but that is -- that membership is the exception rather than the rule for the congress as a whole. there is very, very little interest in realliensing the -- really understanding the constitution much less the federalist papers. many pieces of legislation particularly those that are fairly lengthy but not only that are lengthy most pieces of legislation are never read by members of the house or the senate and i'm not saying that before a member votes on every piece of legislation that they have to read every word. they'd be doing nothing up there except reading but they ought to at least be familiar with it. for hef on's sakes that's why you have a staff up there. use the staff to actually read, brief you sit down with you and go over this stuff. wouldn't take any more time than it takes to attend a couple of receptions generally. but its ignorance, its lack of understanding of the history the meaning of the constitution the meaning of our government and also i think george has to do with the way technology drives so much of our debates not just our debates in the congress we see it

the congress people promised the american voter, me too, that they were coming here for jobs the congress people were going to give employers a way that they could be able to check that they were employing legal residence. the best they come up with was e verify. then they made it voluntary, not mandatory. you look at all this money for contracts and stuff. the democratic party refuses to give money to congress. host: all right. lots there. thank you for calls us. guest: thank you. i want to clear up a couple of things. i think there is a confusion about whether or not you have to pay a tax or not with healthcare. let's be clear. when we have done with this healthcare law. if you work for an employer that has an over the top, high end healthcare plan, than you would be faced to pay a premium on that, or a surcharge on that. at $27,000. if your healthcare plan is valued at $27,000, there's not going to be any change to the healthcare coverage that you have. you'd be hard pressed to find a plan valued at under $27,000. in that, it's tied to inflation. we really try to make sure that we don'

let not the congress of the united states say that this is democracy. you know what tool democracy is? this -- true democracy is? this congress saying to the people of puerto rico, get together, assemble yourselves, decide amongst yourselves and we the congress of the united states will respect that decision. we will not impose a process, we will not impose definitions upon you. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington state is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, can i inquire again how much time is remaining on all three sides? the chair: the gentleman from washington state has four minutes. the gentleman from puerto rico has 5 1/4 and the gentlewoman from new york has three minutes. mr. hastings: can i also inquire, mr. chairman, how many speakers my colleagues have left? mr. sablan: i have one and then close. mr. hastings: and that is the close? mr. sablan: no, one. mr. hastings: so you have two. go ahead. ms. velazquez: i have myself to close. mr. hastings: are you closing. in that case, in that case, mr. chairma

by the committee report. congress does not enact committee reports. it in tax laws, and the way to interpret -- it enacts laws, and the way to interpret the law was by looking at other statutes that use the word costs. the reason the majority can now the other way is that almost all of those did not consider cost to include export fees. >> all i am saying is, congress wanted the opposite. >> you do not know that. the only thing you know for sure that congress wanted is what congress said in the legislation, that was passed by both houses, and the congress adopted. congress never adopted the committee report. >> let me give another example, a harder one. there is a statute, as you probably know, that says you can recover if somebody in government heard you, a tort. you can bring in action against the united states and recover your money. there is an exception, and the exception applies where the harm to you concerned your property. i am not positive i am remembering this correctly, but rep. it says there is an exceptio

are you saying the constitution for gives -- forbids congress from making those decisions in the same way we handle bankruptcy, which is also there? it may be a different one, but are you telling us that if congress decides on this issue, they did not know in connecticut better about immigration in connecticut, congress does not have the power to do that? >> i am suggesting that because of the need for conformity would raise a serious question, and the statute, section one, the delegating -- it does not speak all with respect to immigration -- >> congress can delegate to immigration to the state. >> i am suggesting to your honor that it could raise a serious constitutional question -- >> is that a yes answer? >> is a conditional yes. >> i think this court should hold that to the and it can delegate, and thereby create a network that this founding generation never contemplated, this court is anti federalist and says -- >> in dealing with the district of columbia, congress specifically put immigrants in. if we read the statute as not doing that, congress has critical lack of uniformity

out this delicate balancing act regardless of what these decisions are will be second guessed by the congress and the public and this could also lead to questions about the independence of the fed. i'm hopeful that we can use this hearing to understand better the policy options available to the fed to unwind these programs and the potential policy simply casing of these various options. at the psalm time i think we should be -- same time i think we should be careful not to infringe on the fed's ability and willingness to exercise this independent judgment about which options will be the most desirable and effective. so i view this hearing as an effort to educate members of our committee not as a forum for us to try intimidate or browbeat the fed into pursuing specific options. we have asked the witnesses to provide information about specific monetary policy tools and option that are available to the fed including paying interest only reserves, entering reverse repurchase agreements utilizing the recently introduced term deposit facility conducting direct access sales of the market backed secu

