as a time when our nation needs a robust presence abrawrksd the senate is -- abroad, the senate is stuck. the state department cannot afford for a third of its leadership positions to be vacant. it is not tabooed for the state department. it is not good for our country, and it is not good internationally. this is what secretary kerry said, among other things, in the letter he wrote to us. i quote, "it is not an overstatement that today so many critical national security positions are still awaiting confirmation, that it is now affecting our ability to do the nonpartisan work of american foreign policy, defend the security of our nation, promote our values, protect our interests, and help our business overseas, which creates jobs for americans. simple snraited, the backlog in confirmation of state department nominees is impacting our national security and weakening america's role in the world." close quote. mr. president, the senate's inaction, its failure to carry out its duty to advise and consent has consequences. why are we not moving afford? it's because of obstruction by the republi

if you needed the senate consents to a.you also needed senate consent to remove. that was a plausible thing to believe, there was no text on this and some smart people did believe that but now the conventional wisdom is the president gets to remove those folks on his own motion even though that is unilaterally even those who the senate had the consent to and i think that is right but certainly as a matter of first principles smart thing to be set on the other side. >> d.c. circuit ruling would limit the president's discretion in terms of removal in the sense that if you take them at their word there has to be that magic little time, less than an hour between sessions so you need to find your vote during that hour and recess commission in the same hour of an intersection recess. president rand paul or hillary clinton to fire folks when they need to and i know hillary will do it. >> right up here with the next question. >> i and many economists not a lawyer so i will base your indulgence to my ignorance and asked me to quick questions. professor williams has a coupl

senator al franken from minnesota. senator joe manchin. senator bob casey from pennsylvania. another senator that has no ocean but pennsylvania has i think the most new fema maps of any state in the union. the people of pennsylvania would really be affected if our bill doesn't pass. even the amendment that is being offered by one of the senators does not solve their problem, and it's unfortunate, and i hope that people will vote strongly against the toomey amendment. senator kay hagan from north dakota. of course yours truly in the chair. senator corey booker who came on early and was a huge supporter as soon as he got here. i think this is one of the first bills that you cosponsored. i couldn't be more grateful, and i know the people of new jersey are grateful for your leadership. senator linder see graham of south carolina. -- senator lindsey graham of south carolina. jack reed of rhode island. blumenthal of connecticut. senator sheldon whitehouse of rhode island. lisa murkowski from alaska. ron wyden from oregon. susan collins from maine. and senator debbie stabenow from m

senate." first of all, mr. shaw, with the 50th anniversary of the kennedy assassination, was it a benefit to publish your book at this time or did it hurt? >> i think it was a mixed blessing but on the one hand the book, there's a tidal wave of interest that came out on the 50th anniversary. and yet because of that there is this avalanche of books, many of which deal with the assassination. so it's a very crowded field to answer. and provoke what am i to come out at a different time but the book was ready to go am a publisher wanted to go with it now. so i feel good about it coming out now. the thing about unity, he seems the interesting at all times. is one of these characters that is just such a compelling public official, public figure that he is hot now but i think from a year from now, i'm years been out there so many unanswered questions about his presidency, about his political grip that i think is always going to be a popular person to write about. >> we don't think about him as a sen

senator baker, senator byrd. they would run this senate in the way the republican leader suggested, in the way most majority leaders have suggested. they would come to the floor, they would put a bill on the floor that a republican and a democratic senator agreed on, let's say senator mccain, senator levin, senator inhofe, senator levin, they would ask for amendments. they might get 300 amendments. they would then ask for unanimous consent to cut off all the amendments and, of course, they would get it because everyone had a chance to have his or her amendment, and then within that unanimous consent agreement would be a procedure for how to vote on them and they say we're here on monday, and we're going to finish this week. just as the republican leader has said. and it didn't work perfectly. there was a senator from alabama, and then a senator from ohio and they did all they could to put glue in the works but the majority leader had all the tools he needed to run the senate in that way. everybody got a say. ever

and go around the senate. president obama did that in this case. he knew he would get approval in this nominee and all sides this is a political case. >> has the confirmation process come to mean something, act in a way that we can't imagine the framers really intended? >> yes, i think that's a good point. the way that this confirmation process works today, and you've heard the benefits of advice and consent. the administration overwhelmingly use it is. most of the people, the obama operations and every other operation, they have gone through the confirmation process and they have good reasons to use it in many cases. the nlrb was a particular target for obstructionalism because the entire agency was overly sympathetic. they were not giving business as fair hearing and conservatives in the senate took it upon themselves to block nominees consistently. this is an example of its true. appointments used to avoid the senate but that was a response to a very obstructionist approach on behalf of the senate. >> that'

