secondly we are increasing our sharing of information at the state and local, so those are the eyes and ears, local law enforcement that need to be more fully engaged and plug in, watching for those who would seek to do us harm and have the information and situational awareness to do it. one of the ways we are doing that mr. chair is through support of fusion centers across the country. >> support of what? >> fusion centers where we have a federal state and local law enforcement collocated and to give you some nuts and bolts, one of the problems we are working through a security clearance so people can get information top-secret and above levels, and that is a process that is underway right now, and lastly, we are really asking the american people to lead forward and that the individual, business, the community level, whereever come to recognize our security is really a shared responsibility and there things that can be done at all levels even as we work at the dhs to prevent something from occurring. >> but, i agree with you it is important to come forward with things, but then we have

secondly, that the one size fits all approach is not the best one for us today. thirdly, that senior officials on the ground in country should have more flexibility and take more responsibility to determine which mix of security measures is most appropriate in a given situation at a given point in time. and i second the remarks that ambassador neumann made that this can't be left to personal decision. there has to be bureaucratic support, consensus that lays out guidelines for this. you can't expect someone to take a position i'm going to authorize or have somebody take on a risk when the other side of it is you take all responsibility if anything goes wrong. there has to be a better way. finally, the increased prominence of security issues today underscored the need to do more to avoid the experience gaps highlighted in this and other gao reports prepared for this committee. lack of experiences, from my perspective, increases security risk at both the personal and the mission level. having seasoned, experienced veterans in the right positions decreases those ris

but then secondly, we want to make sure that we have in place adequate laws and structures so that we can counter the vulnerability that bad players are trying to perpetrate on the united states. i'm particularly mindful that nsa located in maryland, the premier collection agency in the world is actively working on this. and i just call to your attention to give this matter the highest attention. >> senator, i couldn't agree with you more. indeed, i believe that the cybermission is one of the major missions of the whole homeland security environment. it's also a rapidly evolving one and changing one almost by the time you are talking about a particular intrusion, it is passed and you're on to the next one. so i just want to clarify if i might one thing. and that is -- i don't think there is any confusion at least amongst the cabinet as to the division of labor. that is that the department of defense operationally has adopted mill side, the department of homeland security, the dot gov, has adopted both. and the privacy issues are built into our own dhs process and from an operational s

secondly that in recent years, the most important of foiled attacks against the u.k. by islamist terrorism was a skeel beyond 9/11 so this was before 9/11. this is the first under the first islamist factory in britain, but fortunately he was under surveillance. the reason 9/11 words is the perpetrators were not under surveillance. the reason that didn't work is that aberdeen was under surveillance. this is a surveillance photograph. this is the first big attempted attack against the u.k. by islamists terrorist after 9/11. on the right there is omar khai am. he could make bones but he could not detonate them so on the left-hand side, there is the first canadian islamic terrorist to attract worldwide attention, who is now spending an awful long time in a canadian jail. the photograph that heathrow for a surveillance photograph. this one is the past but it is also the future. this is a characteristic example of a terrorist who is terribly difficult to track down. this is-- wise he's so difficult to track down? he had gone to british intelligence school and he was a hindu

secondly, nato works. although we can have long discussions about the decision making progress -- process in nato, and one nation blocking other decisions by other nations, we could -- we have worked in southern afghanistan because we have a common need a background. we had the same structure, the same planning process, the same mental attitude, the same approach towards operations and we spoke the same language. from a technical point of view, the fact that every joint control on the ground pumped up with every helicopter, no matter which country they were from, shows you that nato works. in a word -- we were not only quite effective but also quite efficient. we had only 600 soldiers, commanding 40,000 troops. so, looking in hindsight, i can tell you that if people ask me, what impressed you the most in afghanistan, it is the afghan people themselves. great people, loyal. they will never disappoint you if you get their trust. separately, the way the coalition worked. i think we are great is a team -- as a

secondly, the principles were good principles inspired by us. and that was that this military would be under civilian control and it would respect the rule of law, respect the people. i believe very much that those principles are still in place. >> what is the desertion rate? i've heard it is 25%. what is the desertion rate? >> congressman, i'll get you that for the record. it's not that high. one of the things about desertion, many of the young afghans who enlisted in the army go home because there's not yet a good leave policy established. we're still working through issues of how they are paid. electronic is clearly the wave of the future. in many cases they go home to take pay or see family. great sense of family there. and a significant percentage come back. so it is a significant problem. i don't want you to believe that it's not, but it is something that is less clear than it might be in another army. >> i'll take the cue from my colleagues and yield back with the chairman. >> i thank the gentleman. we've had a little misunderstanding. my

