a past senate could not take away the right of the future senate by tying the hands of the new senate. he said a majority may adopt the rules in the first place. it is preposterous to assume they can deny the right to change them. made goody -- said sense. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] edward snowden, congressional hearings, and we talk to new york times reporter mark the seti. -- versetti. coming up on the next washington journal, an examination of what is working and what is not with the affordable care act. guest is editor for politico. keythe discussion on supreme court cases in 2013. we are joined by author of in the balance. live everyjournal is morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. next, our first ladies series featuring eleanor roosevelt. then a discussion on female veterans in iraq and afghanistan on the challenges they face at home. it is followed by a roundtable on the role of religion and faith in politics. >> good evening. i am speaking to you tonight at a very serious moment in our histo

he was on the senate labor committee for eight years. he was in the senate. was also in a very high-profile committee, mcclellan committee. this was the one domestic issue. paul douglas, fairness and other who was not very inclined to be complementary. he marveled at his ability to understand the nuances and complexities of labor laws, liberal legislation, and kennedy get involved in this very complicated effort to pass the reform. fifty-eight to 59. he passed and the modest bill and the house. it went into a conference committee. he passed a modest bill in the senate. it went into negotiations with the house. a very different bill emerged of what kennedy has some ability shape the final product. and that was when people thought that he had the potential to be kind of a serious, serious policy maker. i think kennedy left that experience and a never going to get involved in that kind of complex domestic issue again. certainly well on rent for president. i think that was interesting. kennedy as a foreign policy senator. think that might be particularly interest

he was on the senate labor committee for eight years. he was in the senate. was also in a very high-profile committee, mcclellan committee. this was the one domestic issue. paul douglas, fairness and other who was not very inclined to be complementary. he marveled at his ability to understand the nuances and complexities of labor laws, liberal legislation, and kennedy get involved in this very complicated effort to pass the reform. fifty-eight to 59. he passed and the modest bill and the house. it went into a conference committee. he passed a modest bill in the senate. it went into negotiations with the house. a very different bill emerged of what kennedy has some ability shape the final product. and that was when people thought that he had the potential to be kind of a serious, serious policy maker. i think kennedy left that experience and a never going to get involved in that kind of complex domestic issue again. certainly well on rent for president. i think that was interesting. kennedy as a foreign policy senator. think that might be particularly interest

the united states senate -- senator robert bid byrd when i e loved the senate. senator robbed byrd said there are two great senates, the u.s. senate and the roman snavment he gave us all members a lecture on the rules of the senate. he wrote a book on the rules of the senate. and we have rules for quite a number of years. standing rule of the senate is rule 22. it is a clear, simple, directive passed by two-thirds of the members of the senate, duly chosen and sworn. this is what rule 22 says. it is not confusing. it's very clear. it was adopted by two-thirds of the senate. a it says this: "a motion signed by 16 senators." that is to initiate something, to shut off debate, you have to have 16 senators file a motion. so a motion filed by ^16 senators to bring to a close the debate upon any measure, motion, or other matter pending before the senate -- any measure, motion, or other matter pending before the senate. that includes nominations. "... shall be decided by three-fifths of the senators dolely chosen and sworn, except on a measure or motion to amend the sena

are we going to be the senate that has been the senate for 225 years? with the rights of the majority being able to express -- our majority leader can look across the aisle and say the former chairman of the agriculture committee, former secretary of agriculture can't have a say in what the farm bill says. i mean, it's a treasure trove of experience. it's a treasure trove of knowledge of the whole agricultural sector, and the majority leader simply says because i'm in power and i can tell you what you can do and what you can't do. forget it. forget your adjustments to this. but that leads us right into the most egregious power grab of all, and that was when under total democrat control both in the house and the senate and at the presidency in the white house, democrats decided they're going to tell us how we should reshape our health care system and readjust one-sixth of the entire u.s. economy. and, by the way, we have all this expertise here, or we think we have this expertise here, and we will wrap all this up in one with 2,000-plus page bill, and we