senate and the roman senate. he understood the special and crucial role the senate fulfills in our constitutional republic. the senate is where the great issues of our time are supposed to be examined, reviewed and discussed before the whole nation in public, yet in the last few years, we have witnessed the dramatic erosion of senators' rights and the dismantling of open process. we fund the government through massive omnibus bills. this is the bill that's before us now, 1,583 pages stacked up here before us. and that no one really has a chance to read or evaluate or analyze. senators are stripped of their rights to offer amendments. we won't have amendments. bills are rushed through under threat of panic, crisis or shutdown. pass it today or the government shuts down. secret deals rule the day. work is done outside the public and millions of americans are essentially robbed of their ability to participate in the process by interesting what their -- examining what their senators do. under the tenure of majority l

senate. he was the junior senator from massachusetts. serving from 1953 until 1960, where he engaged in the debates of the day on during his presidency. this is about an hour and 15 minutes. [applause] >> it is so great to be around this table once again today. because we have had some wonderful breakfast with the ambassadors from all over the world. i think that in due course we will have a chance to visit with all in the conversations go beyond breakfasts and they continue on until everything going on in the world better interacts. congress, the administration, those in washington and those in leadership. i am excited about this idea, and of course, my friend john shaw has inspired me to have a new chapter in my life after the senate and continuing to think about the rest of the world and ways in which those that offer service might be more effective. and also more humane. the latest at the outset that this is an exciting day to talk about a new book about john f. kennedy. and his pathway to the presidency. and we were called this very

i want to acknowledge and i'm grateful to the following senators, senator baldwin, senator brown, senator carper, senator cochran, senator durbin, gillibrand, klobuchar, mikulski, murray, rubio, schumer, scott, warren, and wyden, who cosponsored our mentor resolution and have been real leaders in the mentorship movement. we can all identify hundreds of young people or people of all different ages that are stepping up and doing an act of support and mentoring for a young person that is making a real difference in their lives. i wanted to just point out four in louisiana today. one, la rita here is serving 20 hours a week as a foster grandparent, working with special needs children at the james ward elementary school in lake charles, louisiana. with her loving guidance, the student mentee went from a 47% skill mastery in math to 80%. madam president, that's a pretty significant jump. that is a life-changing improvement for that child and opens up a real opportunity for future mentorship works. in one of my favorite programs, the national guard youth challenge program which started in 1993,

, of senator ted stevens, of senator danny inou inouye, of senator thad cochran, that we would work on a bipartisan basis in the interest of the united states of america. though we come from different places, different states and have even different priorities, we are one country. and it requires us to make sure we do our job. an appropriations committee is one of two committees that are constitutionally referenced. when our founders wrote the constitution, they said that there should be a committee that has an annual appropriations committee for public review and public vote and there should be a finance committee to raise the revenue. they didn't call it the finance committee but a revenue committee to raise the money to pay the bills. this bill meets its constitutional responsibility. this is the bill that funds the federal government for fiscal year 2014. we're a little late but we have gotten the job done and we have done that job with due diligence, starting with president obama giving the congress his budget. remember, the president propos proposes, the congress disposes. we too

senator mansfield came over to senator stevens, took his amendment, went back to his desk and senate to the floor for him. he sent it to the floor for him. that was the senate not too long ago. if someone isn't allowed to get a vote on something they believe in, of course they are going to retaliate. of course they are going to retaliate but if they get a vote every once in a while they don't feel the need to. voting on amendments is good for the senate and it's good for the country. our constituents should have a greater voice in the process. since july of last year there have been four republican roll call votes. the whole second half of 2013 members on the side of the aisle got for roll call votes. stunning. that is today's senate. so let me say this. if republicans are fortunate enough to be in the majority next year, amendments will be allowed. senators will be respected. we will not make an attempt to bring controversy out of an institution that expects demandt debates about the problems confronting the country. now a common refrain from democrats is republicans have been too q

senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, creator of the universe, create hearts within our senators that will make them strong enough to know when they are weak. give them sufficient bravery to choose the more difficult right. lord, inspire them to be gracious in tkwepbt and humble in victory. give them enough integrity to face themselves when they are afraid, as they remember that perfect love destroys trepidation. teach them, o god, how to stand up in the storm with complete confidence in the ultimate triumph of truth. we pray in your majestic name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., january 9, 2014. to the sen