that is something the congress decided was important to. the postal service has an obligation to assure that nonprofit agencies in this country can communicate to the public at a subsidized rate because what they do with the nonprofit agencies is so important in our society. it is up to the congress to change that it is true the postal service has to subsidize those rates but also their periodicals of newspapers and magazines because congress has a longstanding policy that it is important for the country to have a free flow of ideas and for the postal service to ensure that happens. ben franklin was a magazine publisher and was there when the congress -- constitution was written to major the postal service would provide an expensive and ubiquitous service for magazines and newspapers around the country. that is a vital role the service place in our democracies. >> host: how many membe does the postal regulatory commission have? >> guest: of five members all appointed by the president and confirmed for the congress and with a staggered six ye

for years, the congress published a biographical directory of the congress. it was up to our office and to update the senate information. but that only took you a little way down the road in terms of finding information. how many books have been written about a particular senator? what is the location of that senator's office papers, personal files? all of that was a very difficult for researchers to find out. we set to work with armies of intern's over about 10 or 12 years. we went over the card catalog at the library of congress across the street. we rode down titles of books by and about individual senators. we put that all into a large database called biobase.gov, that anybody can check out. >> we are going to start with a couple of questions about bob dole, and then focus on the institution. what are some of your favorite memories of senator dole? >> well, one involved a lunch that he invited me and my good staff to in 1989. it is related to the historical almanac of united states senate. we were working with him on that. we drafted a lot of of the text,

we need some fresh people in the congress. i agree with the previous caller that we need to clean house, the incumbents in the congress, both sides. host: mark, did you vote for president obama? caller: no, i did not host: held out for christopher dodd? caller: no, i did not. host: you're calling on the pimm line. have you always been a republican? caller: most of the time. in the past, it has been so long i don't even remember having voted for any democrats. host: good morning. ron? caller: washington has taken enough money. i would you donate to any of these parties? host: have you ever made a political donation? caller: absolutely not, and i never would. they take enough money in taxes anyway. host: do you vote? caller: yes, every election. host: always for a republican? caller: no, i voted for clinton who think was a great president. right now there's a huge divide in the country between the parties. the democratic party is going in the wrong direction. the guy before called him a socialist, but with socialism you are on th

i'm relatively new to the congress. i was elected? june 2008. bring real life experience of being a worker and a mother and living in our communities. the frustration jim expresses is real and valid. we do have to begin to recreate a manufacturing sector in our country. this is a real task. considering president obama took office in january, 2009. the job loss was about 740,000. we just got a job report that we have created thousands of jobs. we are on our way. until we get to the point everyone who wants a job has found a job, we haven't finished our job. host: what's the biggest things congress can do for job growth? guest: one thing we can do is plant construction. getting people to work and really seriously rebuilding. we have done some of that with the stimulus package. our nation's infrastructure is crumbling. it has to be competitive. i like the small business credit we have just done. small businesses really do generate and create jobs in this country and developing a job -- a sector of this economy about the new energy future. we can't h

the first issue is whether congress can delegate. the rule is that judges should avoid constitutional issues if they can. it really protects the stability of the existing law. >> it is not a docking -- a ducking thing. it is a principle. >> on the issue of whether congress did delegate, i think that that is rather clear and simple the statutory language is plain and it sets up the priority. even in the additional criteria, it said to further the public health. that has a very special meaning in our law and ethics. as a sideline, public health runs counter to our system of jurisprudence because it focuses less on individual rights of the rights of the whole population >> -- the whole population. >> how are you coming out? >> i would clearly offered, however, -- i would clearly affirme. if the panel was to get into the public health context, we would talk about the what ifs. if congress could and if congress did, i would say that this statute is irrational. it does not further the public health. i think there is a lot of practical ways

