senator lieu tkpwarbgs who was first -- senator lugar, first elected to the senate two years later in 1976, ranks tenth on the all-time list and most recently passed our former colleague and current occupant of the chair, vice president joe biden. this is not only a remarkable accomplishment of longevity for both men, it's also an opportunity for their colleagues to honor them for their decades of service to the people of indiana and of vermont. senator law had i isn't just a -- senator leahy is also the chairman of the judiciary committee and the senior member of the agriculture and appropriations committee. pat and i got to know each other pretty well, alternating as chairman and ranking member of the foreign operations subcommittee of appropriations for over a decade. somehow he finds time to also be an amateur photographer and to have a blossoming movie career. and i have no doubt he gives most of the credit, of course, to marcelle, his wife, with whom he'll be celebrating a far more important milestone next month, their 50th wedding anniversary. congratulations to you, pat, on bo

a senator: mr. president? the senator from the senator from ohio. mr. brown: plaintiffs, it's not a shareholder -- mr. president, it's not a shareholder democracy where the $10 million, the ten million buys drowns out the corporations real people earn. the disclose act would make people do what political candidates do when you pay for political advertising. you face the camera. you tell the voters you sponsor to commercial, whether you're democrat or republican, surely you don't want to see our political system, our democratic system become the puppet of a few large corporations with whatever interests they have. oil or big insurance or drug companies or companies that outsource jobs as their specialty. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: the most astounding fact that has emerged since the citizens united decision is that just 17 people have given over half the money to the republican super pac. there is very little disclosure and there is huge amounts of money cascading in from a small few.

i had a meeting with senator feinstein, senator tester, senator lautenberg. and in the course of the conversation, senator feinstein looked back and said, you know, i had really a controversial amendment dealing with what should happen to assault weapons. she said, you know, that passed with a simple majority vote. no one suggested filibustering that thing to death. that's only new. that's new. legislation being used as an excuse to stop things. now, i want the record to be very clear, and i've made it all very clear in all of my public statements about the need to get rid of the motion to proceed. madam president, i'm not for getting rid of the filibuster rule. in 1984 i suggested i think the house and senate should be the same. i do believe when the filibuster came into being was to help get legislation passed. i repeat: it's now to stop legislation from passing, and that's not appropriate. so i'm convinced the best thing to do with the filibuster is have filibusters. i've been involved in a couple of them. i'm sure i i irritated people on both of them. but

president, i'm awaiting senator durbin and senator enzi. i'll be happy to listen to the senator from louisiana if she'd like to continue for awhile until they come. i plan to speak for a few minutes after they do on a different subject. ms. landrieu: thanks. mr. president, then in that case, i will -- the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: i have a few other things i'd like to say but not about this bill. i wanted to take a minute to respond to something that senator rubio said earlier and senator sessions while i was on the floor. and i have great respect for those two members, the senator -- the junior senator from florida. but he came to the floor to -- in a very critical diatribe, if you will, against some of president obama's policies. and i have not been a great supporter of the president's energy policies and -- and actually appreciate some of the views that senator rubio holds about the fact that we need to drill more in the country. but i want to show you something that i think florida should be mindful of

, senator blumenthal, senator coons and senator blunt and also should they come senator graham and senator kyl be allowed to engage in a colloquy. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: our topic, madam president, is the urgency of the need to protect our privately held critical infrastructure -- the power grid, the machines that process our financial transactions, the communications networks that connect our blackberries and our phones. and in this area no one is more expert than senator mikulski, who is a senior member of the senate intelligence committee, helped draft the senate intelligence report on cyber, and has the pen as the cardinal for the budgets of most of the agencies that are relevant to this discussion. so let me lead immediately to senator mikulski who has been enormously helpful in ranging this. mr. mikulski: i want to thank the senator from rhode island, former member of the intelligence committee and activist in this area. you know, madam president,, colleagues, i'm happy to be on the floor with a bipartisan group of people who are really worried abou