a past senate could not take away the right of the future senate by tying the hands of the new senate. he said a majority may adopt the rules in the first place. it is preposterous to assume they can deny the right to change them. what he may -- said made good sense. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> all this week in primetime, we are bringing you encore presentations of c-span's q&a. medea benjamin talks about her call to activism and her organization's, including antiwar efforts. watch the entire conversation tonight at 7:00 eastern here on c-span. after that, look at news and events surrounding this year's revelations about the nsa's surveillance and data collection programs in the privacy and security issues advocated. we will bring you highlights from the debate in congress as we talk with mark rossetti. that is tonight at 8:00 eastern 9:00, a look at the life and legacy of bess truman. she was forced to take charge of her family as a teenager following the suicide of her father. despite her reputat

many others who have joined us in this -- senators murphy and senator whitehouse, senator schatz -- who have been partners in trying to get this done. and so now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 3626, which is at the desk, that the nelson-schumer et.al amendment which is also at the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be read three times and passed and the motions to reconsider be made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 3626, which was received from the house. i ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. grassl

senator. because i believe it is just the kind of project that will grow our economy and create the jobs our country so desperately needs and it will do so with good environmental stewardship. at the same time, it will reduce our dependence on the middle east for oil, which is what the american people have sought for decades. mr. president, the keystone x.l. pipeline project is long, long overdue. for the benefit of our economy, our environment and our long-term energy security, this project needs to be approved and it needs to be approved without delay. as i said, we can do these things. we can do these things and so much more, but it takes a bipartisan effort, it takes bipartisanship. and we've got to find a way to tackle these tough issues for the benefit of the american people and we've got to do it in the way that has always been the hallmark of this institution, of the united states senate, and that's on a bipartisan basis. earlier today i read accounts that i've received from my state o

senator murray has been in the senate a long time. we are some of the senior members of the senate. we came here to get things done. there was a time when we used to do that. but not anymore. and all of this talk coming from my republican friends, why don't you vote the way you do? they vote together on everything and it is only to discourage the president of the united states. >> if your majority were to change the filibuster rules, you would do it for everything? >> let him do it. the country did pretty dam well for 140 years. i think we are beyond seeing who can out talk the other. let's just get some work done. let him do whatever he wants to. >> will this come back to bite you? >> no, this is the way it has to be. the senate has changed. if we have a republican president and we think he shouldn't have the team that he wants, one thing people don't understand and i will try to explain this a little bit -- a simple majority is not going to be a piece of cake and every instance. there is stuff on the calendar where there are a few democrats who do not like some of the nominees of

>> in the floor of the senate. in the old senate chamber. it was benton at that point who theatrically opened his jacket and told other senators who were trying to put this to an end -- stand out of the way, stand out of the way. let the assassin fire. fortunately the assassin did not become an assassin and cooler heads prevailed. that was in the 1850s. members carried pistols. >> were they fired at either chamber? >> not in the senate. i don't think in the house. i mean, everything short of that. >> do you have any idea how many senators and congress people and they were all men at that time, carried pistols? >> in that particular time period, maybe -- i don't know, i don't have any hard evidence, but it wouldn't be surprising to say 20% or more. >> let me read some more. >> pretty tough times. >> why do people today keep saying this is the meanest congress they've ever seen. >> because they haven't read this book. >> because -- >> it doesn't come close to being the meanest. >> it's bad. no question. it's bad. but not the first ever. you ca

senator murray, the senator from washington, the distinguished chairman of the senate budget committee, has called this a technical error. a technical error. and she says it needs to be fixed but we'll do this next year. merry christmas, to our wounded warriors whose pensions are by virtue of the legislation that passed yesterday, have now been cut. and you know what makes matters worse is they've been discriminated against. no other federal employees' pension benefits were cut. only those uniform military members' pensions. so she calls it a technical error. i call it a mistake that needs to be fixed. not next month, not next year but right now, today. so why is it that the majority leader won't let us fix this right now? why is it that he is blocking a vote on the relevant amendment? why does he want to keep our veterans and our active duty military, including our wounded warriors, in limbo during the christmas holidays? does he have a good reason for it? is it really more important to confirm some mid-level appointees than to make sure that our wounded combat veterans get the pensio

that was senator schumer. and senator reid. there are many other quotes on the record in which they vigorously opposed the notion of deputying the minority any say in the confirmation process when it was discussed but never implemented some years ago. so why would they have such a 180-degree reversal? why would their opinion and that of the vast majority of my democratic colleagues, why would it have changed to the point where they would actually take this absolutely unprecedented step? well, senator reid gave an explanation on the day that he inflicted these changes on this body and i'll quote from senator reid's explanation. what he said was -- quote -- "there has been unbelievable, unprecedented obstruction. for the first time in the history of our republic, republicans have routinely used the filibuster to prevent president obama from appointing his executive team or confirming judges." that's what senator reid said. so it's been about republicans obstructing the president from appointing his executive team and confirming j