and secondly, you should be regulating those derivatives to make sure you don't have a situation where a company is essentially betting the bank, saying that if coin comes up heads, we make a hot of money, if coin comes up tails, the government bails us out. we don't want that situation. a good regulation of derivatives would be part of a new resheech. >> if i could summarize. you support moving to an exchange. as you put it, for all the derivatives that could be standardized? we have the challenge of deciding to what degree derivatives can be standardized. we have a loft end users very resistant to the idea of going to an exchange because they feel the margin costs would impede their ability to hedge. that might be an argument that may be coming forward regardless. any thoughts about that issue? >> i think the case for exceptions is not the margin costs. that's an appropriate cost of protecting against the counterparty risk. the case for not putting everything on the exchange, some risks are not hedgeable. i may want to hedge against a complicate ed set of events as municipality. they

first about the h1n1 and secondly, about the hiv virus.ms is not, at least for aids and hiv is not the information that the federal government is putting out for the use or for anybody really. i think the real problem lies in the simple fact that a lot of young people my age just don't care. they don't care enough about what's out there. and i think that's real problem. guest: well i'm glad you gave audience. in the united states as we heard, there's 1 point 1,000,000 people infected with hiv, over 20% of them do not know that they are infected and the vast majority of infections transmitted get transmitted by someone that does not know he or she is infected. so what we really need is for people to do just what you did. we need voluntary widespread testing so people know their hiv status and they can get counciled on how to avoid getting infected and if they are infected they can get on treatment and get counseling to avoid other infections. we hope more americans would go and get tested. host hose emerging viruses. you think we'll see mor

if so where you think it might be, and then secondly i will get into the question of detention space.>> i think first of all i support operation streamline. i think it is effective. i think with respect to the tucson sector which is by magnitude the larger sector that we have, they provide logistical difficulties. i think we have the dead space available. i think we are de silva-- solving your detention issues. we had an issue with the ninth circuit, piece of these streamline that has just come down a couple of days ago, about how please are done in streamline matters and given the volume of cases, and i know you know that courthouse well, we have had to be working out there in terms of how are going to operationally address the court of appeals concerns so we continue to streamline in the tucson sector, and while i am not free to discuss the president's budget at this time obviously i can say in my view it fully addresses some of our issues. >> thank you for that. the study that is required we will ask you to report to us your evaluation of what else you need to expand the program ef

secondly, we are not in afghanistan as a colonial imperial power.there is not an american in america who wants to colonnade and control afghanistan. to the contrary, we would like to get away as quickly as we can. the situation in vietnam, the u.s. was there with very little legitimacy and was perceived as the vp colonial -- of the french. let's deal with the situation we have a, not with analogies to other places. i understand the question. in terms of domestic politics there is a great parallel. the president finds himself in a terrible situation. all the critics of the war are daut pelosi democrats from cambridge and new york city. the supporters are sarah palin republic and. the people he has to convince are his natural constituency. palin is just looking for a chance to say he is covering it up. the politics in this are terrible. yes? >> you mention that we do not know and there have been no credible reports. there have been reports over a number of years that he has not stayed in above iran what is going back and forth. there were reports in t

secondly, nato works. have a lot of discussions about the decision-making process with nato and one nation blocking decisions by 27 other nations, have worked in afghanistan because we had common nato background. we had the same structure. we had the same planning process and the same mental attitude and the same approach towards operations and we spoke the same language. from a technical point of view, every joint that had control could talk with every helicopter in the air no matter what country they were from. that's the way nato works. we were not only quite effective but quite efficient with only 600 soldiers. quite effective. so looking back in hindsight i can tell you if people asked me what impressed you the most in afghanistan, great people, loyal, they will never disappoint you, if you give them trust. and confidence and secondly, the way the coalition worked, i think we operate as a team with the different nations and based on that i think we have a better future although next year the deploymen

secondly, thexplosives used wereeither easy to handle r risk-free to prere. the way it was used d the explosives compa to those used in previous attacks. the spect had a valid visa for e united states. e passenger list presented prior to the flight did not ve the us a rean to ask for additial security measures. >> reporter: the bom- made of the chemical p.e.t.n.-- wa hien in abdulmutallab's clothi, and failed to go off. that lefthe airliner intact on e tarmac, but it also left continuing questio about what u.s. intelligence knew ahe of time. was widely reported today the had been al-qaeda "chatter" about a "nigian" being prepared for an unspecified tack. that information hasurfaced in a revi that president obama ordered. and made clear yesterday, he's not happy with whate's hearing. >> when r government has information on a knownxtremist and that iormation is not shared and actedpon as it should have been so at this extrist boards a plane with dangerous explosiv that could ha cost nearly 300 lives, a systemic failure hasccurred, and consider that totally unac

