portman proposes amendment in mnumber 2012. mr. reid: i ask for the yeas and nays on that amendment just reported. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. there is. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. reid: i have a second-degree amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. reid, for mr. toomey, proposes amendment numbered 2013 to amendment number 2012. mr. reid: i have an amendment to the underlying bill, which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. reid, proposes an amendment numbered 14 to the language -- numbered 2014 to the language proposed to be strick tongue the substitute. mr. reid: i ask for the yeas and nays on that amendment that was just reported. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. there is. the yeas and nays are order. mr. reid: i have a second-degree amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the

and so the more people like that, the more rob portmans who come out and say that they -- that they have gay people in their lives who are very close to them, nothing has changed, and that they're changing their positions, which i think a lot of people expect politicians to change their minds on all sorts of issues, but when it is on an issue, something as fundamental as sexuality or you throw in any of the other sort of core issues, abortion rights, a lot of immigration is a core issue, but on something like this, where there has been so much antagonism and mean spiritedness, to see someone, to see more than just rob portman but folks all over the political spectrum saying, hey, this is a similar issue of our time and i support it and i'm going to push for it, it is fantastic. >> it takes the personal experience and sometimes that's frustrating. i remember when senator strom thurmond came out in favor of stem cell research because he had a child who was diabetic. so the personal experience -- >> it does fare and inform. i'll put you on the spot like i put gregory on the spot, do you thi

i will say that senator portman is tight. he will be here a little bit late and he will have to leave early. unfortunately, it's not because of the importance of this issue. it is because we've got a defense authorization bill on the floor and that's giving a lot of folks who wanted to be here today away, but we will do our best to get as much good information as we can on the record as we proceed through this so that they will have the ability to make good decisions with good information as those decisions arise. from the significant disclosures of classified information to the tragedy of the washington naval yard, it is abundantly clear to the american people that the federal government is failing to properly vet the individuals who were granted access to the agent nation's most secure facility. as we've all seen there are real-life consequences to these failures. and looking at the lessons learned, it's obvious there's no single quickfix to such a broken fixed -- system but it's about incomplete, falsified and multiply bac

more with natalie portman when we g back, everybody.tool. but also extremelyowerful. it could bused to start a poem. or finish a sympho. it's been to classros, boardrooms, even to space. and we can't wait to seehere you'll take it next. introducing ththinner, lighter, me powerful ipad air. could sa you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. yep, everybody kws that. well, did you know theanci were aually a mistake? uh-oh. geico. fifteen minutes cod save you...we, you know. ♪ cheers and applause >> jimmy: weome back. we are hging out with the one, the ly, natalie portman,ight here. oh my goodness. [ cheers and applause ] she is in "thor: the dark world." it's going tbe huge this weekend. i'm so excited to see it. i want to see it i3-d. that's the jam i want to do that in imax. it has now bome -- that's the new way to watchovies. back in the day, i was addicted to the 3-d ix. >> really? >> jimmy: yeah, ah, yeah. and my forite was, "siegfried and roy: magic in a box." [ laughter ] i swear to god it's a real movie. i'm t kidding. you talk

, she is not natalie portman she is what's her name natalie portman because she knows next year it isoing to be somebody else. >> rose: natalie portman is not like yesterday, she is not -- he is here, she is real, she is great. >> he is real but in two years. >> and disappear -- >> it will not be in two years. >> >> how about natalie portman to this movie you would have raised more money. >> now, yes, we will see about two years. but what is her name is the give away, these names they are interchangeable after a while. i mean, i don't want to embarrass her by saying three years ago this one meant something and now he doesn't or for that matter a director. i am not worth anything on the international market. i should be, i am a greater artist, you know, but. >> rose: if you say so yourself. >> if i say zero so myself, and if one else -- this time i am getting two great movies, the last two minutes. >> rose: seven holden -- >> 95 percent rotten tomatoes. >> rose: really, tyson -- >> >> rose: this movie and tyson, both terrific, but you had a great main character there. >> i did, i did.