i want to thank senator stabenow, the chairman of the our senate committee, for fighting for these senate provisions. you see, these provisions were part of the senate bill. so representing a majority of the united states senate. more importantly, these same provisions were added on the house floor by congressman fortenbury. so senator stabenow has the high moral ground in conference with the house conferees in fighting for payment limitations. she represents a majority of the united states senate whereas the house conferees in opposing her represent the minority of the house of representatives. and now on the last issue i am going to speak about, then i'll yield the floor, deals with some correspondence i'm trying to have with the nominee to be head of secretary of homeland security. on july 12, secretary napolitano announced that she would be leaving the department of homeland security after four years heading up one of the largest departments of the federal government. on october 17, the obama administration announced that it had finally found a replacement. the committee on homeland s

a past senate could not take away the right of the future senate by tying the hands of the new senate. he said a majority may adopt the rules in the first place. it is preposterous to assume they can deny the right to change them. what he may -- said made good sense. national captioning institute] cable satellite corp. 2013] >> we look at edward snowden, congressional hearings, and we talk to new york times reporter mark the seti. just before 1:00 p.m. eastern and throughout the after noon, c.e.o.'s on education and robotics. on c-span2 book tv, former senator hutchison on the woman who shaped texas. daughters of civil rights leaders share their memories at 8:30. >> i have been involved in politics for four years. i worked on cam papers and worked in the administration. the fact of the matter is, i have never seen so many people quoting and reading the declaration of independence and the constitution. many of you 10 years ago didn't give it a second sthout now i think it is in the front of your mind. the fact of the matter is tens of millions of us love this country and don't want it

leahy, senator schumer, senator feingold, senator feinstein, senator cole, senator kennedy, senator durbin, senator biden. they were saying that this court, the d.c. court, is an important court, but its workload is half the national average of all the courts. it doesn't need any more judges. and before we add any more judges to a court that's underworked, we ought to consider transferring those judgeships to courts that are overworked. that argument had been made since 2001 by senator grassley, the senator from iowa. and finally with bipartisan cooperation in 2007, he achieved some success. with president bush's agreement, the republican president, he agreed with the democratic senators that the d.c. circuit should under no circumstances -- that's their words in their letter -- have more judges. they reduced it by one, the number of judges, and they transferred a judge to the ninth circuit, which was overworked. so all republicans have said about the three judges who the president has nominated to the d.c. circuit is before we consider any of them, consider senator grassley's bill.

the senator from new jersey, the senator from louisiana, the senator from georgia, the senator from florida, myself, many others have come up with a proposal that says we know flood insurance is broken, but we don't want it to be broken on the backs of average homeowners. we have a plan that will delay these increases until 2017 while fema studies affordability and while congress reexamines this issue. there was an affordability study in biggert-waters. somehow fema ignored it. and we're not letting that happen. and so that's why we have to act here. there are three types of people who are in danger. the first are those who know or are about to know they're going to be hit. they have flood insurance already, and their costs are going to go way up. the vast majority, middle class people. the second are those who will be told your insurance won't go up, but when you sell your home it's going to go way up. and any bureaucrat who tells us that doesn't affect the average person, it affects the value of their home immediately. but it also says they can't sell their home. if my area if flood insur

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable mark r. warner, a senator from the commonwealth of virginia, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. mr. reid: i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection, and under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask the chair lay before the senate a message from the house with respect to h.j. res. 59. the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate the following message. the clerk: resolved, that the house proceed from its amendment to the amendment of the senate for the resolution h.j. res. 59, entitled a joint resolution making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes, and concur with the house amendment to a sen

so the senator from -- under the leadership, the senator from oklahoma and the senator, distinguished chairman, senator levin, we have -- and the participation of every member of the committee under their leadership, we have come up with a way to -- at least to a significant degree address this problem in the military. now, there are still some controversial aspects of it that are not necessarily either side of the aisle but just a different viewpoint, but i would argue and i would ask my friend from oklahoma isn't it true that we have made significant improvements in the defense authorization bill on the issue of sexual assaults. these changes after hearings, after debate, after discussion were put into law, and they were agreed as very, very necessary measures to try to bring this terrible situation of sexual assaults in the military under control. i would ask my colleague from oklahoma if this isn't, among many others, an issue that needs to be addressed. mr. inhofe: and it was -- i respond to my friend, it was addressed in the house bill and in the senate bill, but the senate bill