secondly, it was a tabling motion. and those who voted against tabling were willing to consider the issue, not that they agreed with what was in the bill. procedurally when there is a motion to table, if it's passed, the bill is off the floor. if a motion to table is defeated, then the bill remains on the floor for consideration. but it does not mean to people who want to consider the -- that people who want to consider the bill are in agreement that the bill ought to be enacted. the issue of attorneys' fees and the issue of malpractice litigation have really -- really ought to be left to the states in our federal system. and pennsylvania, my state, is illustrative of the way state governments can handle the issue and deal with it to avoid excesses. in pennsylvania, there was a rule change made to require that before a malpractice suit could be brought, there had to be a certification from a doctor that the case fell below applicable standards of care. a second major change was made which required that the medical malp

secondly, the climategate scandal is expanding. there have been two professors who have been placed on administrative leave as a result of this. the un should take it upon itself to step backwards and not make any concrete recommendations until we get to the bottom of the climategate scandal and why the professor's use the mails ended up being put up on the internet said what they said. this could be a conspiracy basically to shutout any contrary scientific opinion. as the chairman of the science committee from 1997 to 2001, one of the things i vigorously protected was extensive peer review of science that was funded by the government. and peer review means debate the issue, the people who don't take the politically correct position during the peer review are not punished by being ostracized, denied publication of their views. the climategate scandal indicates this is going on. i call it scientific fascism. we should not be making decisions that will cost the american ratepayer billions or trillions of dollars in natural gas bills.

and secondly, that the decision we took in bucharest still stands. we all know that we decided in bucharest that georgia and ukraine will become members of nato, provided that they fulfill the necessary criteria. i think that these two messages are the core messages. >> [speaking french] -- disappointed by the fact that mr. sarkozy did not agree to certain elements? are you going to convince france to change their mind? if you could respond in french, please, and tell us how many troops you intend to send? >> on the contrary, i am very much encouraged by the comments made by president sarkozy. president obama announced that there would be a significant increase of the number of u.s. troops in afghanistan, and in such a situation is absolutely crucial to my mind -- it is absolutely crucial to my mind that the other allies follow suit. and in particular, all like to stress the following two points. first of all, the balance of the alliance is at stake. our equilibrium among ourselves -- and it is crucial for the afghan operation not to be perceived as

and secondly it's a completely nonsense of a system of a property empire.cr if you look at the taxpayers and arguing things that accounted -- could cost more and rent could cost more. and not employing family members. >> but transparency is important now. >> yes, that's right and i think that the majority of mp's will be in that view. >> in your dealings with constituents is there sense of anger? >> we never had anger, my husband was a [inaudible] saint and people would appreciate that. >> i understand that labor. >> yes, and basically i think that people appreciate dealing with me. in many cases they will phone up with a huge problem and after a bit ylwñi may say, look am the mp's wife as well as the secretary and it seems to calm them a bit. >> a few days later the kelly report was officially published and we asked what they thought of it. >> we hear of christopher kelly of the rumors are leaked. >> the most crucial of the issues is accommodation. the main recommendation here is that support of mortgage should cease and in the future the members of parliament should be only offered tha

. >> secondly, with regard to the money and i think i was just coming in on this question as well. and the gentleman from new york was asking about the old fee and the new fee and what have you. the new fee that was out there, two questions. one, base and what you know now and i understand from the last answer you don't have all the information, but based and what you know now, is that fee an adequate fee to compensation that you are planning to pay out? >> the answer is yes, the fee is adequate to pay on what we anticipate paying as we understand the claim, sir. >> you have heard the testimony of the panel before you and i think some of the questions were along this line of in some of us would take that view that to go back to your point of helping the small investor should be more expansive than what you are intending to way out right now. if the definition of -- the third point of who should be paid and the question of saying that -- as the gentleman was saying over here before, again, i'm sorry, and it's not just the direct investor but one who has gone through a fund and what

secondly, wind energy.won't spend a lot of time on this because you all know this is a very effective, in many places very competitive now as a source of energy. but here is something you may not know. in the united states, for each of the last two years, the largest new source of elector city in that has been wind, more than coal, oil, nuclear and gas put together and we are not using the best wind resources we have in the mountains because the transmission lines don't run to the remote areas where the wind blows the strongest and they don't run to the southwestern desert area where the solar energy is cheapest and most effective. later in the book there is a chapter on what is called the supergrid. you have heard of smart grid, designed to replace the antiquated obsolete electrical grid we have in the united states today. we need to replace it anyway. there are two new technological breakthroughs that make this supergrid very compelling. they have new transmission lines that don't waste and lose so much o