first witness is senator cordin. a senate member of this committee. this is senator cardin's second appearance before this hearing. he testified last year on the civil rights of american muslims. senator cardin, we're pleased that you could join us today and please proceed. >> well, senator durbin, first, let me thank you for your leadership on this subcommittee. in fact, we have this subcommittee as a testament to your leadership in making clear that civil and human rights are going to be a priority of the united states senate. soy thank you for your leadership and thank you very much for calling this hearing. it's a pleasure to be here with all my colleagues, but i particularly wanted to acknowledge senator conyers and his extraordinary life leadership on behalf of civil rights and these issues. congressman conyers was a real mentor to me when i was in the house and still is and we thank you very much for your leadership on this issue. senator durbin, you pointed out that the nation was shocked. if i could ask unanimous consent to put my entire stat

the senators, the republican senators from oklahoma were right. he's a stellar candidate and by every measure, a great guy. please, don't make him a victim of last-minute political campaigning in this last week before the recess that we take for our democratic and national convention and republican national convention. he shouldn't be a victim of this presidential campaign. he deserves a chance to serve. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: mr. president, i don't like to get involved in the back and forth on this issue. it just bothers me. chairman leahy goes into all these numbers, and they are distorted for the most part in connection with the reality. i've said that i simply will not, however, stand by and see the record misconstrued and the picture painted is something from what it is. president bush's judicial nominees were filibustered extraordinarily. unlike anything we'd ever seen before. and this is the way it happened. i was here, i remember it very distinctly. president bush wa

senator graham is running a little late. senator leahy is out of the senate this morning. but was kind enough to allow me to convene this hearing. and i'm sure we'll add a statement to the record. i'm going to open the floor to senator graham when he does arrive, but for the time being, because we have many colleagues here who have busy schedules of their own, i want to turn to the first panel of witnesses. at the outset, i do want to note that i invited the department of justice to participate in today's hearing, but they declined. we're honored to be joined today by our colleagues from the senate and the house. in keeping with the practice of this committee, first we will hear from members of the senate then members of the house, a practice which i loathed in the house but now that we're running a show i'm afraid you'll have to live with it, my house colleagues. each witness will have three minutes for an opening statement. your complete written statement will be included in the record. first witness, senator cardin, a former member of this committee. senate sponsor of t

senator dodd, senator bingaman, senator kennedy, when he came ill asked us to take the leadership on different provisions of the affordable care act in the help committee and to get it through. we had wonderful support from our colleagues here on the floor of the senate, in our committee. and these provisions that we put in to move us from a sick-care system to a health care system. ivan said in america -- i've often said in america we don't have a health care system. we have a sick care system. if you get sick, you'll have care maybe in the emergency room if you're poor or maybe not at all, if you don't make it to the emergency room. but there's very little in our country to keep you healthy in the first place. and yet we know, we have good data and we know that preventive services up front saves you a lot of money and a lot of lives, a lot of pain and suffering later on. so in the affordable care act we put in a big provision on preventive services. and we said basically that what the preventive services task force of the center for disease control and prevention, what they listed

alexander has been on record, senator chambliss, senator sessions, senator cornyn, senator collins,ator brown of massachusetts, senator coburn and most -- prominently and over a long period of time and with great distinction, senator john mccain. i yield to my distinguished chairman and friend, the chairman of the judiciary committee, and giving his voice to this debate. mr. leahy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i appreciate what the senator from rhode island has done. he has been a champion on this not only in the public forum like the floor of the senate but he's been a champion of it in the -- in the cloakrooms and the committee rooms, everywhere we might speak about it and he's been most consistent. and the people of rhode island are very fortunate in having somebody with such a strong voice. for the last two and a half years, the american people have seen the devastating effects of the citizens united decision. that decision by five supreme court justices overturned a century of laws, a century of laws that have been su

i helped senator mikulski and senator snowe write the senate intelligence committee cybersecurity report. i am the chairman of the judiciary subcommittee on crime and terror that has jurisdiction over cybersecurity. as i have explained before on the floor of the senate, a cyber threat against our nation, against our intellectual property, against our privacy and against our safety is vast and it is upon us. it is a national security threat. it is a national economic threat. we cannot afford to wait to pass legislation to respond to this threat. the leading national security experts in each party agree now -- now -- is the time to pass comprehensive cybersecurity legislation. the cybersecurity act is a strong, comprehensive bill that will make our nation safer. it will provide for the sharing of threat information among the government and private sector, and it will provide for the hardening, for the protection of the networks of the private companies that operate america's critical infrastructure that run our electric grid, that run our financial networks, that run our communications sys