a lot of that is due to senator levin and senator inhofe's leadership. but this time we've got a problem, and it's not going well, and i'm deeply disappointed. i believe we can do better. we must do better. and i will not be able to vote to end the debate as we go forward tonight. i thank the chair and would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

i look forward to working with senator blunt, with senator graham and with senator blumenthal to get this bill passed into law, and i thank them each for their helpful cooperation and their insight. and i yield the floor. mr. blunt: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: i want to follow up on what senator whitehouse has been talking about. certainly last year he and i tried to find the middle ground on this issue where members of the senate and the house would be willing to move forward together to try to deal with it. i think largely the potential damage and the potential danger of what the cyber threat means are both unknown. and if you do know about it, you don't quite understand what we could do about it or should do about it. and so we're coming together here, again with senator blumenthal and senator graham, to try to do what we can to have more information available as we move forward. there's no question that cyber breaches are serious. there is no question that they are a growing threat to our country's security. in my view, there's no

i am more than happy to give the senator from alabama four minutes, the senator from -- the senate pro tem one minute and i will take the final. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. sessions: mr. president, i thought we were voting at 4:30 and that would be at least five minutes left for me. the presiding officer: postcloture time expires at 4:27. mr. sessions: i'll accept the kind and generous offer of the senator. the presiding officer: who yields time? mr. sessions: mr. president, i was concerned about senator leahy. if i would have four minutes, i would consent to --. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama is recognized for four minutes. mr. sessions: i have four minutes until senator leahy has one minute. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: the bill before us today is a perfect example of why it's dangerous to produce a deal in secret and rush it through the full of congress in a panic as we've done time and time again. this bill is example -- a perfect example i have we need regular order, why the senate

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable christopher murphy, a senator from the state of connecticut, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to proceed to calendar number 243. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to the consideration of calendar number 243, s. 1356, a bill to amend the workforce investment act of 1998, and so forth and for other purposes. mr. reid: mr. president, following my remarks and those of the republican leader, the senate will be in morning business until 4:00 this afternoon. at 4:00 the senate will resume consideration of the national defense authorization act. at 5:00 p.m. the senate will proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of patricia millett to be united states circuit judge for the d.c. circuit postcloture. at 5:30 the senate will vote on confirmation of the millett nomination. mr. presi

if the senate receives a message that the house as adopted senate concurrent resolution 30, the senate reconvene for a pro forma business session only. an adjourn until 2:00 p.m. monday, january 6. on monday, january 6, 2014, following the prayer around plage, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the times for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. following any leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 1845, the unemployment insurance extension with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. further, that at 3:00 p.m., the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of executive calendar number 452, the nomination of janet yellen to be chairman of the federal reserve system with the time until 5:30 p.m. equally divided and controlled in the usual form prior to the vote on the confirmation of the yellen nomination. finally, that following the vote on the confirmation of the yellen nomination, the senate resume legislative session, proceed to vote on

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: thank you, madam president. i rise today to discuss the nomination of elizabeth wolford, a nominee to be a judge in the u.s. district court in new york. i'm new here, madam president. i'm just completing my first year here in the united states senate. but i believe this nomination gives us all an opportunity to discuss how government is or is not working here in washington, d.c. i know when i travel the state of nebraska, which i am back in the state most weekends and put on hundreds of miles, we're a big state, but as i travel the state of nebraska, people always ask me how are things going in washington, deb, how are you doing in washington? and i can't help but compare what we do in nebraska to what we are doing now in washington, d.c. because, you see, madam president, in nebraska, we have a pretty unique system. we are unicameral. we have one house. we are nonpartisan. and we get things done. we have an agenda set up every day in the nebraska legislature, and we follow t