secondly they go to their own end of the talk radio dial and their views are reinforced. so these are trends that need to be countered, but there's a deep desire in most americans for real news, reliable information, and, frankly, for rational discourse, and in the market if there's a demand for something there will be that something. we just have to hope to find a way to pay for it. thanks. i think we have one last gentleman here. >> yes. i love your book on einstein. thank you for that. >> he is a really cool dude. >> recently i was watching c-span, there was a woman on, temple grandan, and she has written widely and she is an expert on a number of topics, she has aspergers, and she said a einstein almost certainly had it. >> i addressed that in any book a little bit. i do not think that those of us who are not doctors, and even those who are doctors can diagnosis somebody a hundred years later. i do think that einstein was very slow in learning how to talk as a child, so slow they consulted a doctor and his nickname was the dopey juan. he didn't think verbally. he didn

secondly, we are not in afghanistan as a colonial imperialist power.ere is not an american in america who wants to control afghanistan. to the contrary, we would like to get away as quickly as we can. the situation in vietnam, the united states was there with very little international legitimacy and was perceived to be the repeat colonialism of the french. i also don't think afghanistan today is the afghanistan with the soviet union. 2007. let's deal with the situation we have, not to an alies to other situations. >> what about the potential of creating -- do you know the differences in the situation in afghanistan, the potential of a long, drawn out, draining war that ultimately would have to pull out of? >> certainly in terms of domestic politics there is a great parallel. the president finds himself in a terrible situation. all of the critics of the war are nancy pelosi democrats from san francisco, came bridge, and new york city. all the supporters of the war are sara palin republicans from alaska and arizona. it's a terrible place for a democratic

secondly, we asked the united states to adopt eight multi-lateral approach.ieve that the united states will begin to challenge, or have doubts about this approach if they consider that the other allies are not fully carrying their weight and sharing the burden. therefore, i would like to call on all of the allies to increase the number of their troops in >> secretary you have said that we're not talking today about actually strategy from afghanistan but president barack obama has already said he plans to start deployment of soldiers in mid 2011 and already the papers are talking, reporting that the united states is already thinking in leaving afghanistan. how do you score these two things of president barack obama saying that in 2011 we're going to be back home. do you say that we're going to stay there for along as it takes? >> i think it's a very important question and important to interpret this correctly. nobody is speaking about an exit date. but what we're speaking about is a transition. a transition to afghan lead. and i have repeatedly stressed how im

secondly, oman is the beneficiary, 30 years ago, of iran sending a total of around 30,000 iranians to oman. never more than 3,000 at a time, usually for three months at a time to help quell what was arab's longest civil insurrection in the past 100 years. there are no territorial disagreements between iran and oman. comparable to the claims of iran towards bahrain. comparable to the potential claims of iran vis-a-vis qatar regarding their offshore oil field, comparable to iran vis-a-vis debate. comparable to iran vis-a-vis kuwait and saudi arabia. so oman has a special niche and it needs to be seen as exceptional in the aberration but with reason for its own strategic national interest as it formulates them. and so oman is for not interfering any further than the dccc countries have with the language they used in their communique. >> another question from the audience. please tell us about the dccc's decision to form a regional security force is in front real rhetoric who's going to finance it? who's going to pay for it? >> that's a good question. i think like a number of other wishes

secondly, if you have a policy, then the cost can be dictated from the policy itself. we now know where we want to go and what those benefactors are. that policy sits at the top and we need that. last but not least, i always tell people being in the transmission business, it's a great business until i do one of two things. the first item is bring transmission lines. the process is long and hard. when we need is true federal backsiding authority. the states should be involved in the process as you've heard there are thousands of megawats this country needs to deploy. we need to deploy it now. if we start now, we are years away from our goal line. i thank you for my opportunity to speak here today. >> thank you. >> our next witness is christopher miller. he is key member focused on the conservation issues of the peed mont area of virginia . >> thank you for being here. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of peed mont conservation. we are an active member of the land trust alliance and working hard on this issue with them. i have a couple of maps i hope

and secondly, how do we do away with this two-party system that we've got here? it's not working, it's gridlock. one fights the other. they won't agree on anything. how do we get, establish a government that's run by individuals rather than parties? that was my question. >> guest: two good questions and let me sidestep the first one a little bit because the problem in afghanistan stems from a bigger problem which is called iran, and i discuss that in the book, "whores." you know, iran holds the key to peace in the middle east. you've got people in the streets, mostly students and i represent a family who had a very valiant brother who died, was tortured. his lips were scene shut, his eyes were sewn shut and he was killed fighting for freedom. the iranians are pro-american generally. they are contrary to radical arab states, they're persians. they are our natural allies. we put our resources in the wrong place. we put it into iraq. once we leave, it's vietnam all over again. if we could change leadership in iran and have responsible leadership that would end fundi