, senator burr, senator murkowski, senator coa coats, senator johnson, we want to make sure that we do this right. as the heritage foundation has so aptly said, we don't want a big, new regulatory scheme that is not going to be successful in our efforts to improve the cybersecurity safeguards in our system. we are the ranking members of all but one of the relevant committees. we know this area. we deal with the agencies that deal with cybersecurity and all the national security in our country and we know what can work and we know what we have a chance to pass and we know how to take the first step forward without another big regulatory overreach that we have seen happen in the last 3 1/2 years in this administration. we hope to work with the majority, with the lieberman-collins bill and come up with something that everyone will feel is the right step forward. we'd like to have a bill that would get a large number of votes rather than a very lopsided vote against it. so, mr. president, i appreciate very much that we are now beginning to discuss this. i'm appreciative that we have had se

it began to look like the time in the 1980's when senator byrd and baker ran the senate and senator byrd or baker would come to the floor and say, all right, here's a bill, it's supported by the democratic chairman and the ranking republican, or vice versa. they put it on the floor, they had sea for amendments, they might get 300 and then they'd say, i ask unanimous consent to have no more amendments. of course they'd get it because anybody that had wanted an amendment had offered one. then they'd start tovestment the majority leader would say, we're going to stay until we finish and they did. that never was perfect. it's always a little messy. that's the way the senate is. but they got a lot of work done. that's what makes this so disappointing. mr. blunt: it is disappointing in that as you say it is not even that hard to figure out what we could be doing or what we should be doing or what's the fundamental work of what we should be doing. you know, there are things that the constitution says we can't do, like initiate a tax bill. so we spend a the love time on tax bills that even if we

durbin, senator franken, senator blumenthal, senator merkley, senator sanders and others, we found that appropriate balance in this legislation that's before us. the changes we have made to the original text and to the house-passed version have significantly strengthened privacy rights. that's why i say, madam president, we can celebrate real progress here today. i long thought that it was the privacy issues that would be the rock on which this ship would founder, that the critical and unaddressed privacy issues in cispa and secure i.t. just spoken to by senator franken would be issues that would prevent me from supporting cybersecurity legislation in this session of the congress, but we have made remarkable progress. let me, if i can, briefly review a few of the areas where that progress has been made. we made sure that companies cannot pry into the private online activities of everyday americans in the name of national security. i want to mention just one more improvement. in addition to those mentioned by senator franken just before me concerning legal immunities contained in this bi

basically what we're in in the senate, as senator bennet and senator whitehouse and senator merkley know, we're in the mode of a full filibuster now. we're on a motion to proceed. we're not allowed to get on to the bill. and so people should just recognize that's the posture we're in right now, and yet we're going to be down here, we're going to be talking about this issue. and i join my colleagues today to talk about about this serious problem of campaign finance reform, one that threatens the very nature of our democracy. and that threat is the unprecedented flow of money into our elections. we need to look at this dangerous torrent of money and consider how to stop it. and i believe a step in the right direction is the disclose act. in january 2010, the supreme court issued its disastrous opinion in citizens united versus f.e.c. two months later the d.c. circuit court of appeals decided speech now vs. f.e.c. which the supreme court upheld. these two cases gave rise to super pacs. they opened the floodgates of secret cash. super pacs have poured millions of dollars into negative and mi

mcconnell of kentucky, senator mccain of arizona, senator thune of south dakota, senator cornyn of texas. in fact, the entire republican leadership team voted for what they are now branding as devastating, arbitrary and irresponsible. so it's a little hard for me to understand how on this date, august 2, 2011, in the early afternoon, they could vote for this and now come to the floor and condemn it. here's the reality: the reality is we need to deal with our deficit in a responsible fashion. we need to keep this economy moving forward. in order to deal with the deficit in a responsible fashion, i still believe the boobles approach is -- bowles-simpson approach is the right approach. work through it in a responsible way. i thought it was right then, i still believe it is right. i am troubled, though, by this concept about defense spending. now, let me confess my own personal and family feelings. an hour ago, my nephew, michael kakase in the 10th division in new york came up to see me. he was a sight for sore eyes. a little over a year ago he was a doorman letting people into the gallery u

