to testify, and if she wanted to be the democrat witness, that would have been all right. >> uh-huh, but the author of the bill who i presume is here today, we're in the first few week of the hearing, of the 112th session, and this is a major piece of legislation, and he's not here. >> mr. conyers, the author made the decision not to testify. we don't know the reasons. >> okay. well, let me ask ms. ruse this question. the title of this bill is no taxpayer funding for abortion act. do you know of any federal funding for abortion that goes on in this country presently? >> the potential funding of abortion and the potential subsidies of abortion are numerous. the debates last fall over the birth amendment opening up military facilities for abortions to be done then is impacted by hr3. that's still an open question. we may see a reversal under that policy, and under the clinton administration, that was reversed and opened up to elective abortions on military hospitalsment -- hospita

i think mrs. norton asked to testify, and if she wanted to be the democrat witness, that would have been all right. >> uh-huh, but the author of the bill who i presume is here today, we're in the first few week of the hearing, of the 112th session, and this is a major piece of legislation, and he's not here. >> mr. conyers, the author made the decision not to testify. we don't know the reasons. >> okay. well, let me ask ms. ruse this question. the title of this bill is no taxpayer funding for abortion act. do you know of any federal funding for abortion that goes on in this country presently? >> the potential funding of abortion and the potential subsidies of abortion are numerous. the debates last fall over the birth amendment opening up military facilities for abortions to be done then is impacted by hr3. that's still an open question. we may see a reversal under that policy, and under the clinton administration, that was reversed and opened up to elective abortions on military hospitalsment -- hospita

i think mrs. norton asked to testify, and if she wanted to be the democrat witness, that would have been all right. >> uh-huh, but the author of the bill who i presume is here today, we're in the first few week of the hearing, of the 112th session, and this is a major piece of legislation, and he's not here. >> mr. conyers, the author made the decision not to testify. we don't know the reasons. >> okay. well, let me ask ms. ruse this question. the title of this bill is no taxpayer funding for abortion act. do you know of any federal funding for abortion that goes on in this country presently? >> the potential funding of abortion and the potential subsidies of abortion are numerous. the debates last fall over the birth amendment opening up military facilities for abortions to be done then is impacted by hr3. that's still an open question. we may see a reversal under that policy, and under the clinton administration, that was reversed and opened up to elective abortions on military hospitalsment -- hospita

. >> john joining us from -- from newark, new jersey, with richard norton smith. caller: mr. smith, nancy reagan had a thing for the children where she would say "just say no " to drugs. i want to hear your view point on iran contra with the drug problem in compton, california, during the reagan administration. guest: i'm not sure of the two issues. iran contra is a great illustration. scholars will be dividing iran contra for years to come. i think it was a combination of neglect and wishful thinking. i think there was a human desire on the part of ronald reagan's part to try to rescue americans that were not only being held hostage but were brutalized by their cap torse in the middle east. that said, the nir ower debate over -- the narrower debate over the leg at of iran contra and more specifically whether the president was aware of the illegal galt is something that will go on for a long time. i saw a piece that quotes catherine weinberger's diaries, in which the president seems to acknowledge the fact that people can accept the illegality of this, what they couldn't acce

. >> john joining us from -- from newark, new jersey, with richard norton smith. caller: mr.th, nancy reagan had a thing for the children where she would say "just say no " to drugs. i want to hear your view point on iran contra with the drug problem in compton, california, during the reagan administration. guest: i'm not sure of the two issues. iran contra is a great illustration. scholars will be dividing iran contra for years to come. i think it was a combination of neglect and wishful thinking. i think there was a human desire on the part of ronald reagan's part to try to rescue americans that were not only being held hostage but were brutalized by their cap torse in the middle east. that said, the nir ower debate over -- the narrower debate over the leg at of iran contra and more specifically whether the president was aware of the illegal galt is something that will go on for a long time. i saw a piece that quotes catherine weinberger's diaries, in which the president seems to acknowledge the fact that people can accept the illegality of this, what they couldn't accept i