the senate has resisted. in 1860 three, the senate passed the pay act, which prohibited pay to any appointee to a pre- existing vacancy. you don't have a kind of uniform -- >> suppose that we were to conclude that the history is too overwhelming to rule in your favor on the happens problem. could we still use history to say -- or overlook history to rule for you on the inter-intra- session point? >> yes, your honor. from the time of the founding until 1948, there was a uniform understanding that the recess and session were interchanging periods. you're either recess or session. an appointment made during the recess lasted until the end of the next session. in 1921, attorney general doherty's opinion muddled things a bit eerie he assumed that if you took a long break, it broke it into two recesses. you still have the view subject to the arguable and ambiguous exception of andrew johnson. from the time of the founding until 1921, there were some 63 midsession breaks, all longer than three days, so all recesses

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 presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate previous order, the senate >> so the senate is taking a break for the weekly party lunches. last hour lawmakers voted to move ahead on a work extending unemployment for three months for the long-term jobless. "the hill" has a story about it today. in a 60-37 vote the senate ended debate on a motion to consider the bill. 60 votes are required to move forward. gop senators susan collins, kelly a ayote, rob portman, dan coates, joined dean heller vote with democrats. they objected to the $6.4 billion cost of the three month extension is not offset with spending cuts. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell said his party could accept extending benefits that go to people that exhausted state benefits only if they were paid for. many would like to see them extended without adding to the national debt, mr. mcconnell said on the senate floor. you can read the story at thehill.com. senators return from the party lunch as the two 15 eastern. we have live coverage on c-span2. we have set up a facebook page related to the senate work on un

now, that describes what he thought the senate should be, what the senate is, but my point is the senate isn't functioning that way. in other words, if you have just one legislative chamber with a large number of members, it is likely to make laws hastily based on a partisan agenda without thinking through all the long-term consequences. a hastily passed partisan agenda that ignores the long-term consequences, now doesn't that remind you of the health care law? remember how then speaker pelosi said the house had to pass a bill to find out what was in it. they were in such a rush they couldn't be bothered to read it. the senate is intended, as madison just said, as i quoted, to be smaller, to be more deliberate, and to be less partisan. imagine if the senate had been allowed to operate in a deliberative fashion and craft a truly bipartisan health care proposal, if that had happened, we certainly could have come up with something more workable than the current law. madison continues his explanation of the rationale for the senate -- quote -- "thirdly, another defect to be supplied by the s

senate on c-span2. . the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal spirit, today teach our lawmakers to do things your way, embracing your precepts and walking in your path. remind them that the narrow and difficult road less traveled leads to life and few find it. as our senators receive guidance from you and follow your leading, replace anxiety with calm, confusion with clarity, and despair with hope. may your peace become the hallmark of your labors as you keep them focused on the priorities that reflect your kingdom. we pray in your wonderful name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the president pro tempore: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to proceed to calendar number 266. the president pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion

chairman. >> senator. >> thank you, senator. one of the issues that affect my state and will affect a lot of the itea industry in america is the chinese government with their propensity to subsidize businesses that are supposed to be competing in the open market. as we all know, as soon as the government start subsidizing. the chip industry, particularly the prices have been volatile over the years because of different governments, subsidies with their own industries. and speaking no of micron technology which is one of my nose largest private employers. they have up and down success because of other government interference with the free-market price for chips. you're probably aware that the chinese government is spending billions to prop up their semiconductor industry and indeed are finalizing a policy right now to provide additional government support for that. that is going to harm u.s. producers that are out there in the marketplace trying to do the right thing as far as producing semiconductors. what are your thoughts on t

senate. on weeknights watch key public policy events and every weekend the latest nonfiction authors and books on booktv. you can see past programs and get our schedules at our web site, and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. >> fifty years ago, president lyndon baines johnson declared a war on poverty, creating the office of economic opportunity. wednesday, senator tom harkin marked the anniversary with a speech on the senate floor. his remarks are 45 minutes. >> mr. president, 50 years ago today president lyndon johnson came before congress and spoke these bold words: this administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in america. lyndon johnson, as we all know, was born and raised ahidst stark poverty in texas hill country, coming of age during the great depression. there hard personal ex-- from hard personal experience, he understood how poor school, empty stomachs and bad health make a mockery of america's promise of equal opportunity for a