so i believe the portman language does strengthen the bill. i hope, mr. president, that we are on the verge of making history tomorrow by passing this bill with a strong vote. i then hope that our colleagues on the house side will follow suit and that we can see this bill signed into law, but again, my purpose in rising once again today is to thank the senator from alaska for her strong support and for making a very powerful argument, for sharing the experience in her state, and i'm sure that her words help reinforce the support for this highly significant legislation. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota is recognized. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, i also wanted to thank the senators that are gathered here today for their stalwart support for this bill. senator merkley who has -- who as senator murkowski has mentioned has been there since the day he got to the senate and actually would be working on this issue before when he was in oregon. and also senator collins for working with senator k

landrieu, ator senator portman. some of those folks have slipped out but will come back. i just want to start with you, if i could. we appreciate >> of the things that we heard from each of our witnesses, the changes that we made, the reforms being adopted or have been adopted, what should we feel especially good about? >> i think the collaboration between d.n.i. and o.p.m. and the other agencies has improved over the years. i think when we started this work back in 2005 looking at timeliness issues, there was not a lot of collaboration and communication going on. i think that executive order 13467 that established the performance accountability council and pointed the deputy director for management at o.m.b. as the chair helped provide a governance structure for that collaboration to continue. the most notable improvement that we have seen is with the processing of initial personnel security clearances at the top secret level. there are no metrics for the processing times for other aspects such as the periodic reinvestigations. again our concern has been and we have stat

there were two amendments, the rob portman amendment that was passed, by a voice vote on this religious exemption language that mand amanda was describing. how do you think of the amendments -- do you think this has been watered down in a significant way or is this still a sound piece of legislation? >> well, look, the fact that it passed the senate and is sitting in the house, if they can just get the thing passed, and get the protection there, it's a victory. just get the thing on the books, and then, if people feel that the law is too porous or isn't effective or that the religious exemption is too broad, you can go in and tinker with it. but, you know, all this conversation might be useless because of one person and that is speaker boehner. unless he allows the bill to go to a vote, you know, we're all just talking. and that effort in -- that effort in the house would be for not. >> so, mary, congresswoman, you know the republican house better than anybody at the table. you were part of the republican house. what do you think is going on in john boehner's world now? what do you thin

i don't think rob portman is looking for 2016. my take on christie is if you gave him the truth serum, he doesn't care. he's fine with gay marriage. is this leak the sort of thing, an indicator, you have to say this to survive as a republican and be nationally viable still? >> i think when you look at someone with rob portman, he is versatile. i would put portman near the top of the list for the vice presidential nomination. i think christie is trying to fenagle a way forward politically to not alienate a base. it's like he is in christie's coalition. i think you are right, christie is not ready to take that final step. take him at the benefit of the dad. that's his position. if you gave him truth serum. he would stick with that. knowing christie, he is candid. >> there is candid in front of the cameras, anyway. go ahead. >> is the pub leg ready to watch the evolution process? it seems the pub leg, the american people have made a shift on this issue. are they going to be able to sit around and watch another politician hymn and ha

there are two pieces of that bill that senator portman, senator mccaskill, senator johnson and others are part of, plus some others, that deals with accountability and it deals with the number of clearances that are out there. i think we should push to try. negotiations are going on, but you have to set a level of expectation. i think that's what that does in part. i want to follow up a little bit on what chairman carper alked with you, elaine, on the d.o.j. suit that was filed in 011, july, and we were told by o.p.m. that there wasn't problem with uses. and there's a suit out there that doesn't look very good to me, and now we're finding out that o.p.m. is probably going to get onboard or maybe going to get onboard or is getting onboard. what's going on? it looks to me quite frankly that there's a real disconnect here between what the contractors are doing and what the expectations what the contractors to do and people are dying because of it. we're losing critical information because of it. i mean, the list goes on and on. o what -- what's going on? >> thanks for the question. i am