secondly, we had a fit consumer regulation. i don't care much whether they make the existing agencies better or they make a new agency, but i think it's widely agreed that we need a system where people can't be sold, products that are so clearly not in their interest and people can make so much money off of it that they keep selling them. i think that we had -- you mentioned the shadow baking system. we now know that regulators spent too much time looking at things that are conventionally defined as the banks. citibank, while cobia, not those things did get us into a lot of trouble, but bear stearns, bear stearns, aig, these are outside the banking system. the money market funds. they pose the same threat that conventional banks did. so that's why the president is proposed and most of the people who don't agree with the president on the specifics that you need a broader thing. the financial system has to be regular. we understand why that is. both of us to. and we can't set up a system where people go around and say i'm going t

secondly, that the one size fits all approach is not the best one for us today.hirdly, that senior officials on the ground in country should have more flexibility and take more responsibility to determine which mix of security measures is most appropriate in a given situation at a given point in time. and i second the remarks that ambassador neumann made that this can't be left to personal decision. there has to be bureaucratic support, consensus that lays out guidelines for this. you can't expect someone to take a position i'm going to authorize or have somebody take on a risk when the other side of it is you take all responsibility if anything goes wrong. there has to be a better way. finally, the increased prominence of security issues today underscored the need to do more to avoid the experience gaps highlighted in this and other gao reports prepared for this committee. lack of experiences, from my perspective, increases security risk at both the personal and the mission level. having seasoned, experienced veterans in the right positions decreases those risks

not speeches but sticking with it and secondly the great deal of what counts now is moving from policyndreds of decisions on the ground to what people do and we're probably now going to increasingly talk about the wrong things. policies when we ought to talk about execution of policy. >> i was going to say in 2001 after 9/11 in early 2002 i actually worked on afghanistan here in washington at the state department. they asked me to come back and help. we were trying set up the economic reconstruction effort, which was a multi-lateral effort. the multi-lateral part got set up okay but almost nothing happened. just to back up what ron said, we saw almost no flow of õresources in that time. i was there. and a year after as far as i can tell. host: callers. people lining up to talk to both of you. david from kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. just seems like to me this yeah dynamics.rorist changes the % are we going to every arab country and fight? discuss that if you will. host: sorry david i think we may have lost david. are you still with us. can you elp!orate more? caller: th

and secondly, and one other thing i didn't mention in commerce at the last oversight hearing and may was about a month before the hemisphere troubled initiative took effect and we had serious backlogs of travelers in minnesota who were suddenly going to need passports or other documents to get to canada which had not been required before and this is going on and we have had a decline in the tourism industry and all over the country and i have learned from talking to people in minnesota that the implementation of the western hemisphere travon should have has been much smoother in our state. this is a good thing, madam secretary, people and said he did and were pleased with how things went in a timely fashion and pragmatism of the people in the department so i wanted to thank you for that as well. at the commerce hearing we talked about my concern about the no-fly list and some of the secure flight issues and i know i'm not going to go at that again. i did want to touch on something negative no was touched on briefly year about the accidental disclosure of transportation safety adminis

secondly we have a grouping of steps that has never appeared before in a framework or otherwise as a for group with respect to all of the measures that will be given specific language as we go forward, and by talking about the various components of the clean coal, the nuclear, the renewables, the efficiencies etc.. there are parts of them that have been in different pieces of legislation but never put together as a whole in the way that we are presenting them with the manufacturing components and the international components. that's a framework. the reason there is not specific language today is very specifically because of the process that we are honoring within the senate. we sat with the chair. blanche lincoln will be holding some hearings hopefully very much and early january, and max baucus is committed to reporting out language from the finance committee and is very committed to helping to pass this legislation. we don't want to jump ahead of their committee process. we want to honor the committee process. we want donner colleagues within the process, and as they bring it toget

but secondly on the secondary market fits. andy davidson knife votes a paper for the anti-macarthur and what we said was if we want to get the whole securitization market which is really, but important for the mortgage market and the housing market to recover we have to establish trust. so investors around the world, the united states pension funds have to trust that the securities market is going to work etc. and the problem is if we go to cram-down. they will send kind of a shockwave through the international markets that's all my gosh were going to haven't entered judicial intervention and probably not going to be consistent. they will vary by jurisdiction. they are a terrible signal that were sent into the capital markets around the world if we pursue that. as they nobly intended as it is. >> thank you professor. >> pitcher will next recognize mr. clay from missouri for five minutes. >> thank you so much mr. chairman. i guess along the same lines as mrs. waters, some of the strategy that we see now deployed by mortgage hol