we also have been working with senator vitter and senator manchin. there's a senate companion to that, 949 and 1577. based on a survey conducted by the real estate settlement providers council, the inclusion of title charges causes 60%, 60% of loans under $60,000 to fail as qualified mortgages. these loans actually become high cost, as we were discussing early, these hopa loans because of points and fees exceed 5% of the loan amount. survey also found 45% of affiliated loans between 60 and $125,000 failed to qualify as qualified mortgages. in fact, 97% of the loans that failed as qms were under $200,000 simply due to the inclusion of title insurance on that. and if title is excluded, only 3%, 3% of those same loans would fail as qm. now, the statements by and large regulate most of, and as i have been working with people in the industry, i've had some conversations with colleagues across the, across the capitol, some who may or may not -- not to name names -- may or may not have been involved in creating your bureau. who constantly bring up title ins

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: madam president, i happened to be on the floor to hear the news from senator hatch and senator baucus that they have reached an agreement on trade promotion authority. i want to congratulate them on that working with chairman camp over on the house side. this is incredibly important. these two gentlemen have worked as republican and democrat closely together over the last few months with the administration to put in place the opportunity for american workers, american farmers, american service providers to be able to sell their goods, their services on a level playing field by opening up more markets for u.s. products. i really congratulate them on that. it is sad to me, madam president, that for the past five or six years, we haven't had trade promotion authority. and without their strong efforts, we still wouldn't have it today. it has been noted that this administration, the obama administration, is the first one since f.d.r. not to have asked for even the ability to open

the only democrats that have amendments that i know of a senator a good -- senator hayden, senator reid from rollins, and senator wrigley. we have no objections of the democratic side for this bill, and only three members that have amendments, and we are happy to have a vote on those amendments. they're not really controversial someone might find a problem with them. they don't cut the bill. there is no problem with the bill. it is the republican side that we are waiting. again, i know how busy everyone is. i know the senator from pennsylvania is working very hard on -- he was just to speaking about on the unemployment insurance. i know that is a very, very important issue to the people that he represents and louisiana a little time to work on this amendment that we think he wants to offer of floods, we are happy to have his amendment. we will vote on it. we will decide on when and how and what the number is. i believe, let me just speak for myself, that it does not matter. we have the votes to not allow it his intention was to get the bill, the bill will not be gutted. if his intention

crapo, senator shelby. i want it thank the authors and managers of the underlying bills for their work. they have are a done an extraordinary job in, wog to in working to e ensure that my amendment quo be considered. i believe that this amendment will add to the goals of the underlying bill and given the bipartisan support thor this concept, i would hope it could be adopted about by a voice -- by a vis voice vote. before i leave the floor, madam president, just another point. another emergencying that is facing up -- emergency that is facing us, unemployment insurance. and i would ask if we could continue this bipartisan dialogue we've had and salute my colleagues on the other side of the aisle

you could believe if you needed senate concept to appoint, you needed senate consent to remove. that was a plausible thing to believe when there was no tax on this, and some smart people actually did believe that, but now the wisdom is the president gets to remove folks on his own motion even though they were -- unilaterally even those who were the senate had to consent to, and i think that's rights, by it's certainly as a matter of first principles, smart things to said op the other side. >> this ruling would limit the president's discretion in terms of removal in the sense that if you take them as they were, there's a magic little time less than an hour between sessions, and so you would need to fire your foe during that hour and recess commission your foe in that same hour of an intersession recess. i want president rand paul or hillary clinton to fire when they need to, and i know hillary won't do it. [laughter] >> right up here. >> mark, cato institute, an economist, not a lawyer, i beg your indulgence to my ignorance of the law. first, professor williams has a couple occas

the remarks of my friend, the senator from ohio, senator portman. the presiding officer: without objection. the senator from ohio is recognized. mr. portman: thank you, mr. president. and let me just say that i applaud the majority leader for his work on this neil armstrong flight research center. this is something that diane feinstein's been very involved with and jay rockefeller supported. and it's an appropriate way to pay tribute to neil armstrong, who was a constituent of mine and a dear friend. i spoke to his family about th this. they believe that it is an appropriate way to pay tribute to him as well. he was a true hero, not just because of what he did as the first man to walk on the moon, but also the way he led his life subsequently. he was a humble hero to me and to so many others, and i'm delighted that through the action we just heard on the floor here a moment ago, with the majority leader, we have now passed that legislation. it will go to the president for his signature and the dryden flight center in california will now be renamed t