some senators indicated they would vote to end debate. >> i hope it will pass the senate. i'll do anything, but not anything but we must not shut down the government again. >> reporter: last week the house passed a 1 trillion-dollar budget that would ease cuts from the sequester and avoid risk ing another government shutdown. >> i'm glad to report that senator murray and i have reached an agreement. >> reporter: months in the making this compromise came together from budget leaders in both chambers. democrats lost the fight on extended long-term unemployment insurance and republicans did not get the spending cuts they were looking for. it will be the first budget that was passed under normal order rather than emergency legislation. also in this final sprint in the senate long-awaited votes on judicial nominations. last month senate invoked the nuclear option. now it will be senate majority instead of requiring 60 votes to get a nomination to the floor. last week was the nomination of two , and it's been a scramble to overcome the view of that do-nothing senate. the senate

if it was true for the senate then and if it was true for senator biden, if it was true for senator obama, if it was true for their colleagues and many maintain this precedent until today, it should be true for us now. last week when mr. mayorkas was considered by the homeland security and governmental affairs committee my chairman justified moving forward with the nomination by asserting the d.h.s. o.i.g. had not identified any criminal wrongdoing by mr. mayorkas. at present the d.h.s. o.i.g. is only considering allegations of conflicts of interest, misuse of position, mismanagement and the appearance of impropriety. in none of those situations identified were the nominee's under criminal investigation. yet the senate delayed its vote until each investigation was finished. since the d.h.s.-o.i.g. has not completed its investigation, we don't know if there will ultimately be any criminal findings and i doubt that there will. we do know based on the precedent i cited, an investigation into any potential wrongdoing, whether criminal or not, is enough for the senate to delay a vote on an imp

senates, the roman senate and the american senate. and he defended it. it's rights and priorities. but we have one leader of the senate, supported by his colleagues, who says we don't want amendments because we might have to take tough votes. and all we want to do is rubber stamp this agreement, this bill written in secret. and we want to pass it without any amendments. how did that become the policy of america? how did that become the policy in the united states senate? what justification can be given to the concept that duly elected united states senators can't stand up on the floor of this body and defend their rights of their constituents and their states by offering amendments to improve legislation? and we're going to have tomorrow, the defense bill spending authorizing the expenditure of over $500 billion. $500 billion-plus to fund our military? a lot of people have ideas about how to improve that bill. we're not going to get a single amendment, because the majority leader has filled the tree, and he's going to deny the members

quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. mr. wicker: thank you, mr. president. it is my understanding that at 10:00 a.m. the senate will proceed to a cloture vote on the proposed budget. it's already been passed by the house of representatives. the cloture vote will take 60 senators. if those 60 vote in favor we would then move to a period of debate, pro forma debate, actually, because the question would already have been decided. if members do not favor this budget, the time to register that opposition is this morning, and at 10:00 a.m. is the last chance to say no to this proposal and simply to send it back to the negotiators and ask them to do a better job. i rise this morning to reiterate my strong opposition to the thousands-passed budget, to the murray-ryan budget, and i do so for one specific reason. i would first interject there are many aspects of the

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: i came to the floor to talk about several other things, but after hearing the majority leader and my colleague from delaware, i think the revisionist history needs to stop. you know, this place ran till 1917 under a process where any one senator could stop anything. and that was changed by a two-thirds majority of those present voting to a number less than that. and then through a period of time. the point i'm getting to is we're in this process because the rules weren't good enough to 0 accomplish what the majority wanted to accomplish. and the majority leader wanted to accomplish. the majority leader byrd didn't have any trouble when he had the same vote, number. majority leader daschle didn't have any trouble. frist, dole, none of them had any trouble. as a matter of fact, we've seen what has happened is the lack of effective leadership in building bipartisanship. the senate wasn't designed to be the house, as you all have recently made it. the senate was designed to protec

the senate. we approached these amendments and others in much the same manner as we did provisions that were in the bill. working to come up with language wherever possible that could be accepted on the democratic and republican sides in both the senate and the house. the bill that we've come up with is not a democratic bill or a republican bill. it is a bipartisan defense bill. one that serves the interests of our men and women in uniform and spreerves the important principle of congressional oversight over the pentagon. here's some examples of what will be in the bill that will be considered by the house later this week and then hopefully by the senate next week. the bill will extend the department of defense's thought to pay combat pay and hardship duty pay for our troops. the bill relative to guantanamo includes that part of the senate language easing restrictions on overseas transfers of gitmo detainees but it retains the house prohibitions on transferring detainees to the united states. alt

of the senate. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table and there be no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m., that is, december 17. that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: so, mr. president, the first vote will be at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concu