and every speakers have used the collections of the library of congress. others are involved with projects come with not just the center for the book, but maybe other parts of the library. and it's an important way that we feel that we can demonstrate a product coming out of all this the promotion and we try to get books and authors as much publicity as we can here at the library of congress, but also in the states. the format today is going to be a presentation by our author. we are being filmed today, not only by the library of congress for the library's website, but also by c-span and also by the national journal. so we are part of an educational experience about books of which we are very proud. one warning though is placed or not all things electronic because of the filming going on. we will have a brief question and answer. before the book signing and at that time we hope that you have questions, but your question is you are authorizing us to have you participate on film with us as part of the educational experience. there is a new feature for the lib

you know, for the media and also for the congress of the united states. you can imagine a four-star leader resigning over a matter of policy with a president or a theater of war within 24 hours after that resignation, where is he? before the television cameras -- >> he's on night line. that's where he is. [laughter] >> most of my military friends would probably shy away from that. but they would -- they would answer the call to testimony before the congress. and given a full explanation of what that is. the american people would have the benefit of that. the congress, you know, would have the benefit of that. i mean, it's an important issue. i think sometimes it's overstated in terms of what military impact can have on policy formulation. because at the end of the day, military executes that policy. that's primarily what it's function is. but it does not minimize the importance if those leaders believe that policy is wrong. they have a moral problem with that policy. or they have some other execution issue with that policy, then they should speak. and mos

it's clear the american people evaluate congress in a different matter than the member of congress. they evaluate their member on what she or he brings home to the district. they evaluate the congress on what it does and sometimes how quickly it does it. so, passing legislation if this was a calculation by the democrats they would be worse off doing nothing than passing bill to which some people objected. that's one thing. but the proof of the pudding is in the eating and i think how the democrats do and the president does depends in large part on how the economy does and how we feel about the economy and whether we think our future will be brighter or not brighter. if the economy continues to move, all be it slowly in the direction it's moving, it may not have come that far by the 2010 elections but it's clearer

the banking committee? republicans controlled congress from 2000 to 2006 while this was happening and the democrats controlled congress since 2006. i remember, senator cantwell, during the bush days the democrats complained all the time where's the oversight. how did we get into iraq? where's the oversight of the intelligence of weapons of mass destruction. where's the oversight now? >> it's really important we get to the bottom of this. yes, you can go back to the 1990s and hear from a lot of people part of economic strategy before, both democrat and republican administrations saying these derivatives don't need to be regulated because they will only be used by a few people. what we have seen is since 1999 this has grown into a $600 trillion market, much of it dark. so we don't really know what's going on because, as you talked about or as my colleague, senator ensign said, you'd never be able to go to las vegas and make those kinds of bets if you didn't have capital to back it up. it was a casino game at its worst level. >> may i ask you, senator hutchison. it's your party that's been arguing, for example,

many of them of course are fiscal and therefore appropriate province of the congress. we at the federal serve -- reserve have a lot of economic and analytical capability and as you know we are always willing enter interested to provide technical assistance to to any congress person work on a program. we worked with the treasury on their employment programs and we stand ready to provide any kind of help we can and if you have some specifics things we -- yud'd like us to work on. >> that might be one of those issues we might want to pursue outside the context of hearing gentle lady's time has expired and gentleman from texas paul is recognized athank you gentleman for yield yielding. i imagine everyone agreece the increase in the monetary base last year and half is probably history -- historic. don't think we have much in our history to look back as a precedent. i would assume we can't look back too easily and look at trying to solve a problem like this and what we have to do and how much the monetary base has to shrink. as we talk about this i think most people assume th

and when framed in this way, the congress going to vote yes. so we should set a new numeiry cal target, contemplate these questions and as we get close to the target, we should reauthorize the war or terminate it. we don't have a good structure for asking the right questions as you can see. this seems to be -- >> we're going to have a couple more questions here. first get the my can right here. >> i'd like to ask general mcmaster and come back to general keane, whether you think the torture issue and the issue of how to conduct interrogations has really been resolved within the military? and the reason -- and resolved no matter which civilian administration of whatever party should be in power? one of the reasons i ask this is, as you know, many people believe that there was political pressure from the civilian side involved in what came down in abu ghraib. the commander of guantanamo was transferred to abu ghraib. there were many questions involved, not the least of which is whether the individuals who were finally imprisoned were simply escape