senator mcconnell and senator reid. and i know the senator from georgia is trying to work through this. would that be a generally good description of where we are, senator? mr. isakson: the senator is correct. in fact to be precise, there were seven concerns about the legislation when the first u.c. was propounded on our side, five of which involved potential amendments that would be made, or need to be made to the bill, or in their opinion needed to be made. in the case of two of those and working with the leadership on the democratic side they are acceptable and would be included in the base bill. there are three that would be allowed to be debated with time equally divided on the floor and they've asked for a 51-vote threshold. and there is the potential, as we all know, always for a point of order but only three amendments in a point of order would be the only things that i am aware of in all those conversations. and i continue to work at this very moment to get a final agreement so we can get a u.c.. but we're just

so the goal of our coalition which is led by menendez, senator menendez, your senior senator from new jersey who is on the banking committee, who has been one of the great spokesmen for this and leaders, senator isakson from georgia who is literally the most respected member in this whole body on issues related to real estate, because he has one of the largest -- or had one of the largest real estate companies in atlanta, knows the issues very well, is very well respected on both sides of the aisle. these two gentlemen have led this effort and have built a bipartisan coalition, so we are now ready this week -- of all weeks, this is state of the union week. we would have probably preferred another one, but it's just the way this worked -- to debate the bill on the floor of the senate. at last count when we left, there were about six or seven relevant amendments, which is the only amendments that we're going to accept, relevant amendments to this bill. we're not going to accept amendments that are on other subjects in an effort to derail the senate, get us off topic, et cetera, et ceter

it is not that the senate is not available. the senate is available. it can be easily convened. >> let me take cap a step back and answer that question this way. ishaps it sounds like this an aggressive assertion of executive authority. i ask record to think back to federalist 51. what the framers were most concerned about was that congress and the separate -- in calculus waspowers going to a mass authority and drain authority and energy from the executive and therefore, the executive needed to before to fight against those actions by congress. and one specific way in which the farmers -- framers decided to fortify the executive was by rejecting the notion that the appointment power should reside with the senate. the framers considered that and they rejected it. and the reason they rejected it, as this court noted in its opinion, was to protect the executive against encroachment by the legislature. >> but the compromise they settled on and moving away from that is that the president will nominate and the senate, if it so chooses, can not -- and for men

the distinguished senator from michigan, senator levin, said on november 21, "a senate in which the majority can change the rules at any time is a senate without rules." it's as if the red sox finding themselves behind in the ninth inning in the world series add a couple of innings to make sure they wonment -- won. when he wrote the rules, tom at jefferson said it's not so important what the rule is but there be a rule. ignoring executive orders. while it ignores its own rules, the senate meekly watches as the obama administration changes the health care law, suspends immigration laws and rewrites labor laws. tolerating more czars. president obama has appointed more zams than the romanofs did. in both russia and the united states, czars don't report to elected representatives. not passing appropriations bills. hopefully that's going to chan change. but the senate's repeated failure to pass appropriations bills canceled -- cancels the senate's check on the executive's power to spend. illegal recess appointments. that's being debated today in the supreme court. the majority acquiesced when pre

senator mikulski next and then senator collins. >> i'd be happy to yield to senator collins. >> the chairman of the appropriations committee always goes first. [laughter] >> senator, please proceed. >> first of all, to those here at the panel and other members of agencies representing the intelligence community like homeland security, i too want to echo my thanks and support for all the employees who work in the intelligence community. general clapper, i want to say to you, i recall that last year's hearing you asked for flexibility for the intel committee. during this, here today i want you to know that both the chairman and vice-chairman supported by the entire members of this committee work with me to try to get flexibility for you. there were stacked by the house of representatives during the cr to get you that flexibility. what i want you to know today, we were united to try to get you and therefore the intelligence community that. so we are on the side of the employees facing sequestering so on. ask now to the budget agreement and a consolidated approach relations. we think that part i

we have the committee and 12 senators actually hear this and eight senators don't. they are also doing other things. and then all 100 senators come together and all 100 thumbs-up and thumbs down. stripped of his salary as a federal judge. of course and sought to have the court and the judiciary , for theis shortcut impeachment trial process. well, chief justice rehnquist knew that impeachment removal was an important constitutional check on the judiciary. exercising prudence and restraint. our nation's highest court would not even define the word try in the impeachment trial clause. in article 1. here, they should not attempt to define the just as judges should not be the final arbiters of the senate process, the court should not have the final say, temporaryword, on the appointment method used to regulate bench composition and our court'ssform racial and gender demographics. how recessear appointments have been used in the 300 judges that have come to temporarily. the first female judges, by recess appointment. first jewish federal judges, by recess appointment. fo