so i'm glad to join with senator alexander, with senator leahy and others. i hope we have an overwhelming vote today for this gentleman who i believe is going to be an outstanding federal judge, and i want to -- i want to ask all of my colleagues to join us in supporting this person who, again, i think will be exemplary on the bench as he has been throughout his entire life. with that i yield the floor and i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: mr. leahy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: i ask that the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: i ask for the yeas and nays on the nominee. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays have been ored. mr. leahy: mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

by me, i say senator binghamton, senator feinstein, who are the ranking members on energy and the energy appropriations committee, and senator murkowski and i who are the ranking republican members, we've decided we're going to work together, mr. chairman, with you and others to try to break the stalemate and address the issue and begin to implement the best ideas from this report. two things have happened this year which are moving us in that direction. first, we were able to include with the approval of the authorization committee leaders a provision in this year's energy and water appropriations bill that creates a pilot program for the department of energy to begin to find consolidation sites for used nuclear fuel. that would be a consent-based process, and it would be a place where you would put nuclear fuel before it goes into the long-term repository. we thank you for the endorsement by the co-chairs of your commission of this idea. and dr. peterson's also commended the idea. that's a big help. whether one is for or against yucca mountain, we need to move ahead. we still need cons

you don't have to look any further than senator chai poe and senator -- senator crapo and senator risch to know idaho is a state filled with good people. the national laboratory has calculated idaho's wind resources produces foreign 218% of identify -- more than 218% of idaho's electricity needs. most of this potential is in the high plains of the southern half of the state. i have to tell you that eyes hoe is already working to -- that idaho is working to take advantage of what is a bountiful resource. there are wind projects either online or under construction across the state. if you look, madam president, in southeastern utah near twin falls, the wolferine energy creek farm, it covers about 5,000 acres and pays royalties to 30 different landowners. in 2011 idaho's installed wind capacity grew by nearly 75%. that growth created hundreds of temporary construction jobs as well as permanent jobs in operation maintenance of these facilities. another number, right now idaho's wind sources provide power for nearly 160,000 homes without releasing the nearly 1.1 million metric tons of carbon

, senator dick durbin. he will response to mr. gillespie here. plus the future of the bush era tax cuts. also joining me the assistant republican leader in the senator, jon kyl. durbin and kyl will square off. we'll also get their thoughts on this olympic-style outrage in washington over the uniforms being made in china. a little bit later on, bob costas will be here to talk about the penn state candle scandal and the fallout from this week's freeh report. it's all coming up. [ male announcer ] if you had a dollar for every dollar car insurance companies say they'll save you by switching, you'd have like, a ton of dollars. but how are they saving you those dollars? a lot of companies might answer "um" or, "no comment." then there's esurance. born online, raised by technology, and majors in efficiency. so whatever they save, you save. hassle, time, paperwork, hair-tearing-out, and yes, especially dollars. esurance. insurance for the modern world. >>> coming up here, your taxes depend on your vote in november

i had a meeting with senator feinstein, senator tester, senator lautenberg. and in the course of the conversation, senator feinstein looked back and said, you know, i had really a controversial amendment dealing with what should happen to assault weapons. she said, you know, that passed with a simple majority vote. no one suggested filibustering that thing to death. that's only new. that's new. legislation being used as an excuse to stop things. now, i want the record to be very clear, and i've made it all very clear in all of my public statements about the need to get rid of the motion to proceed. madam president, i'm not for getting rid of the filibuster rule. in 1984 i suggested i think the house and senate should be the same. i do believe when the filibuster came into being was to help get legislation passed. i repeat: it's now to stop legislation from passing, and that's not appropriate. so i'm convinced the best thing to do with the filibuster is have filibusters. i've been involved in a couple of them. i'm sure i i irritated people on both of them. but

senate. people measure the gravity and importance of votes in terms of their political impact. how many times have i heard someone cast a vote here and afterwards say, well, that will be a good 30-second spot. you think about that because you know that's what our life experience translates into, messages that can be delivered through the media to the voters. and now this outside force comes along and spends enormous amounts of money, dramatically increasing the amount that's been spent. as was said earlier, 2006, outside groups spent $70 million to influence federal midterm elections. 2006, $0 million. -- $70 million. four years later, super pacs, outside groups, spent $294 million, four times as much. trust me, it's on its way up. well, what will the average family think about this? i said to my colleagues at a lunch a few weeks back, i think that the average voter looks at this enormous wash of money coming into american politics much the way they you're gangland -- very view gangland killi