now, this is incredible. >> the role of congress is -- >> just to publish the thing. >> we tan to go to questions very quickly, general mcmaster and general keane. >> i just have one quick comment. i think you underestimate the degree to which you get access when you embed u.s. troops. we're in amongst -- we're working with iraqi leaders, iraqi police, iraqi -- you need it get there with security obviously, because our enemies are operating in and among the population an are targeting journalist. the most dangerous course of action would be not to embed journalists and to rely on stringers, because the stringers who are in those communities oftentimes are in influenced by our enemies, and i think can almost read some stories in some print media and i know exactly that the stringer is planting that propaganda from the enemy in american papers. now depends i guess on thette tore's familiarity with the situation, to be able to weed that out, but we have to remember that the enemy is really operating very strongly on this battleground of disinformation and it is in our interest to give t

the iraq administration. it was negotiated entirely secret from congress. congressmen and senators -- one of the reasons we found out what the negotiations were evolving, this agreement, which commits american troops, was never approved by the congress of the united states, actually, i should emphasize. it was -- we found out about what the resolving negotiations were because the the iraq government leaked texts of the agreement, and the christian science monitor translated the arabic text in a

101st congress, the 1989, 1990 the congress everyone looked at had a broad sense of career there are still quite a number serving but 76 have left the senate. out of the 76, 15 have educational institution centers of one sort or another named after them. you have the mitchell senter, liberty university, the helms center. trent lott has a center, fritz hollings interestingly enough has a center on conducting useful. i'm not sure you can even understand him. but in a certain sense the careers have been institutionalized after they have gone. so again, something to look at after the senate. so it seems to me that with the longevity has come opportunity. you can do well and make more money or you can do good and honestly you can have fun. for bob dole doing health care was fun. george mitchell worked hard but i think he had a lot of fun at it as well. you see many of these individuals stained with politics but without the pressure of going to bed at three in the morning, getting a put mine in the morning to continue the vote of the last 24 hours. so, the senate may be

to do the very thing that congress has a difficult time doing, and thats pull together as best we're able to facts that the american people would like to have to understand first of all what happened. this isn't a commission to come up with solutions to assist congress in the policies so that it doesn't happen again but as you know if you don't know the past you may, in fact, be required to repeat the past. no one wants to repeat the past and it starts with knowledge and understanding of what happened. >> brown: well, tell us more about... i'm sorry. go ahead. >> as to your question, i don't believe there's the kind of examination that is required. i mean, there is... this has been a disaster for the country. and, by the way, the crisis is not over. i mean, it's being lived by families and communities across this country everyday. and the fact is that our commission may be the last and best chance. the best forum for the american people to have the questions asked that they want to have asked and answered. and that's our mission. and we hope the do work a

components but as long as it is aligned that way, it still requires a presidential approval and the congress would get a look at this, too. . . ,,,, ,, >> last slide. this goes back and restates everything that we have talked about up until now. one point that i would bring out is that the reality of the world that we live in today and the world we anticipate living in, we have to expand the spectrum that we guard against in this area. anything from nuclear weapons being used to influence, to terrorism, all the way up to icbm that would be coming towards the united states. our defensive capabilities must be able to address that entire span. a substantial amount of work in this nuclear posture review has not been emphasized as much as it should be. and making sure that we have the capabilities to address those types of threats as a go forward and that we develop those capabilities and we keep them robust and credible, which is a key attribute. i will ask my colleagues to join me and they will take questions. >> thank you. i want to introduce an undersecretary tauscher and the undersecretary o

the congress doesn't pay for them. it comes from a special fund, out of the treasury department. it automatically renews. last year, it was $15 million. >> members of congress, say they do need to do this official travel. and all of the expenses are disclosed. they can make up their own mind. >> reporter: their disclosed to a degree. you learn how much you spent on travel. and how much you spent overall. and there's a category called other. and sometimes the expense reports are filed up to a year after the trips are made. >> thanks very much. >>> when we come back, from happy baby to her majesty. a rare look at queen elizabeth's baby pictures. ♪ presenting the new toyota avalon.