secondly, the principles were good principles inspired by us. and that was that this military would be under civilian control and it would respect the rule of law, respect the people. i believe very much that those principles are still in place. >> what is the desertion rate? i've heard it is 25%. what is the desertion rate? >> congressman, i'll get you that for the record. it's not that high. one of the things about desertion, many of the young afghans who enlisted in the army go home because there's not yet a good leave policy established. we're still working through issues of how they are paid. electronic is clearly the wave of the future. in many cases they go home to take pay or see family. great sense of family there. and a significant percentage come back. so it is a significant problem. i don't want you to believe that it's not, but it is something that is less clear than it might be in another army. >> i'll take the cue from my colleagues and yield back with the chairman. >> i thank the gentleman. we've had a little misunderstanding. my

secondly, i have provided some charts with my testimony. those show the wide variation in pricing plans overall. pay-as-you-go pricing varies widely. they're charged differently depending on the plan. some prepaid customers pay 5 cents, up 20 cents, up 10 cents. i notice from the the testimony that they have a different plan. there is no suspicious coincidence in the timing for these price changes. the different carriers change their prices over a period of two years. in a competitive market, you would expect some competitive prices over time. the market evidence shows the fierce competition across the wireless market. the fcc reiterated that u.s. customers are seeing low prices, new technology, improved service quality and choice among providers from all competition in the wireless marketplace. using the most recent information available, the fcc found that the avenue revenue per minute fell 67% in the last few years while usage has increased many times. american consumers fare far better than wireless customers across the globe. a recent

secondly, to put security first because nothing can be done in the political and economic sphere withoutecurity. third, to seek as wide as possible and international influence into an international operation of this kind with the legitimacy that would lead to that and which flows from that. and fourthly, to be much more aware of where the gaps are and where the limitations will be and try to address those early in security, political resource, economic and other terms before you begin. this was clearly to rest and exercise -- too rushed an exercise on the ground which some people had been predicting would be as difficult as it was. to have this degree of mismatch is something that has to be avoided in the future. >> thank you. >> thank-you, sir jeremy. i think this has given you the opportunity to make a final observations for the session. there may be more to say. with that, can i say one thing for the record? i think you used the term "third role?" can you explain what that is? >>an fco section was composed of the head of that section, the deputy head of that section and the third room

secondly, we have no idea what the assumptions are in the analysis that they made. thirdly, it's based primarily on the house bill which has has $13 billion more in reductions than we have. so before we get stuck there, we ought to listen to the national association that is working with us on a daily basis where we agree on what the reductions ought to be. the skilled nursing facilities, the rehab facilities, the long-term acute care hospitals have all come to the table and said we can do this. now, is that their preference? do they love it? nobody wants their budget to be tightened where they have to make changes to try to be more effective, but the bottom line is every single one of them has agreed with what we are doing on this side of the aisle. and notwithstanding that, our friends on the other side of the aisle keep coming back and keep trying to stand up for grandma or stand up for some senior citizen that is being falsely scared into believing that their benefit is going to be cut or that medicare is somehow going to be less available to them. and my amendme

secondly, in their fixation on the sound and fury of the stormy presents, it is easy for conservatives to overlooked and undervalued one of their most impressive achievements during the past 40 years, the creation of a veritable conservative counterculture, a burgeoning infrastructure of alternative media, foundations like heritage, research centers, thinktanks, publishing houses, law firms, homeschooling networks and more. from the beltway to the blogosphere, these clusters of purposeful energy continue to multiplied and flourish. they comprise a significant part of what has been called the influence industry in washington. from the perspective of a historian, this flooring of applied conservatism if you will, this is leopard deinstitutionalization of conservative impulses and ideas is a remarkable intellectual and political development. think of it. when amanat conservative thinkers like william f. buckley jr., richard weaver and russell kirk were riding in the 1950's and early 1960's, the number of publicly active professing conservative intellectuals in the united states was minusc

secondly, to spend all that money to protect khalid sikh muhammad when he could have been tried down at guantanamo bay just doesn't make any sense. no one believes that that makes sense. lastly, to send people to yemen and this other place. i think will endanger the country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. olver: mr. speaker, i yield at this time three minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. edwards. mr. edwards is the chairman of the--administration and military construction subcommittee of the appropriations committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. edwards: this bill supports america's veterans, our troops, and their families in a meaningful way by improving their health care, their benefits, and quality of life. those who defend our nation have earned and deserve this support. for the first time ever we provide two-year funding for v.a. medical programs. this is a historic achievement and has been one of the highest priorities of our nation's most respected ve