it was four months ago when we had the hearing after the snowden leaks that senator portman and i had and steven lewis works part of that panel and i want to thank you for being here as well as last time in my opening remarks given the fiscal security stakes involved we have to get it right and there is no margin for error. the fact was we knew then as we know today we need to make immediate reform of the process. it needs a more be more transparency in any scheme or oversight. the outcome of that hearing was the bill that the chairman talked about introduced by myself as well as portman mccaskill johnson and coburn. a provision of that legislation subsequently pass the senate and was signed into law. it's going to bring better oversight to the background as the investigations conducted by opm and its contractors that there are two other provisions that are also very important that we need to get across the finish line that go with the issues that senator coburn talked about with a number of security clearances given and quite frankly another issue that deals with what we do when we h

and third, i know senator portman and i have gone around and around on this. and this was just raised by percent of revenues. i would simply point out one of the reasons why we have a 17 trillion dollar debt is that based upon historic revenue numbers we've never -- we've always been at an annual deficit. the only times we've had a surplus within the last 30 years is when revenues have been between 19.5% and 21%. anything at the lower rates, we'll be in deficit. i will simply say even with entitlement reform, and stroingly believe in entitlement reform, i guess i question on a going forward basis and even look at your numbers with revenues that i -- at a higher rate that still below 19 were still in that gap. two questions. one, because of the demographic bulge, it's hard to imagine how you're going to be able to drive the spend down to the numbers that could be dealt with on dmind of historic revenue basis. and last point, it seems to me that one thing that we may not have factored in, i don't know if you did any analysis, is that not just in america but acro

joining us is the former director of management and budget, rob portman. as always, welcome back to the show. >> larry, thank you. >> before we do budget stuff, can i ask you, there's several bills that let you keep your insurance plan if you like it. there's senator johnson's bill and others. the democrats are in panic tizzy over what's going on and obama's unpopularity. can you just give us a sense, any of these bills serious? could they pass? will there be a vote? >> i think they're serious. i don't think they're going to work and that's what you just heard from the experts. in other words, we've already kind of gone down this path and it's very difficult to unravel the damage that's been done. 50 times more americans have lost it than gained it in enrollment. 50 times more. i want to try to help folks who are -- >> there's a renewal process. there is a renewal -- insurance renewal process. it's not as clean. but you could do it if you wanted to do it. >> what do you think -- >> who give votes to these bills? that's what i want to know. >> i don't know.

portman. i will go to mr. portman and then mr. whitehouse in the queue after him. >> thank you mr. chairman and dr. elmendorf thank you for your insights this morning and as you said at the end you have kind of depressing information for us which is things don't look at and they could be even worse if we don't continue to see these relatively high rates of revenue as you said over the coming decades and continue to see these relatively low rates of domestic discretionary spending. i have two questions for you quickly. one is with regard to tax revenue someone is regard to interest rates. it seems to me if we go back to an and historical level on interest rates we have a huge problem in terms of meeting these protections that you lay out and specifically $120 billion in increased deficits so if you could give us an answer on that and what you consider to be the historical rate if we went back to that historical rate of interest and seeing a creeping up of the rate today what would be the impact on the deficit and second with regard to taxes, you mentioned that reading from what you

quick senator portman? >> i have a brilliant statement with a strong assist from my staff that i would like to submit to the record. i had an opportunity to hear from a number of my colleagues. i feel like we have an opportunity here, but not meeting again until -- it sounds like mid-november -- we have a lot of work to do among ourselves. i hope that republican and democrat alike would be willing to do that and figure out how we can take this opportunity that has been prevented to us to really make a difference. i would like to simplify it to just three things. we have not met for four years, the budget conference, and during the interim period we added $5.9 trillion to the debt since the budget conference last, about $50,000 per household. i do not think we will do a grand bargain here. i would like to. i am sure a lot of us would. but i think we can do something that moves us in the right direction. and we can call it a good bargain for the american people. and again, i think there are three elements. on

and third, i know senator portman and i have gone around and around on this. and this was just raised by percent of revenues. i would simply point out one of the reasons why we have a 17 trillion dollar debt is that based upon historic revenue numbers we've never -- we've always been at an annual deficit. the only times we've had a surplus within the last 30 years is when revenues have been between 19.5% and 21%. anything at the lower rates, we'll be in deficit. i will simply say even with entitlement reform, and stroingly believe in entitlement reform, i guess i question on a going forward basis and even look at your numbers with revenues that i -- at a higher rate that still below 19 were still in that gap. two questions. one, because of the demographic bulge, it's hard to imagine how you're going to be able to drive the spend down to the numbers that could be dealt with on dmind of historic revenue basis. and last point, it seems to me that one thing that we may not have factored in, i don't know if you did any analysis, is that not just in america but acro