the vote of the congress has asked them to amend the law, challenge it in court but we should never go down and allow ourselves to be pulled down that slippery slope of the president saying he is above the law. >> there is a question that site and compares and wants you to compare your involvement with the clinton impeachment and a movement to impeach george w. bush, and because you expressed some strong views about that as well. how do you view both of those scenarios and it what point, given all that you have seen and all that you now no, at what what.should a president impeached? >> not only a very timely but i think the last time i was here was with bruce time. bruce fein and i were here i think it was a couple of years ago, and we were talking about that very issue. bruce proposed at the time, i think, some steps in that direction in regard to impeachment. i was very disappointed in the last congress's, both when republicans were in charge and then after the 2006 election when the democratic party regained the majority, that neither of those congresses held any hearings that delve

it still requires a presidential approval and the congress would also get a look at this. that would look at the transition. as you go to engineering phase, they would in fact have a review of that -- those kinds of weapons that are put into the category of replace. we have talked about the over $5 billion over the next several years that we would put into the complex from the department of defense to the department of energy to address both the aging infrastructure, updated support to our science and technology -- technology capabilities of the recruitment and retention of the physicists and scientists that are associated with this capability, and then a promise to renew and refresh our continued leadership focus on the nuclear mission within the department, those who lead this inner voice -- this enterprise. last slide. this goes back and restates everything that we've talked about up until now. one point that i would bring out is that the reality of the world that we live in today and the world we anticipate living in -- we have to expand the spectrum that we watch and g

not only do i have connections inside the congress but outside the congress and certainly the dole enterprise is famous for its linkages over time so again, i think there is a model there. >> i would say as far as how the public responds to the sort of procedures that used and things like filibusters and the deem and pass when i was under consideration, generally i think substance trumps procedure and people are going to respond primarily based on their opinions of the policy itself, so on an issue like health care particularly where people do have pretty well formed opinions, not necessarily by the details of the legislation but in the general question of the role of government, i think that is going to be-- and i think that is what we are seeing already in the immediate aftermath of the first policy indicate once again the public is very divided along policy lines in this evaluation of this. polls generally show there is a negative perception of congress and that people don't like this partisan bickering. if you asked people if they think there should be more i partisanship they say yes the

i think the congress will think it's the right direction. so the answer is i think we're prepared to do that and are going to do it. >> would you say it's a certainty that you would get a bill this year? >> well, that's carl. right? >> yeah. >> carl, i hesitate to say anything is a certainty in the congress of the united states. but i would say that there's very, very high probability that we're going to pass regulatory reform. as you know, we passed it in the house and we passed it pretty handly in the house. we're hopeful that senator dodd and his colleagues and others, senator she will by and senator cork on the republican side will come together, pass the bill, go to conference, will work out an agreement and send a bill to the president. and i would hope that we would do that within the next few months. i think that's what the american people people, and that's certainly what we want. >> mr. leader, if i could go back to health care. you said that it's a success. if so, then why in friday's paper was it reported that the white house is

the congress does not have a good track record on that objective. doing so will take courage, the willingness to value our nation's fiscal future over the political pressures of the moment. it will be essential for the congress to show that courage, and it will be incumbent on the american people to demand that courage. that is why i lament the fact that every seat here is not filled, and, david, i hope in your sessions to come around the country that the seats will be filled and that americans will come as you hope, as pete peterson hopes, as concord coalition hopes the public does, in fact, understand, and the aei, for that matter. we're all of one mind on this issue. i understand there is no fiscal slight of hand or silver bullet to eliminate waste and inefficiency in our health care system. i know that no expert can tell us definitively the best steps to cut costs, but i do know that american health care is the most expensive per capita in the world and that we don't have better health to show for it. in so doing, nothing on costs in the health c

can that get through the congress? t: i think you're going to see the white house and congress to try to link jobs to everything they're doing, especially with the stimulus funding, with again with health care, which is going to be what they're talking about a lot over the next several months there's going to be a lot of talk how ths going to help the middle class and small businesses. because everybody knows jobs is the number one issue, they're going to try to link all of the things that they've been able to past to ways that they could help jobs. so stay tuned. jobs will be all over everything. guest: one issue that i remember writing briefly about was in terms of trying to link jobs to everything. the house passed a bill to designate some beach front property on the u.s. virgin islands as a national historic site. and even that on the floor of the house was cited as a potential job creator. so there's probably nothing that's safe from being designated as a jobs bill. host: thanks to bodes of you for coming in -- bot