secondly, we've heard about the european union, as an example of why we should permit reimportation. what did we here hear from the european community last week? that this just two months they seized 34 million fake tablets in all member countries and that this was beyond their greatest fears. thirdly, how do we create affordability? by closing the doughnut hole and this amendment will not do that. it will undermine that. and, finally, finally, senator lautenberg's amendment, which comes up after this, is the one that permits reimportation, but takes care of the safety issues that the f.d.a. has said is critical. we want to make sure when you buy that nexium that what you get is the substance and the quality and the quantity that you bought, not something less that can undermine your health. vote against the dorgan amendment. the presiding officer: the senator's time has spirted. the senator's time hats expired. -- the senator's time has expired. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: the presiding officer: is there anyone wishing

secondly, i think it is in a incumbent upon us to let people know that we are doing more than just changing the dotted lines. we are not redesigning this just because it is working so well now. it is not working well now. with the new technology we have, we will be able to utilize a lot of new techniques. >> we look forward to that. i will close this hearing. once again, i would like to convey our condolences to those who lost loved ones on the flight to buffalo. we are trying very hard, honestly, and i address this to the people here, to make sure that we learn from mistakes, how terrible a mistake that was, how terrible error in judgment that was in terms of having the kind of person in the cockpit that you could not feel good about or was unable to assist in then, the emergency. with that, i close this hearing and i think all of you for being here. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [no audio] [no audio] >> this morning on c-span, the senate voted of its version of the health care bill with reaction by presiden

secondly, some of the steps we have taken, like the aig episode, for example, obviously have hurt the fed a lot politically. we know that. we did it -- and i think that should just be proof that we did it for the good of the country. we didn't do it for ourselves, because it obviously has hurt the federal reserve, and the public's view. we did it because we felt that there was no other way to avoid what number of your colleagues have called the risk of a catastrophic collapse of the financial system. and so we did what we did, knowing it would be politically unpopular, knowing it would bring problems for the federal reserve. but because we didn't have an alternative, and one of the things we're hoping, of course, that congress will come up with will be some framework that will allow this to be done in a more orderly way, and will leave the federal reserve completely out of it. we would like to be left out of it. on financial stability, i would like to differ just a little bit, which is that the federal reserve actually was founded in 1913 for financial stability purposes not monetary

but secondly on the secondary market fits.ndy davidson knife votes a paper for the anti-macarthur and what we said was if we want to get the whole securitization market which is really, but important for the mortgage market and the housing market to recover we have to establish trust. so investors around the world, the united states pension funds have to trust that the securities market is going to work etc. and the problem is if we go to cram-down. they will send kind of a shockwave through the international markets that's all my gosh were going to haven't entered judicial intervention and probably not going to be consistent. they will vary by jurisdiction. they are a terrible signal that were sent into the capital markets around the world if we pursue that. as they nobly intended as it is. >> thank you professor. >> pitcher will next recognize mr. clay from missouri for five minutes. >> thank you so much mr. chairman. i guess along the same lines as mrs. waters, some of the strategy that we see now deployed by mortgage holde

secondly medicare was not on the verge of an imminent bankruptcy, which it is now in third there was in the bill on the floor such as the one on the floor now that would extend the airy generous subsidies to those 55 and 65 earl to enable them to buy insurance and reduce the impact age in the pricing of insurance policies, so things changed a lot. ayn connecticut poston divya? well, i finally got to see that on tv last night and it looked like i was referring back to things i supported in the past to make the point that though i was against the public option, i was not against health care reform and of course i did that before the finance committee bill came out with this very large and again i would say generous but i support it, system of subsidies that brings basically lower, middle income people into the health insurance system. >> what is beytin to the health care reform architecture? >> not to that extent but here is the point. the medicare by yent that is proposed is not make sense. you can all focus on the but it ended up when advocates of the public option, they tried to get

separately, -- secondly, we are not in afghanistan as the colonial and. is not an american who wants to control afghanistan. to the contrary. we want to get away as quickly as we can. the situation in viet nam, the united states with their -- was there with very little international support. i think the situations are fundamentally support. i do not think afghanistan today is afghanistan of the soviet union. i do not think it is iraq 2007. let's deal with the situation we have. not with analogies to other places. i understand the question. >> [inaudible] the situation in afghanistan has the potential of along, drawn- out -- [inaudible] >> in terms of domestic american politics there is a great parallel. when the president finds himself in a terrible situation. the critics of the war are nancy pelosi democrats from san francisco, cambridge and new york city. the supporters are sarah palin republicans from alaska and arizona. that is a terrible place for a democratic president to be. the people he has to convince to support him are his natural constituency.