bob portman, republican from joe.tha: some sky high bickering over two iconic sky scrairps new york and chicago -- skyscrapers, slugging it out over which one is the tallest building. architects have put their heads together and they will tell us the answer. bill: days a big day for weddings, 11-12-13. why would that be or did i just gift away? [♪] bill: tuesday, noontime, turns out to be a great day to be married. 11-12-13, a great date to be married. it won't happen again for 1,000 years. 11-12-13. martha: when i got married halloween fell on a saturday and it was the only places available. bill: did you get married on halloween? martha: absolutely not. but some people like to get married on days like that. bill: you can do it as 9-10-11 in the morning. martha: chicago and new york city are in a battle over bragging rights for the world's tallest building. it's believed to belong to the new world trade center which is 1,77 feet wit76 feet with the ne installed. but should the expire count? if it doesn't chicago's wi

portman, i'll go with mr. portman and then mr. whitehouse in the queue after him. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director elmendorf, thank you for your insights this morning and, as you said at the end, you have kind of depressing information for us, which is things don't look good and they can be even worse until we continue to see these relatively high rates of revenue, as you said, over the coming decades and continue to see these relative low rates of congressional discretionary spending. i have two questions for you, quickly, one regarding to tax revenues, one regarding interest rates. you did not mention interest rates. it seems to me if we go back to an historical level on interest rates we also have a huge problem in terms of meeting these projections you lay out, specifically about $120 billion a year increase in deficit, so if you could give us an answer on that. what do you consider to be the the historic rate, if we went back to that historic rate of interest and we already see it creeping up of the rate today, what would be the impact on the deficit, and second with regard

why are people like pat toomey and kelly ayotte and rob portman and mark kirk and these other republicans able to come along when the rest of their colleagues on the republican side aren't? >> one of the real concerns was religious exemption, and we anchored it in title vii of the civil rights act, and that's answered a lot of the concerns that they had about balancing religious organizations and this issue of employment discrimination. by taking the standard of the civil rights act, that helped a lot. the only thing they were really worried about were lawsuits, and by looking at those 21 states you referred to and their record, we find that lawsuits do not materialize in surprising numbers or cause a real problem for business, and thus, businesses are very much on board with nondiscrimination. so, those have been two key factors in bringing this together. >> what do you make of the argument from the house leadership that they are not going to allow a vote on this on their side of capitol hill because they believe it's legally unnecessary? they believe it already is illegal to fire someon

republican senator rob portman joins us. how do you like that. >> greta, it's doubling down on dysfunction displu don't like that, i take it? >> no. >> how does this happen. >> for one thing the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing in bureaucracies a bunch of different agencies and departments. somebody needs to be held accountable. >> speaking of accountable. let me go to the next topic. secretary sebelius is going to testify before a committee you are on? >> right. >> i'm curious whether you are going to ask her about this august 28th letter that you wrote her. in the letter if i can just summarize it, you asked her all sorts of things including whether or not she would urge a delay. you had asked whether there was testing done. did she ever reply to this letter? >> no. >> so tomorrow you are going to ask her why she didn't answer this letter. >> yeah. i'm going to say look more than a month before the october 1st deadline i wrote you a letter saying this doesn't look good it looks like the infrastructure is

coburn, senator mccaskill, senator portman, begich, johnson, nelson, and senator baucus, to allow the inspector general to tap into o.p.m.'s revolving fund to perform the much needed oversight. we commend our colleagues for their good work. legislation passed the senate earlier this month. my hope is it will be signed into law by the president soon. in closing, i want to say that the vast majority of individuals who hold security clearances are honorable and trustworthy people. many of them felt called into service after 9/11 to help protect our country, and they deserve our thanks. having said that, though, we still must have a system that does a better job of rooting out those with nefarious purposes and those who have become deeply troubled and unstable. that system must identify those with behavior signals and when that system must identify those whose behavior signals are unacceptable risk to be trusted with classified information or access to sensitive federal facilities. i hope that our hearing today will help point us to a number of sensible solutions that taken together will