senate on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. and the chaplain, retired admiral barry black. will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. out of the depths we lift our hearts to you, o god, waiting for your providence to prevail more than they that watch for sunrise. guide our senators to find hope in your presence as they trust the unstoppable cycle of seedtime and harvest. lord, give our lawmakers such reverence for you that they will stand for right although the heavens fall. may they delight in any work they do for you and tire of any rest that is apart from you. create in them clean hearts, which no unworthy purpose may tempt aside. may they wait for the power of your spirit, working through their faith, to do more than they can ask or imagine. we pray in your great name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with

senator johanns from nebraska, senator angus king from maine, senator kirk from illinois, senator joe manchin from west virginia, senator saxy chambliss from georgia, senator michael bennet from colorado, senator roy blunt from missouri, senator mazie hirono from hawaii, senator mark begich of alaska, senator orwin hatch from utah, senator ron wyden from oregon. so you can see a great group, absolutely bipartisan, equal number of republicans and democrats from across the united states have joined together here, recognizing that people are concerned about their privacy, and we need to make sure that their privacy is protected. so i'd like to make a few introductory comments here, with the help of these charts, and then turn to my colleague from minnesota for her comments as well. you know, we have seen with the n.s.a., with the i.r.s., with the affordable care act, with a whole range of issues that people feel with what's going on, not only with government but technology, that their privacy is at risk these days, and it's very much a concern. many people don't realize that this event d

i would have to ask senator reed when he will let it come up in the united states senate but i think the committee is willing to move forward on it. host: the trillion dollar spending bill includes provisions on the postal service . it says that postal delivery must continue on saturdays. the postal service would like to discontinue saturday service in order to save some money. guest: i believe it's a good thing to put that in the appropriation bill. should not beery decided by itself or it it should be decided in a comprehensive postal reform bill. that is something that senator carper's bill deals with. this is just a delay until september 30 that the postal service will not go ahead until we get a bill passed. host: here is an e-mail -- guest: the reason it is not in the appropriations bill is because it is a separate item on the floor of the united states senate. host: it sounds like the two sides cannot agree on extension of on employment benefits. guest: they can agree on the extension but they cannot agree had to pay for it. -- how to pay for it. i think there needs to be 60 v

moments ago, senators reid, a cosponsor of today's bill and senator schumer made their case. >> we extended these benefits unpaid for 89-8. and yet now we have to pay for these benefits. well, what we've done, senator heller and i, listen, we need to help these people now. >> what i'd say to my colleagues is, if you believe in unemployment benefits and extending them, pass them clean and simple. don't play games. get it done. >> president obama, who spent yesterday reaching out to republicans on the phone, will speak from the white house. we're expecting him at approximately 11:40 a.m. eastern time to talk about what democrats have called an unprecedented loss of a lifeline for millions of americans. a reminder of what's at stake, aid to about 1.3 million americans. their three-month extension expired on december the 28th. the bill would have added $6.5 billion to the national deficit. how to offset that cost is what lawmakers are fired up about up and down party lines. >> you don't cut medical research or meals on wheels or some kind of social security cuts in order to pay for it. you don'

by specifically senator leahy and senator stabenow. the farm bill as i mentioned also streamlines conservation programs from 20 to 13 including the provisions that i worked on to help communities in the red river valley address flooding. it extends conservation compliance rules to the crop insurance program, something that came out the senate bill and includes the sod saver provision that i worked with senator thune of south dakota, that for five or six states really including the prairie pothole states -- i don't think, mr. president, that would include delaware -- that it protects native lands, native prairie and hepts, again, to -- helps, again, to conserve conservation for hunting and our way of life particularly in the upper midwest. these critical provisions with the you compliance and our sod saver amendment were the reason the bill is supported by wildlife organizations including ducks unlimited and environmental groups like the national resources defense council and the nature conservancy. i believe we do right by ourselves wh