senator tom harper is chairman of the subcommittee and senator john baraso is the ranking member. this is just over two hours. >> one of my heroes and mentors from my time in the house. i appreciate that. today's hearing is really one of several that we hope to hold on the work of the blue ribbon commission on america's nuclear future as our committee starts to deliberate on how we move forward on what i think -- i think what we all believe is a very important issue of nuclear waste disposal in this country and really in the world. specifically today, we'll be focusing on the consent-based side and recommendations made by the commission. our senators will have five minutes for their opening statements and we'll recognize our first panel of witnesses. two members of the blue ribbon commission, itself. general scowcroft and dr. peterson will have five minutes each to offer their statements to our committee. if you go a little bit over that, that's okay, but not too far over that. following the first panel's statements, we'll have one round of questions. somewhere during this we'll p

, senator dick durbin. he will response to mr. gillespie here. plus the future of the bush era tax cuts. also joining me the assistant republican leader in the senator, jon kyl. durbin and kyl will square off. we'll also get their thoughts on this olympic-style outrage in washington over the uniforms being made in china. a little bit later on, bob costas will be here to talk about the penn state candle scandal and the fallout from this week's freeh report. it's all coming up. we know why we're here. ♪ to connect our forces to what they need, when they need it. ♪ to help troops see danger, before it sees them. ♪ to answer the call of the brave and bring them safely home. [ female announcer ] around the globe, the people of boeing are working together, to support and protect all who serve. that's why we're here. ♪ >>> coming up here, your taxes depend on your vote in november. so are your rates going to go up or not? joining me this morning for a special debate on the future of those bush-era tax cuts democra

of senator landrieu and senator snowe. this is not a controversial issue. well, the only way we're going to get that increase -- that expired in 2010. it is no longer part of the law. so the small business owners are at a disadvantage. we haven't had a chance to extend that. iit is not controversial. it brings money into the economy. it is not scored, so we need to be able to get that done. if we can't get to this bill, i don't know when we get that increase in the surety bond limit. so it is another reason i just urge my colleagues to let us vote on this bill to help small businesses in our community. it has always enjoyed bipartisan support. so here's what we're asking: my colleagues, we all talk about we want to create more jobs. we all talk about supporting small businesses because we know small businesses are the growth engine of america. we all know that small businesses are more -- create more of the new patents, more of the new innovations per employer than the larger companies do. well, let's put our action where

senate. all four were nominated by president clinton and blocked by senate republicans. this entire year the senate has yet to vote on a single circuit court nominee who was nominated by president obama this year. since 1980, the only presidential election year in which there were no circuit nominees confirmed, that year was in 1986 when senate republicans shut down the process against president clinton's circuit nominees. there is no good reason the senate should not vote on nominees like judge shipp, more than a dozen other consensus judicial nominees to fill trial court vacancies in iowa, california, utah, maryland, connecticut, oklahoma, michigan, new york and pennsylvania. all those states being denied federal judges, people that have bipartisan support, all of whom could have been confirmed with a voice vote. there is no good reason why the senate shouldn't vote on the nomination of william kayatta of maine, richard toronto of the federal circuit or judge patty shwartz of the third circ

and only the senate bill, the senate violence against women act, the leahy-crapo bipartisan senate bill affords protection to all of our people. and so what we're saying to speaker boehner is please, hear our plea. this isn't about the senate saying it's any better than the house. what we are saying is on a bipartisan way, we figured out a bill that will protect everybody. and we are asking you to pick up that bill and pass it. there's some technical issues, a blue-slip question. we've studied that and what did we find out? those technical problems can be overcome in five seconds. so there's no reason why the house cannot pick up and pass the senate bill. the safety of women across the country, the safety of all of our communities is at stake. and it's time we pass it. in closing, i would say this. vice president biden is a wonderful human being, and he could not sit back when he was in the senate and see violence against women go on and on and on without any way to ensure that women could get into shelters, that women could get counseling, that law enforcement could be trained, that do