portman, i'll go with mr. portman and thenurs mr.ouse in the queue after him.r. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and, director elmendorf, thank you for your insights this morning. and as you said at the end, you have kind of depressing information for us which is that , and they't look good could be even worse unless we continue to see these relatively high rates of revenue, as you't said, over the coming decades and continue to see these relatively low rates of domesti discretionary spending.ue i have two questions for you quickly, one is with regard toa tax revenues, one is with regard to interest rates.onar you did not mention interest rates, and it seems to me if we go back to an historical level m on interest rates, we also have a huge rob. specifically, i think a point is about $120 billion a year increase in o deficit. so if you could give us an answer on that, what do you120 consider to be the historic rate, if we went back to that historic rate of interest, and what would bhee the impact on te deficit. and secondly with regard to

john mccain, rob portman, conservative names, kelly and great news for the lgbt community. anand politics on capitol hill. >> and speaker boehner has indicated that he believes that current federal law already protects these groups. is that true? >> as a matter of fact, as you outlined in the open there, as you reported, it specifically does not, sex, gender, ethnicity, yes, and race, and federal law of course does. the republican party has a problem, and it's the same story that it's a schism, and many republicans in the establishment want to get away from social issues. they think that it's hurting them. and or tuesday night, with the social conservatives, coming close and still losing, there's more evidence of that, causing consternation among republicans. >> mike in washington. thank you very much. >>> secretary of state, john kerry, said that he's confident that a syrian peace conference is going to be announced in the next couple of days. he's now in jordan meeting with king abdulla, and he said that some clarity has been established. this despite public statements of

. >> rob portman says it was a difficult day for him. i think it was a difficult day for the people of toronto. rebels have admitted defeat. it ends a bloody this -- has killedthat thousands. revolutionary surrendered after congolese forces, backed by the united nations, recaptured strongholds in the east of the country. andy harding has this report. >> could this be one of the last artillery shells to scar the green hills of eastern congo? there had been conflicts here for a generation but today one major rebellion came to an end. rare victory for the soldiers, from the inventories we ragtag -- from the g army.usly ragta they were forced to give up the fight. crucial to the breakthrough where these troops from a new united nations force, working alongside the congolese army. for all of those involved in trying to stabilize the country, this kind of aggressive action that has been lacking in the past. >> this is certainly a significant step in the right direction. it has to be followed by the disarming of the other armed groups and a bro

why are people like pat toomey and kelly ayotte and rob portman and mark kirk and these other republicans able to come along when the rest of their colleagues on the republican side aren't? >> one of the real concerns was religious exemption, and we anchored it in title vii of the civil rights act, and that's answered a lot of the concerns that they had about balancing religious organizations and this issue of employment discrimination. by taking the standard of the civil rights act, that helped a lot. the only thing they were really worried about were lawsuits, and by looking at those 21 states you referred to and their record, we find that lawsuits do not materialize in surprising numbers or cause a real problem for business, and thus, businesses are very much on board with nondiscrimination. so, those have been two key factors in bringing this together. >> what do you make of the argument from the house leadership that they are not going to allow a vote on this on their side of capitol hill because they believe it's legally unnecessary? they believe it already is illegal to fire someon

senator portman wanted an amendment that i believe just moments before i came on here actually passedelt it was unnecessary, but it went forward. and it passed. all of the talking points against this -- if you look at what speaker boehner's spokesperson said, those are the talking points that come straight from the right-wing, anti-gay, homophobic extremists. that's not the view of most republicans. most of the republican electorate. and it's not the view of most republicans in this building behind me. i hope the speaker is going to realize we're in a new day in this country. this is a basic american value. i think increasingly elected officials, democrat and republican, are going to start paying a price when they're on the wrong side of history, especially on a piece of legislation that has such broad and wide-reaching support in this country. >> yeah, i mean, especially as the gop sort of presumes or takes the mantle on being the party of business. of the fortune 500 companies, 88% of them prevent discrimination against gay and lesbian employees. we are there. this sort of last stan