senator menendez, senator blumenthal, senator begich, senator pryor, senator landrieu, senator gillibrand, senator warner, senator hagan, senator donnelley. they're all democrats. and if you want to pass that thing, no problem. conventional wisdom has been, whatever else republicans and democrats disagree on, no matter how intractably divided democrats and republicans are on partisan lines, on other issues. when it comes to the war with iran, well, conventional wisdom has been that not only would the war with iran bill pass, it might even pass with a veto-proof majority. but a funny thing happened on the way to our next big land war in asia. a big unexpected group of senators today decided to yank back on the reins. now, bob menendez is not the most famous senator in the country, but bob menendez is very, very senior in the senate and very powerful. he is chairman of the foreign relations committee. here's the thing, though. there are only 16 standing committees in the u.s. senate. so 16 committees, 16 chairs. senator menendez is the chair of one of the committees. today, an amazing thing

myself, i'm on the bill, of course, senator cochran, senator merkley, senator vitter, senator hoeven, senator scott from south carolina, senator wicker, senator heitkamp from north dakota, senator schumer, senator gillibrand, senator markey from massachusetts. of course senator warren from massachusetts, senator gillibrand, senator nelson from florida, senator begich from alaska, senator manchin from west virginia. there is no ocean anywhere near west virginia, but they have many middle-class families that are getting caught up in a quagmire here, and this bill is the only bill that can release them and save taxpayer money. bob casey from pennsylvania, amy klobuchar, of course our new senator we're very proud of who is on the floor helping us, senator booker, senator hagan and senator lindsey graham who is also on the floor. and our newest cosponsor said, lisa murkowski from alaska. this is a very unusual coalition. i have been here a long time now. i have hardly seen a coalition this broad and diverse, so clearly we have something meaningful to say that needs change, and please let u

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: thank you, mr. president. i want to congratulate the senator from missouri for his comments. sometimes i think republican senators especially should begin and end every speech with an answer to the question, what would you do if you were in charge? the senator from missouri has said that very eloquently. and i.t it's not the first times been said on this floor. he mentioned that the law was passed three and a half years ago. we counted it up one time. we mentioned 173 times the republican proposal for a different approach to health care in this country. we said, don't expect senator mcconnell or any other republican to come in here with a wheelbarrow with a 3,000-page republican bill. we don't believe in that. we believe in a different direction, a different approach. we don't believe we're wise enough in washington to write 3,000 pages of rules to govern every aspect of our health care system in america that takes 18% or 19% of the economy. we live in the iphone age when w

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: mr. president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 1797, which was submitted earlier today. that the bill be read three times and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from north dakota. mr. hoeven: mr. president, i want to reserve the right to object. i'm certainly willing to let the good senator make comments. but at this point i want to reserve the right to object. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. hoeven: object. yes, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. reed: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: first of all, i -- i think it's appropriate to make some comments and i appreciate certainly the senator from north dakota being here and making the point. but we are at a juncture that within two weeks, 1.3 millio

hi, senator coburn. when you are doing senate , i found your interactions were particularly mineral -- memorable and i'm loving the goatee. [laughter] there are brilliant people. unlike most supreme court justices, sometimes i agree with what they are doing and sometimes i don't. i don't think it really matters. the questions you hear are really interesting as they hear cases. packed -- from the fact that they are both interesting individuals. i think they're doing fine. judgment which coincides with justice -- if you have open and clear judgment and it is willing andook at the constitution look at the facts of the case ,nd it is done out in the open essentially with a hearing before the justices -- one of the things i would like to say to the supreme court is documentation of their meetings as they decide these cases behind closed doors so that we can have more insight into what the discussions were before we see the a patient -- opinion and dissenting opinion. host: how did you feel about having camera

senator cory booker, and as a u.s.nator, now he is putting his stomach on the line again for a different cause. senator booker and new jersey's other senator, robert menendez, both agreed not to eat anything at all for 24 hours yesterday, as part of the rolling fast that lots of legislators have been participating in over the last few days. along with immigration activists. they're trying to pull heartstrings, basically, trying to appeal to house republicans to please allow a vote on immigration reform. the activists who have been fasting have had this tent set up on the national mall and they've had a very high political profile. after the president and first lady visited them on the mall, in that tent, the day after thanksgiving, the activists have since received visits from democratic leader nancy pelosi and congressman john lewis and senator pat leahy and singers and cultural figures. today, the activists held a press conference with democratic members of congress, including nancy pelosi and congressman lewis. cong

quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. vitter: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. vitter: i ask unanimous consent to speak for two minutes as if in morning business. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the house message to accompany h.j. res. 59 which the clerk will report. the clerk: house message to accompany h.j. res. 59. mr. vitter: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to speak for two minutes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senator from louisiana is recognized. mr. vitter: thank you, mr. president. obviously, i'll be brief. i was simply trying to engage the majority leader in a simple question and i'll add the question here and i think it deserves an answer, not to me but to the american people. last week, i had written the majority leader noting that several press reports have stated that he has exempte

senate. so what do you do if you have -- an agenda that's out of step with the american people and can't pass in the duly elected house of representatives? well, some people think that the thing to do is do an end run around the legislative body. bypass the legislation and use an undemocratic, i would argue, unconstitutional process, and have unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats imposed by -- impose by fiat and through regulation that which you cannot achieve through legislation. now, of course, that is completely inconsistent with our constitution, with the way our federal government is intended to operate, with the principle of the separation of powers. i would require -- it would require pursuing an agenda that is out of step with the american people and without the consent of congress, which, of course, is supposed to be a partner with any executive branch, with any president in pursuing any agenda. of course, our founders foresaw the danger of an executive that would try this sort of thi

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. cochran: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: the senate is not currently in a quorum call. mr. cochran: madam president, since the senate has had an opportunity to be given an update on our status of negotiation on a farm bill, it's my pleasure to announce that since our first conference committee meeting in october, we have been working to reach an agreement on a new five-year farm bill, a bill that we can take to the house and senate and in collaboration and working through our differences make progress and establish a framework of government support and assistance for our agriculture sector to continue to contribute in an important way in the economic life of our nation. i'm pleased to say that we are making progress, but there are still some decisions that lie ahead of us. i'm hopeful that on both sides of the aisle in both bodies, we can come together on a farm bill agreement that will reform and moderni

ofshow you senator ted cruz texas and his filibuster in the u.s. senate. we will begin with a conversation with a woman who covers issues on political hill. how did the health-care lobby, this linchpin for -- at least on the house side -- for the shutdown in october? >> that was a big part of this year. republicans have tried multiple stop come delay, or defund president obama's health care law. in website was coming online the health care exchange coming online. effort tore last best try to prevent the affordable becomingfrom taking -- -- coming to fruition. they stall the government spending bill as the best vehicle as her last best chance to make a stand. they did. this is a continuing resolution to keep the government funded until the new fiscal year. >> exactly. there have been some of the disagreements over how to fund the government. this has been a long-running difference of opinion over what level to fund government at and how far to cut back in different programs. they're unable to resolve that. they decided to punt. this is a fairly routine bill

i am very, very pleased, happy and proud of my colleague, senator heller who joined with senator aveda from island to introduce a three month extension of unemployment insurance. that is the way we do things are not here. it is a good bill and it deserves a vote and i hope that my republican colleagues will work with us to schedule a vote in a very timely fashion, which to this point they haven't. we come to the floor and have had appeal last unanimous consent to move but the answer is no. they blocked as from scheduling a vote from the end of this week and as i have indicated before, i'm going to fly file cloture and be the first when we get back. i hope that we can give the cooperation to set up the vote before we leave, but if not, we are going to vote no later than june every six or seven. this bill this the right thing to do for hard-working americans who are looking for a job. long-term unemployment rate is twice as high now than it was the last time the unemployment benefits were allowed to expire. on a repeat what mark zandi said, remember he was john mccain's financial that pf

senator chambliss, senator isakson have come up with a way to fix this. and all three of them will say, i will embrace military retirement pay and benefit reform in the future. i'm just not going to single out the military retiree and reduce their cola when no one else gets that reduction retroactively violating our own commission charter. so, senator shaheen on the other side wants to fitch it. senator murray wanted to fix it. i'm really fleeced a the love people -- i'm really pleased that a lot of people have said, no that i know how this works, i want to fix it. if you have had your legs blown off in afghanistan, it might be pretty hard to get another job. your cola is reduced, too. what do you say to those people? thank you? itsy-bitsy teng teeny-weeny? really? $600 million from the $6 billion comes from that community. it's not just so much that we're insensitive, it just shows me how far we've fallen as a natin and how comfortable we are for other people to do the fighting and we see these folks almost as the hired help even though we he fusel--even