senators franken, senator merkley, senator blumenthal.i've also received a great deal of support and encouragement along the way from organizations dedicated to ensuring that students have a genuine path to success in higher education. in particular, i thank the cowns council for opportunity in education, the leadership trust, the leadership council on civil rights, institute for college access and success, campus progress, and the national association for college admissions counseling. all have been involved in helping us over the last couple of years to get the data that we need. on behalf of service members and veterans, we have had tremendous assistance from the iraq and afghanistan veterans associati association, the veterans of foreign wars, the military officers association of america, blue star families, the vietnam veterans association, student veterans of america, the american legion, vet jobs, vets first, paralyzed veterans of america, the national association for black veterans, the national guard association, the air force se

senator wyden. we both were in the house together so we still sometimes throw that word congressman in. maybe we're hearkening back to our house days. senator gregg, who is now retired from service, distinguished service here in the senate, worked with senator wyden for two years in putting a package together, a comprehensive tax reform package. it's the only plan out there that has been written, that has been scored, that is available for debate and available for -- to the tax-writing committees to use as a basis or a foundation or parts of it or all of it or whatever in forming their own version to bring forward, but there is a bipartisan consensus that we ought to move forward on comprehensive tax reform. senator catch, our republican leader of the finance committee, which is the committee responsible for writing that bill, has said that piecemeal is not the way to go. anybody who has analyzed our current situation understands that. comprehensive is. but even he agreed that in this instance, give

, senator dick durbin. he will response to mr. gillespie here. plus the future of the bush era tax cuts. also joining me the assistant republican leader in the senator, jon kyl. durbin and kyl will square off. we'll also get their thoughts on this olympic-style outrage in washington over the uniforms being made in china. a little bit later on, bob costas will be here to talk about the penn state candle scandal and the fallout from this week's freeh report. it's all coming up. >>> coming up here, your taxes depend on your vote in november. so are your rates going to go up or not? joining me this morning for a special debate on the future of those bush-era tax cuts democratic senator durbin and >>> back now with senator jon kyl of arizona, and senator dick durbin of illinois. and senator durbin, let me start with you. i want to pick up on this fight in the campaign this week over bain. this is the spokeswoman for the obama campaign, stephanie cutter, bringing the charge against mitt romney over these signatur

and senator lautenberg. >> thanks, senator landrieu. i'm pleased to be here with colleagues who have the guts to stand up and fight the battle that women deserve. that is reasonably good health care. and led by barbara mikulski who always surprises us with her leadership, dynamism, her tenacity, and all of the things that resulted and where we stand on this health care bill right now. can you imagine what would have happened just february when one of our colleagues in the senate decided to bring up an amendment that would strike the women's health care section out of the reform bill. now, what would have happened if at the same time a woman came in there and said, you know what, i think we ought to stop pros state screening for men -- prostate screening for men, what do you think would happen? we might get a response to that. the fact of the matter is that there's a group trying to decide what women ought to be doing for themselves and their families. now there is a chief honcho as you know as the owely garky group, his name is romney,

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. hoeven: madam president, i rise to speak on the need for pro-growth tax reform rather than a tax increase. president obama's proposed raising taxes. he says we should raise income taxes on individuals and small businesses, that we should raise capital gains taxes on investments and that we should raise the estate tax, meaning raise the death tax on american families. for example, take the estate tax. you've got a farmer right now. he wants to pass his farm on to the next generation for any value over $5 million he has to pay estate tax. generally, families may be able to do that, may be able to borrow the dollars required and pass the family farm on to the next generation. but under this proposal, that changes instead of paying estate tax on anything over $5 million, now that farm family would have to pay estate tax on anything over $1 million. so think about a farmer in my home state of north dakota or maybe in minnesota or anywhere throughout the midwest. now, how do they pass on th

and senator murray will tell you the rest. senator murray. thank you. >> thank you [applause] well, ron, thank you so much for that introduction. i am so glad to be here today to discuss this issue with so many of you who have been working on this for a very long time and i want to thank the budgeting for national priorities project at brookings for hosting you here today as well as the great members of the panel that you're going to be hearing from shortly and all of you for taking time to be a part of this discussion. as all of you know last august i was asked by majority leader reid to co-chair the joint select committee on deficit reduction, or the super-committee as it was commonly called. this certainly wasn't the most sought-after job in congress as you may imagine. it was probably just a notch below the chair of the dscc but i agreed to do it because i thought it represented a few important opportunities. the opportunity to avoid the pain of sequestration that would be triggered if no deal was made of course. to pass a responsible, lo