senator and state senator. i meet a lot of people. and i can't name a time or met an american who would rather have an unemployment check than the pride of having a job. [applause] the long-term unemployed are not lazy. they are not lacking in motivation. they are coping with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis in generations. in some cases they may have a skills mismatch. they may have been doing a certain job for 20 years, suddenly they lose that job, they may be an older worker, may have to get retrained. it's hard. sometimes employers will discriminate if you have been out of work for a while. they decide, well, we are not sure we want to hire you. we would rather hire somebody who is still working right now. it's hard out there. there are a lot of friends, a lot of our neighbors who have lost their jobs and they are working their tails off every single day trying to find a new job. as the job market keeps getting better, more and more of these folks will find work. but in the meantime, the insurance keeps them from falling

senator shaheen, senator browne, and senator schumer. without them this wouldn't have happened. >> thank you, senator reid. thank you for your leadership on this. you made this a bipartisanship vote. it was good news to see the 60 votes to move forward to the bill. it's good not just for the 19.3 million families who will benefit, but it's also doing to be good for the economy of the united states. the congressional budget and numerous economists including marc sandy indicated this is one of the best things we can do to help keep the money in the economy, keep it stimulated, it's a good way to spend public dollars to encourage private sector response. this is good for families, but it's also going to be good for our economy as we know the people who get unemployment insurance are going to spend the dollars, they're not going to put them in the bank. and as senator reid said. how do we think about creating jobs, this is one of the challenges that we have. so making sure that people can still go out and look for work, but those dollars can

senate on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, retired admiral barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god our shield, as we approach the martin luther king jr. holidays, we thank you for raising up leaders who appeal to the better angels within us. use our lawmakers to use the quest for justice to roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. as they lead our nation, guide them around the obstacles that hinder their progress, uniting them for the common good of this great land. lord, enable them to go from strength to strength, as they fulfill your purposes for their lives in this generation. may they stand for right and leave the consequences to you. we pray in your 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 to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: t

hatch and senator coburn and senator burr. i wanted to come down to the floor today to talk about the implications of this framework for affordability and patient protections all across this country. i give some credit to our colleagues because it has been 1,406 days of complaints, of politics, of obfuscation, of obstruction, and at least for the first time we are beginning to see what the republican vision for the future of health care in this country is. and though we don't have a bill -- all we have at this point is a framework -- it is a pretty scary future. the proposal from our republican colleagues would dramatically increase the cost of health care for millions of americans and would put back in charge the insurance companies of of our health care -- of our health care. so i wanted to come down for a few minutes today and try to talk in real terms about what this proposal will actually do for health care in this country. and i only have a few minutes, so it's hard to really go through the litany of backward steps that

discussion with senator collins, senator reid of rhode island, senator heller, how likely will get adeal? what i you looking at to pay? >> it is doable. republicans voted to have a debate on that, we have a proposal among eight of us on the republican side, it was rejected and the majority leader had a proposal we didn't get to have the debate on those issues but the reality is we are close. it is a three month extension and during that time i want to do what the president said last night which is to read corm unemployment insurance for long-term unemployed. >> what you looking for? >> we want to pay for it. if you cannot paying you increase the debt and deficit which has a negative impact. if you can't pay for it you should. we can pay for it. i have lots of ideas including stopping the double dipping between unemployment insurance and social security disability which is in the president's budget so there is lots of waste, fraud and other issues. i know the democrats were talking about another proposal on the pension side snoozing pension contributions. >> and -- >> we want to look

senator and state senator, i meet a lot of people. i can't -- i can't name a time where i met an american who would rather have an unemployment check than the pride of having a job. [ applause ] the long term unemployed are not lazy or lacking in motivation. they are coping with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis in generations. and in some cases they may have a skills mismatch, they may having doing a certain job for 20 years and suddenly they lose that job. there may be an older worker, may have to get retrained. it's hard sometimes employers will discriminate if you've been out of work for a while. they decide, well, we're not sure we want to hire you. we would rather hire somebody who still working right now. so it's hard out there. there are a lot of friends and neighbors who have lost their jobs and working their tails off every single day trying to find a new job. as the job market keeps getting better, more and more of these folks will find work. but in the meantime the insurance keeps them from falling off a cliff. it

our first panel today are our partners in the senate, senator carper and senator coburn. no to people have been willing to speak out more against the organizational waste and misspending vanities two senate terse. the second panel will be for individuals who represent organizations that are heavily contributed to the spending reform discussion. first, we will hear from our senators. it's my great pleasure to welcome my colleagues, dr. colburn who releases the waste a book every year and recently released this year's chronicles the kind of waste that can be eliminated, and chairman senator carper has been a good partner in this discussion. i look forward to their hearings and i would remind my colleagues that any questioning or any further comments after their opening statements will be at the discretion of the senators, and i take pleasure in introducing the ranking member for his opening statement. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm very pleased the youth called the hearing today. this is the bread and butter of what our committee does, and i hope today's hearing on this imp