mr. cummings: an additional 30 seconds. ms. norton: i'm grateful. the majority has taken regulation, a subject where there is a basis for areas of consensus and polarized it, they have broken their promises on jobs. look, no jobs bill. and reducing federal power by trying to literally usurp power from a local jurisdiction and dictate to that local jurisdiction from the federal government what it should be doing. i thank the gentleman for yielding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. southerland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes from florida. mr. southerland: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. southerland: i thank the gentleman from california for yielding me time. i rise today in support of this resolution and i commend the gentleman from maryland, the minority leader, for rising in support

norton smith. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. dodaro, i would like to ask you a question that i'm sure perplexed members of this committee. and certainly the public. it has to do with very large contractors whose abuse or poor performance is so severe that they are brought to this committee or there's headlines on them and i want to know -- i want to describe the responses of federal agencies in awarding them contracts again. for example, if you did some -- if you did the functional equivalent of what some of these contractors have done is an employee, you'd be out the door and nobody would ever hire you again. but let me give you a couple of examples. kbr, doing work in iraq for department of defense, is so faulty on the maintenance of electrical equipment that deaths resulted including dozens of deaths of american soldiers. but then they awards kbr a $2.8 billion contract to provide support services, additional support services, for our troops in iraq. or let's take the most notorious perhaps black water and private security be

norton for five minutes. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. mr. dodaro i would like to ask you a question that is perplexed members of this committee. and certainly the public. it has to do with very large, sometimes huge contractors whose abuses or poor performance is so severe that they are brought before this committee or their headlines on them and i want to know, i want to describe the response of federal agencies in awarding them contracts again. for example, if you did equipment of what some of these contractors have done as an employee, you would be out the door and nobody would ever hire you again it would seem that let me give you a couple of examples. kbr did work in iraq or the department of defense. it was so faulty on the maintenance and the electrical equipment that death resulted, including dozens of deaths of american soldiers. it awards kbr at $2.8 billion contract to provide support services, additional support services for our troops in iraq. let's take -- perhaps blackwater and private security because that has been a headline

norton smith. during that discussion you will see the video of mr. reagan over the years to give you a flavor of what to expect for tomorrow. this is from 1964. >> no government voluntarily reduces itself in size so government's once launched never disappear. actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth. federal employees number 2.5 million. and federal state and local, one out of six of the nation's workforce employed by government. these proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safe guards. how many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant, they can impose a fine without a formal hearing let alone a trial by jury and they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. host: and just a little bit of what to expect, the speech about the size of government tomorrow on our program. for now, we're taking the idea or at least an idea given to us by sara palin last night a

norton: five minutes to the gentleman from from new york, mr. serrano. mr. serrano: i thank you for the time. and i congratulate you on continuing to be the representative that you are for the district of columbia. let me in the short time be brief and to the point. this may be one of the least known issues in the united states, the whole issue of how congress treats the district of columbia. understood that there are constitutional provisions. but constitutional provisions for congress to oversee the district of columbia does not mean that you should mistreat the district of columbia. and i think it's important to note something that happened when i became chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the district of columbia and that is i took it very personal. you see, like so many new yorkers, i was not born in new york. i was born in puerto rico. and i was raised in new york and i represent the bronx in congress. puerto rico, as some may know, everyone should know, is a territory of the united states, some would say a colonny of the united states. so the o

mr. chairman i ask unanimous consent request -- i'm sorry. i ask unanimous consent to place into the record testimony submitted by our colleague the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, miss norton. the gentlewoman be requested that she be presented testimony at this hearing because there's a provision in the bill that specifically pertains to her district, the district of columbia and to no other who we are told the chairman of the full committee has denied that request. i'm sorry. i regret she was denied the permission to testify. and i hope that this has been a misunderstanding and that the future members of congress will as is the practice when i was chairman of the subcommittee would be permitted on request to testify as witnesses especially if there's something to do specifically with their own district. and i ask unanimous consent to place her statement and my statement in the record. >> without objection, your statement and hers will be placed in the record. >> thank you. >> just to clarify the issue, mr. nadler, chairman smith has decided that as a general policy the judiciary committee and its subcommittees will only have one panel of witnesses for each hearing and tha