i think it applies in the senate. i would say our governing style different somewhat in that we really do -- i think every one of us wants to get something done. we want to accomplish things. we want to bring people together and hammer it out. sometimes that isn't the case in the senate. >> in fact we know that the senate the congress generally seems pretty frozen, and hogs -- hostile along partisan lines. is there a way out of that? >> it's a collegial place. i think even more in the house because we do have more open rules, and therefore, minority has more power in the senate than they do in the house. in the house everything was done by the majority. in the senate, the minority can stop legislation reporting on votes, they can have -- we have a straight work relationship with our colleagues always understanding that we may differ on philosophy and may differ on the way things are done, but in the end understanding that everyone wants do the best they can for their state and for their philosophy. so some of my best

quorum call: a senator: the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mr.ident, i ask that the quorum call be set aside. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the time until 2:15 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees with the republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the second 30 minutes. mr. johanns: madam president, i come to the floor today to discuss a wholly predictable and forseeable economic disaster, and i ask why the senate continues to waste valuable time while we continue barreling toward a fiscal cliff. in a little more than five months the current tax rates are scheduled to expire for every single american, resulting in the largest tax increase in history. it's hard to imagine this massive tax increase is what the president wants. just two years ago he warned that you absolutely should not raise taxes in a poor economy. yet today the economy is actually in worse shape. so what

senate floor here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. today's opening prayer will be offered by reverend elizabeth evans hagan, senior pastor of washington plaza baptist church in reston, virginia. the chaplain: let us pray. our gracious god, we thank you for being the source of all life, all wisdom and all grace in this world. and truly as your people we are so very blessed: we are blessed with breath as we rose to this new day. we are blessed with communities of friends and family that support us. we are blessed with hope that our gifts and talents can be channeled into meaningful work. help all of us, o god, to remember the richness of our blessings so that we may work courageously for all of those you have given us to serve. to whom much given, much is also expected. may we give more into your holy work before us today. it is in thanksgiving we pray in your most holy name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and

senate and was re-elected. currently he's on the senate judiciary committee, homeland security and government affairs committee, and the committee on finance. he is a leader in the fight to uphold the true meaning of marriage, the dignity of human life by protecting the unborn. second amendment rights and incorporating responsible fiscal policy. outside of standing up for these important values, he has a great business track record. when he was the manufacturing manager for ophthalmic, correct me on that, senator, when you get up here, division of coburn optical industries, his company grew from 13 to 1,350 employees, and he's personally delivered 4,000 babies, so -- but most of all, senator coburn is known as a true conservative. last year "the national journal" ranked him as the most conservative senator. his opposition to excess spending and more debt is well known. his commitment to smaller government is well known. and his objections to those who propose government as the solution for any and all problems

i had a meeting with senator feinstein, senator tester, senator lautenberg.and in the course of the conversation, senator feinstein looked back and said, you know, i had really a controversial amendment dealing with what should happen to assault weapons. she said, you know, that passed with a simple majority vote. no one suggested filibustering that thing to death. that's only new. that's new. legislation being used as an excuse to stop things. now, i want the record to be very clear, and i've made it all very clear in all of my public statements about the need to get rid of the motion to proceed. madam president, i'm not for getting rid of the filibuster rule. in 1984 i suggested i think the house and senate should be the same. i do believe when the filibuster came into being was to help get legislation passed. i repeat: it's now to stop legislation from passing, and that's not appropriate. so i'm convinced the best thing to do with the filibuster is have filibusters. i've been involved in a couple of them. i'm sure i i irritated people on both of them. but

senator snowe has worked side by side with him, and senator moran, senator coons and senator rubio have all called for this provision making it permanent. now, i wish we could make it permanent. this bill will not -- we will not make it permanent in the landrieu amendment. but we will extend it for another year and a half. and according to the kaufman foundation paper published earlier this year -- and the kaufman foundation, for those that don't know, is really the leading think tank. it is not political at all. it is just a middle-of ha-the-r, well-respected think tank on small business development. they published a paper earlier this year. the 100% exclusion boosts the after-tax returns on such investments and tartups and should -- start-ups an. they estimate that by making this provision permanent would increase investments conservatively by 50%, more than the overall cost of the provisions. so, they are supporting the -- this provision very strongly and would like to see it permanent, but we can only afford in this package to have it for a year, the next year, as we again build out