i think senator shaheen and every other senator who voted for that have to go back to their home statesexplain why it's a good thing for new hampshire and every other state. i'll figure it out a little more. right now, i'm focusing on obviously the holidays, contributing as i'm doing right here right now. >> those sound like extraordinary priorities as well. positive ones, indeed. scott thanks, so much for being with us. >>> up next, he said he didn't leave the democratic party. >> that it left him. dr. charles's block bust er book. things that matter, detaming his transformation into one of the country's most respected conservatives and thinkers of any stripe. he's our guest here next [ male announcer ] this store knows how to handle a saturday crowd. ♪ [ male announcer ] the parking lot helps by letting us know who's coming. the carts keep everyone on the right track. the power tools iroduce themselves. all the bits and bulbs keep themselves stocked. and the doors even handle the checkout so we can work on that thing that's stuck in the thing. [ female announce] today, cisco is connec

i talked to senator harry reid and so has senator gillibrand and senator mccaskill because all of uslls there are major improvements in the area of sexual assault for instance, will give you some of them again. one of them is retaliation is the crime. threat of retaliation is one of the reasons they do not report. the insults or improper context for sexual behavior. we make in this bill that will be introduced in the next couple days and the senate retaliation is a crime, we also point the direction for commanders to be held accountable for the climb -- the climate inside the units in this bill. we also say that the commander cannot reverse a finding of a court martial. one of the problems which arose was when a commander reversed a finding of a court martial and it that created a real problem and we have addressed that by saying that that can no longer happening and if a commander does not follow the advice, if there is a sexual assault, complained that is filed, that complaint if it does not lead to a court martial must go to a higher level official, including usually a general off

senate race.rs later she takes out a rising star in new hampshire politics, johnny sue knew, retires him, and now she's in the senate and doesn't look safe but looks very strong. >> kevin, one of the veteran reporters that i have followed for years, knows new hampshire politics inside and out. good to see you. thanks for coming on. >> same here. thanks, chuck. >>> up next in our "databank," who wins an award for most trusted profession in the u.s. hi hint, it's not the members of congress and it isn't us in the media. >>> meanwhile, facing the music. a big day for some of your favorite bands. first today's trivia question. how many sitting senators are former cabinet members? first person to tweet the correct answer gets the shoutout. [ male announcer ] this duracell truck has some very special power. ♪ [ toys chattering ] it's filled with new duracell quantum batteries. [ toy meows ] [ dog whines ] [ toy meows ] these red batteries are so powerful... that this year they'll power all the hasbro to

the senate. lots of republicans joined i believe almost every democrat or maybe every democrat. but again, it was gladly signed by the republican president of the united states. and you can trace from the time of the minimum wage, when hugo black sat at this desk and helped to write the minimum wage and president roosevelt signed the bill, for all these decades, the minimum wage, in fits and starts but it's kept up with inflation most of the time until the 1980's. it's been signed on by people in both parties. the same with the extension of unemployment benefits, the -- that we discussed. and it's this extension of unemployment benefits. again, social insurance. you pay in when you don't need it and when you need it, you can take money out of the social insurance fund and get unemployment benefits if you can't find a job. and, you know, this -- these are -- these are really tough times. some of my colleagues i don't think understand sometimes how tough a time it is for so many families. there's a

minority leader mcconn l mcconnellll, senator thad cochr, senator mime cochran and senator enzi in a with the former vice president's daughter, senator lamar alexander on the lest of incumbent republicans with what could be a very tough primary battle. the question now is, could we see a repeat of 20 ten when two republican incumbents, senators robert bennett and lisa murkowski, joining us to assess all of this, doug schoen, judith miller, fox news legal analyst, great to have you all here. let me start with you, doug, this is, i mean, this looks like a real battleground shaping up for the republican party. >> it is, t best news other than the budget deal president obama had all day. bottom line, the tea party has a fervent group of activists who vote in primaries. even if this two, four, seven incumbents you have there are all leading, probably leading comfortably now. they all are worried because of the nature of the republican primaries. >> does this disquiet you? >> the squabbling has to be great for the democrats, right? you have all squabbling with nobody really out there as a