secondly, it's going to be essential to improve the accountability.orking with confident ministries. we have a good program that's been under way for over a year now. taking the essential ministries of afghanistan, working with them to improve their procedures, in which they reach a level of -- more effort in trg to train civil administration understandably after the three decades of conflict. low literalsy rates and a disrupted society. with away don't have it. we did not in 2002 begin with a strong base. we're making progress in that area. ae and fourth in the way we deliver our programs. 80% of aid funds don't go through afghanistan. the united states government is the leading element right now in trying to change that. so it really acquires an approach. behind all of that, though, senator, as you're asking in your question, leadership at the top and commitment is absolutely vital. we are encouraged by president karzai's inaugural address. what he has said will be his plan of action. >> you mentioned the high office of oversight. is that an office

secondly, on the imported liquid fuels chart, chart nine, you show a flattening out of production in later years compared with what your projections were last year. so i'm trying to figure out -- and you have, i think, expanded net imports from 40 to 45%. what's going on in the later years that you're seeing now that you weren't seeing last year? >> okay. let's take the first one first. so we do not include e15 as a fuel blend in the projection because it is not currently an approved fuel blend under existing regulation. the second question which -- was it this slide you're referring to? so repeat the question, please? >> the production figure flattens out between the 2010 projection more than it did -- [inaudible] >> yes. so we have, yeah, we have relatively -- if you go back, oh, i don't know where it is. anyway, if you go back to the crude oil slide, you can see we're projecting somewhat lower oil prices in the projection which would tend to lead to relatively higher consumption. you could see consumption's a little bit higher, and it would also tend to mean that relatively less d

secondly, i am hoping that the printss that we've developed, limited cash-based salaries, stock that will be redeemed over a period of years so that the individuals compensation is tied to the future financial success of the company, those are principless that we hope will be adopted voluntarily by companies outside of my jurisdiction. >> woodruff: still you know that over time people expect the stock market is going to come back. people are still going to be able to earn significant salary. do you really believe that rules like these can prevent another financial collapse? >> oh i don't think these rules alone will prevent another financial collapse. i think that what happened today in the congress, with the regulator its are doing, the other initiatives promoted by this administration, i think if you look at the entire package, as well as what foreign governments are doing. the secretary of the treasury and the g-20 urging foreign governments to do these things, i think if you look at the whole panapoly of reforms together as a package, there is a real attempt by the federal govern

secondly, this was a management standard operating procedure. in other words, it had many checklists of what to do to start the day at the checkpoint. it did not have a lot of sensitive security information on how to actually do certain procedures at the checkpoint. that being said, i appreciate the gravity andÑi significance with which people regarded this. we knew and their immediate reaction was to begin to do a line by line review of that document, compared to measures in place today, and frankly, even with the confidence we had, out of an abundance of caution, we immediately took some additional measures which we do any time we get information that tells us to put an additional set of measures in place in order to be that much more confident in the system. >> is it safe to say that you have changed the review procedures? is it safe to say that as the public is traveling, that there are new schemes and procedures that no one knows about? let me hold this up. this is an example of the kinds of cards that were displayed. some others dealt with

secondly, medicare was not on the verge of imminent bankruptcy which is now.here was no bill on the floor that would extend very generous subsidies to the 55 and 65 years old to allow them to buy insurance and reduce the impact of age in the pricing of insurance policy spreaies. things have changed a lot about i finally got to see the "conn post"interview. though i was against the public option, i was not against health care reform. i did that before the finance committee bill came out with this very large and generous system of subsidies to bring a lower middle income people into the health insurance system. >> were their subsidies baked into that? make sense. when advocates of the public option saw they did not have the votes for the public option, they tried to go down another path. it made no sense. incidentally, i am not the only person who oppose the medicare buy-in. you saw 11 other democratic senators wrote to every breed and they were against it because of the impact they thought it would have on hospitals and doctors in their state and by cost shifti

secondly, to put security first because nothing can be done in the political and economic sphere withoutsecurity. third, to seek as wide as possible and international influence into an international operation of this kind with the legitimacy that would lead to that and which flows from that. and fourthly, to be much more aware of where the gaps are and where the limitations will be and try to address those early in security, political resource, economic and other terms before you begin. this was clearly to rest and exercise -- too rushed an exercise on the ground which some people had been predicting would be as difficult as it was. to have this degree of mismatch is something that has to be avoided in the future. >> thank you. >> thank-you, sir jeremy. i think this has given you the opportunity to make a final observations for the session. there may be more to say. with that, can i say one thing for the record? i think you used the term "third role?" -- can you explain what that is? third>>an fco section was composed of the head of that section, the deputy head of that section and the t