, senator dick durbin. he will response to mr. gillespie here. plus the future of the bush era tax cuts. that's a big debate as well important the fall. also joining me the assistant republican leader in the senator, jon kyl. durbin and kyl will square off. we'll also get their thoughts on this olympic-style outrage in washington over the uniforms being made in china. a little bit later on, bob costas will be here to talk about the penn state scandal and the fallout from this week's freeh report. it's all coming up. it's all coming up. [ female announcer ] the power of green coffee extract is now in our new starbucks refreshers™ -- a breakthrough in natural energy. made with real fruit, starbucks refreshers™ are delicious low calorie drinks you can feel good about. ♪ rethink how you re-energize. ♪ get a boost of natural energy with a new starbucks refreshers™, in three ways. natural energy from green coffee extract, only from starbucks. but they haven't experienced extra strength bayer advanced aspirin. in

. >> thank you, senator shaheen. senator isaacson, thank you for your patience. >> thank you. it's good to have you here on a historic day. i need to get a couple of clarifications. i wrote down some things i heard in the absence of my having read the testimony so i apologize. but, mr. gerard, you made a statement, i think it's with regard to shell, had invested $4 billion in the arctic. they sent two ships to look at their first claim, is that correct? >> yes. they acquired the lease five years ago through the process of permitting and getting the ability to go out and actually start to drill a well, they've been in that process five years. it's cost them $4 billion to this point, and we hope they're going to get final approval to drill those first wells this summer during this summer season, but that's how long this process takes. my simple point was these are long-term investments, and they're very significant. so we've got to know that we've got some rights intact before we commit to make those investments. >> who is granting that permit? >> u.s. government. >> the u.s. go

of the 100 senators in the u.s. senate, 17 senators are women. so the senate is 17 women, 83 men. and the 435 members in the u.s. house of representatives, 7 iii women, 360 men, two vacancies. why are there so few, especially relatively speaking, when it's very vivid, women in the congress, eleanor? >> because they have better things to do, and i'm not -- >> now wait a minute. >> i'm not just trying to be -- >> are you slurring the political -- >> i'm saying there are so many opportunities available now to women where you don't have to put your whole family on display, you don't have to make your tax returns public, you don't have to turn your life over seven days, 24 hours, and you don't have to put up with all the criticism from your opponents. politics is a tough profession but there are like a dozen pretty high-profile women running for the senate and the house in this election cycle, mostly democrats, some are republicans, and so there are some predictions that we could get the numbers up this time. the year of the woman in 1992, four women, democratic women, were elected to

>> senator, go ahead.et me tell you, the bottom line is this, the outsourcing of jobs by bain capital to low-wage countries is an embarrassment to mitt romney and he's trying to distance himself from his own company that made millions of dollars for him. i would say to senator kyl, i hope that this week the senate republicans will join the democrats in supporting the measure that senator debbie stabenow of michigan, general brown of ohio will cover that eliminates the incentive, the tax incentive that we have to outsource jobs and rewards american companies for bringing jobs back to america. it would be great to see the republicans join us in a bipartisan effort to create a tax incentive to bring jobs home. instead, they're making excuses. now, i have to say that mr. gillespie and my friend jon kyl have failed to answer your question. outsourcing, unfortunately, costs good american jobs. we need a president focusing on creating jobs in america, not a former governor whose company specialized in exporting j

to anybody in the senate? no. no. it ended suddenly. >> did you have a sense of time table? >> yes. i was very concerned about that. that's why i didn't want to leave my office. i thought it would be fairly quick. i thought 30 to 60 days after the articles of impeachment would come down. and that's an important time to prepare a case. and we'd have to prepare the congressman because we weren't really going to be able, and even in the clinton impeachment, you have congressmen present on the floor so we have to prepare them. they are not as steeped in it. i have to spend time preparing them, how, who is going to prepare them. this was a big job if he wanted to find all the way through. >> what role would john dorr have played? >> that's an interesting -- i envisioned him playing a very important role making you know, basic -- if the -- yeah, if the senate would have permitted it, then we had to get senate permission the whole procedure thing, i remember reading about the johnson impeachment. how they did it ther