. >> rob portman says it was a difficult day for him. i think it was a difficult day for the people of toronto. rebels have admitted defeat. it ends a bloody this -- has killedthat thousands. revolutionary surrendered after congolese forces, backed by the united nations, recaptured strongholds in the east of the country. andy harding has this report. >> could this be one of the last artillery shells to scar the green hills of eastern congo? there had been conflicts here for a generation but today one major rebellion came to an end. rare victory for the soldiers, from the inventories we ragtag -- from the g army.usly ragta they were forced to give up the fight. crucial to the breakthrough where these troops from a new united nations force, working alongside the congolese army. for all of those involved in trying to stabilize the country, this kind of aggressive action that has been lacking in the past. >> this is certainly a significant step in the right direction. it has to be followed by the disarming of the other armed groups and a bro

he is from pennsylvania which at level is very l democratic but still a socially state.vative rob portman has said i'm for same-sex marriage because his gay.is republics that come from places hat have state laws on the books but toomey it was most notable. >> were you surprised by any of those? >> toomey especially. the others make sense. illinois has been fighting for this since he came to congress. maine a big from champion of gay rights but tsunamsignals that he understands the politics of his running in will be 20 2016. he other though if a conservative, social conservative like pat toomey can the issue perhaps there are others who are seeing the polling and understand it is change. gwen: in the house if their heels are dug in does this make senate vote a show vote? >> to some 10th and it was as midterm cycle was beginning. the gay rights community loyal give a lot of money and to some it will be seen as a show vote. could be hope it tacked on to something like the defense bill and force it through the house but have generally said they are not for it. gwen: maybe there will be other

senator portman? >> thank you, chairman. think about that question. first, thanks for holding the hearing. this, as you know, our second hearing we have held. there also has been a hearing at the full committee level on this same issue. i think we have all acknowledge there is a need for significant reform with regard to the security clearance process. and this is not our last hearing, so we will continue to work on this. we appreciate you being here today and giving input. sorry i'm a little late. this is kind of a crazy time i know with the budget conference going on. but i am pleased we made a little progress, even in the last couple of months. we have legislation that senator tester and i introduced that passed, call score act, and he gives important oversight abilities on this, too. the inspector general and opm -- i think you are familiar with. we are actually working on additional legislation now that we think will also be able to move pretty quickly because it is bipartisan and i think it makes the system more accountable and more efficient. t

i will say that senator portman will be here late and will have to leave early, unfortunately. it's not because of the importance of this issue. it is because we've got a defense authorization bill on the floor, and that's keeping a lot of the folks who wanted to be here today away, but we will do our best to get as much good information as we can on the record as we proceed through this so that they'll have the ability to make good decisions with good information as those decisions arise. from the significant dischow sures of classified information to the tragedy at the washington naval yard, it is abun adaptly clear to the american people and that the federal government is failing to properly vet the individuals who are granted access to our nation's most sensitive information and secure facilities. >> it's about agencies improperly adjudicating clearances and about pure volume. today, there's nearly 5 million individuals with a security clearance. you heard me right, 5 million. there are no indications that number will decrease any time soon. it only takes one individual to

so they're going -- they -- kelly ayotte and rob portman secured a vote on their amendment that deals more with antiretaliation issues or religious groups. they look as a way of strengthening protections for religious organizations in the employee nondiscrimination act. senator toomey is going have another religion-related amendment. it's going broaden the number of groups that qualify under the religious exemption. senator merkley, who is kind of the bellwether for -- the chief sponsor said last night he supports the proposal for ayotte and portman, not so sure about toomey. so that's the fate of that legislation is -- the fate of that measure is still unclear. they will get votes on both of them. >> will the senate vote on the bill before thanking giving? >> that's the plan. majority leader harry reid said we're going get it done. please, he said the senators he doesn't believe senators need use all the time left on the clock for debate on this bill. it's set to, i mean, after you vote on the couple of amendments it's set to pass in the coming days. we don't know exactly when. but t