senator dick durbin was right about that when he senate. and i think it is time to allow the senators on both sides to fully participate in the legislative process. that means having a more open amendment process around here and as i said, it requires us to cast votes that we would rather not cast. but we are all grown-ups. and there's rarely ever a vote that you can cast around here that is fatal. and the irony of it all is that that process makes it a lot less contentious. and it's a lot less contentious and you vote on tough issues and when you don't and when you are not allowed to do that, everyone is just angry at being denied the opportunity to do what you are sent to do, which is to represent the people that elected you and offer ideas that you think are worth considering. we had a meeting and the senator was just talking about how there were 13 amendments that people on the side of the islet like to offer on this bill all on the subject and it's important to each senator who felt that there was a better way to improve the bill that

in the crossfire, senator joe manchin, a democrat from west virginia, and senator john hoeven, a democrat from north dakota, on this eve of the state of the union, is there any hope for action? tonight on "crossfire." >>> welcome to "crossfire." i'm newt gingrich on the right. >> and i'm van jones on the left. in the crossfire tonight we've got two u.s. senators who also happen to be former governors. they know a little bit about how to get things done and so does president obama. and that's why tomorrow during the state of the union, the president's going to make it clear to everybody, if republicans keep blocking everything that's good, the president's going to use his executive pen and help america anyway. and i say, it's about time. can you imagine having a co-worker on your job who sabotages you every single day? now, you try to scale back your own ideas, try to accommodate him and he go, well, you're feeling delete. then he torpedoes his own ideas. finally you just say forget it, i'm going to solve these problems on my own. now she says, you're a dictator. does this sound familiar?

for example, senator pawcialg the senator from kentucky -- for example, senator paul, the senator from kentucky, his economic zone act. i think there were five -- he calls them by another name -- but basically the same sort of concept, looking at blighted areas and trying to provide incentives for job creation in those areas of high unemployment. so senator paul has got a bill that would deal with that. senator portman from ohio has a reform that would simultaneously prohibit -- prohibit simultaneous continuation of unemployment benefits. that's something we ought to be dealing with. senator moran of kansas has a bill he calls the start-up act 2.0, a jobs bill. the other senator i senator fro, senator coats, wants to offset the extension of unemployment insurance by delaying individual employer mandates for a year. the president has already done that unilaterally for employer mandates. why not delay the individual mandate for a year and use that to offset this extension for three months of unemployment insurance? so there are plenty of ideas out there. i mentioned some of them. the sen

senator landrieu says she does, too. senator pryor from arkansas another democrat says hey so do i. never mind the republicans. >> we're going to have to -- >> how far does he go? this is his signature initiative. >> the white house is going to have to give some kind of cover to those democrats. give them a win of some kind. mary bent my ear so many times we are going to tweak this or that. they have to do that this white house. i was e-mailing with a house democrat tonight on the way here about the speech. they don't want to talk about health care at all. they want to focus on two angles this year. a populist economic message that we heard to the tune of the president talking about minimum wage. also what you can sort of call affinity politics. women, hispanics, african-americans, focusing on issues that will sort of drive that democratic base. the combination of those two things, populism, affinity politics. if democrats are going to sort of hold tight this year or even make some gains it's going to be because of that. >> one of the biggest applause last night from democrats was a

senator mccaskill and senator gillibrand. the democrats will continue our fight to restore benefits to 1.6 million americans looking for work during difficult economic times. and the last two weeks since republicans filibustered a bill to restore this important lifeline an additional 150,000 americans have lost their emergency unemployment benefits. for many families already suffering through hard times, a loss of $300 a week has meant going without food, turning down the heat on freezing days or staring down homelessness. one nevada woman, a vietnam veteran in her 60's worked all her life and raised her family and said she's afraid she'll end up on the streets if washington doesn't restore her emergency benefits. this is what she wrote to me -- and i quote -- "it's not that i don't want to work. i'm unable to procure a job. i do feel it might be my age but i'm more energetic than some people i know. please continue to work to get this passed as i'm fearful i will end up homeless." her situation is not unique. thousands of ve