. >> let me try to answer the sensenbrenner issue and deal with it head on right now. in my opinion, the sensenbrenner bill and i understand what he is attempting to do, it's a good start. but it makes our country less safe. why? i talked about the example of a known terrorist calling from a safe house in yemen. under the sensenbrenner bill, in order for us to be able to have the ability to see who that person is calling and get that information, under the sensenbrenner bill, you have to have an ongoing investigation. that's not an ongoing investigation. right there, we wouldn't have the ability to see who is calling into the united states because we didn't have an ongoing investigation. what sensenbrenner is attempting to do is getting information for a probable cause, for evidentiary hearings, that type of thing. we are in the intelligence business. we have standards in intelligence. and yet, we understand listening to our constituents who have concern about privacy and we should. we should always be concerned about privacy. what we're doing is attempting to get this

. >> let me try to answer the sensenbrenner issue and deal with it head on right now. in my opinion, the sensenbrenner bill and i understand what he is attempting to do, it's a good start. but it makes our country less safe. why? i talked about the example of a known terrorist calling from a safe house in yemen. under the sensenbrenner bill, in order for us to be able to have the ability to see who that person is calling and get that information, under the sensenbrenner bill, you have to have an ongoing investigation. that's not an ongoing investigation. right there, we wouldn't have the ability to see who is calling into the united states because we didn't have an ongoing investigation. what sensenbrenner is attempting to do is getting information for a probable cause, for evidentiary hearings, that type of thing. we are in the intelligence business. we have standards in intelligence. and yet, we understand listening to our constituents who have concern about privacy and we should. we should always be concerned about privacy. what we're doing is attempting to get this

i'm i'm a little creeped out by jim jim sensenbrenner but the us freedom freedom act.ell us about that well you know the sensenbrenner leahy bill the freedom act is far far better start and i say start i mean it's just a start but it's far far better for two. reasons one it would end the bulk collection of hundreds of millions of americans phone records and two it would require the n.s.a. to get court approval before accessing americans information that it collects for. for intelligence purposes so that is a far better start and i think it says a lot that jim sensenbrenner is sponsoring the bill because he authored section two fifteen of the patriot act and has been outraged to learn how the government has interpreted it and been using it it's not what he intended when he wrote the statute and it's not what the language of the statute says and i think it is republicans yes the freedom act has strong bipartisan support and i think a lot of these programs have a lot of these reforms have bipartisan support and i think it's very important to note where senator feinstein a

chairman sensenbrenner has introduced the act. and they held hearings soliciting views and concerns regarding the state of the federal criminal code. in many well-respected commentators have criticized the federal criminal code for excessive length, lack of organization, redundant provisions and outdated offenses. there also have been calls for certain substantive changes to the code, such as the bolstering of mens rea requirements this decriminalization of regulatory and other offenses, and the reduction in the number of mandatory minimum sentences. many of these and other critiques are persuasive and there's no doubt most observers would agree the federal criminal code is in need of reform. however, before we contemplate how congress might best streamline, re-organize, refine and modernize the federal criminal code, it's essential to draw lessons from past efforts, the seeds of federal code reform were sewn by the american law institute0s penal code with elegant organization and forecastsmanship and attention to principles of cu

i think this effort will go down in flames just like the previous ones. >> thank you, chairman sensenbrenner. i see this as the most important prim, which is to stay policy neutral because there's so many issues that have to be addressed with regard to drafting, with regard to inconsistency sunday, with regard to penalties, that we need to get a foundation document that is almost like the beginning of building a house, that is clear and is done in the right way, with technically making the right choices and consistency. from that point, everybody can then debate the issues. what is the right penalty? should we have a death penalty? but we first need a document that makes sense. and the way to do that is -- i share the recommendation of some type of body, some i don't want to -- you started the antitrust modernization commission in 2006 when we did the judiciary -- department of justice reauthorization bill. that would be some model that could work for, like, rewriting the code in a policy-neutral basis. make that their charge and get a group of people together who are experts in the field to

beginning, it's the two hops, but again, getting intelligence, this is where i have a problem with sensenbrenner, in the ongoing investigation, we wouldn't get any of that. it would make us less safe. you get the two hops and after you do the investigation to move forward, you need to pass the r.a.s. test to get more information. based on your field investigation with the f.b.i., you might want to go to the court and use the foundation of the intelligence to get to the improbable cause. >> no content. this is really important. there is no content in this collection, zero. it's only that metadata. >> no name, no address. and if they want content later, there is no recording, that doesn't happen. they have to take that information, and have to again rate the case in order to go out and determine who it was if they could build probable cause to get content. those are pretty solid protections. >> we are concerned, we already from pre-court on the process and procedure, but there are those who feel strongly that you need the pre and the post together. our concern is that it would take too long. you n

sensenbrenner: i rise in support of h.r. 3826. i appreciate the work that the bill's sponsor, mr. whitfield, has done on the issue and i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of the bill. wisconsin relies on coal for roughly 2/3 of our electric production. energy costs are consistently one of the main concern misconstituents share with me. the cold winter has made high energy bills the norm throughout wisconsin and instead of trying to alleviate these high costs, the e.p.a. is pursuing policies that will drive energy costs -- cost prices even higher. the e.p.a.'s new source performance standards require that new power plants capture, compress, and score about 40% of the co-2 produced in order to be compliant. however, c.c.s. technology required has not been adequately demonstrated. ignoring the realities of today's technologies, the e.p.a. is plowing full speed ahead this action threely -- clearly marks another salvo in the obama administration's war on coal. the next rally will be the rules concerning existing power plants. if done incorrectly, they could make it too expensive for

sensenbrenner, urging then president clinton to do the same thing that president obama has now done, which is to come up with actual standards that apply. so i don't think that this bill should change that. but let's say it does. let's say that we would have to report each time a dreamer applies for deferred action. i think what we're talking about is 500,000 or so dreamers, their names and addresses would have to be reported into the congress. is that what we really want to do, to have all those kids be reported in to the congress? and let's talk about another thing mentioned, specifically page 14 in the committee report, the so-called point three, unluffle extension of parole and place. what the president did as prior presidents have done is to parole the immediate family, the husbands and wives of american soldiers who are in immigration trouble and the reason for that and the military asks us to do this, the last thing you want, you have a soldier in afghanistan dodging bullets, you don't want that soldier worrying about what is going to happen to his wife, the visa got lost and