and so, it is worth considering the senate of the congress he entered in 19602 where it is today. i think it is particularly appropriate in that on the day of we hope, we think the final senate vote on health care reform, assuming the house doesn't screw things up, the coincidence here is great. the interest in the senate is as high as it has been in a long time. so that serendipity has been terrific. finally, when i thought about this move from the more abstract to the specific, i started sending out e-mails, and i sent 10 e-mails out, and to the first 10 people that i really wanted to come, to present things. and, the 10 accepted. so, these are the people that i thought, and there are certainly some others without any question, but these are the people i thought would come together, cheerlead the leading scholars on the u.s. senate, to talk about various facets of this institution that is both interesting, puzzling, often frustrating. and so, it is great to have them all here. we get to talk among ourselves, and i get to talk with you, another great audience from the dole institu

you go to congress, it goes into the low teens. it's a significant step to run for congress for physicians, yet doctors across the country are willing to give up their peace of mind and livelihood to come to the aid of their country in its hour of need. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. king for 60 minutes. mr. king: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate being recognized to address you here on the floor of the house. i remind you, mr. speaker, these deliberations here represent the most deliberative body in the world and that's the argument that we've made for years and even though it's not as deliberative as it was before speaker pelosi took the gavel we still have some discussion time down here. we still have special orders and 60 minutes and alternating hours between democrats and republicans, when both sides do show up for those alternating hours. tonight that's n

the caller wants congress to do a better job and i think all of us do. host: what do think about the time line for this legislation? guest: in the senate, anything can be ground to a halt by just 41 members and it is hard to see whether things will go forward on an orderly basis or not. the country wants to see reforms in these areas. they want consumer protection. they want derivatives control. they want higher capital requirements. and they do not want to see tax payer money put at risk to bail out private interests, whether those be shareholders or creditors. and if those basic views of the american people cannot be translated into legislation, that our democracy is not working hos. host: congressman brad sherman of the financial services committee. we will take you now to the house of representatives for live coverage of today's session. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . . holy name, o lord, for you alone are holy. all nations shall come and worship in your presence. your

the arizona law is a similar ton and only congress can truly solve the crisis. immigration is fundamentally a federal issue and yet we here in congress continue to fail in meeting our responsibility that's allocated to this body and the federal government. until we can pass comprehensive immigration reform, these misguided local laws will continue to be passed in vein attempt to address the issue at a local level and we will continue to suffer from the unintended consequences and abuses that they foster. arizona will suffer because of this law. how can we expect to recover from our recession if we scare honest hard-working american families. blanket discrimination is not the way to solve the crisis. in order to present more states to follow in arizona's footsteps, i encourage to act immediately to pass immigration reform. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: janet lte the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. poe, the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: request permission to address the house for five minutes. without objection. mr. poe: thank you, mada

the last congress. if they do, we will certainly address it. >> you would bring a bill to the floor if the senate passed a bill? >> if the senate passes a bill, the speaker and i are willing to address that. we believe that comprehensive immigration reform is necessary. the first up is to make absolutely sure that our borders are -- the first step is to make absolutely sure that our borders are secure. people who are not authorized to come into the united states should not come into the united states. it is important -- it is an important aspect of the demands on our government and the competition in our country for jobs and services. our second priority is to make sure that americans who are now -- people who are here part not documented and not authorized to have incentive to be identified, and to be in the mainstream of our economy, so that they are paying the proper taxes if they're working. we provide a ways and means for people to become -- who have come here to this country, as have so many of our

it is the kind of case which correspond with the taxpayer. congress is limited -- limiting tools we can use. we can talk to the taxpayer and we have a refund of said mechanism in order to enforce that provision. that is in our toolbox. >> let me give you this thing. some idea of if something could happen. if you have matching, which is one of the ways of checking, if an individual does not purchase health insurance, you would not be receiving anything from the insurance company and has no filing requirement, what with the irs be matched against? >> that is senator roberts' question as well. i am not sure of the income levels and when the requirement triggers. i have to get back to the committee on that. >> thank you. >> i would like to ask questions about offshore and. >> the numbers are thrown all- around a lot. we do not have an estimate on that. but we do not know is the answer there. >> is there a way to find out? >> ultimately, yes. we obviously have done some i believe some good things in the last 12 months in this area. congress has as well. as

violence broke out as the flow of illegal immigrants intensified. members of congress first tackled the district of columbia, with u.s. citizens at the top of the statutory hierarchy. after a two weeks of negotiation, lawmakers were a stalemate. seized by the need to do something, the house and senate agreed to a bill that give priority to health workers, pregnant women and children, but conveniently punted on the key issue of immigration. statutory language, which she did not have in your pamphlet, listen carefully. the center for disease control shell in coordination with each state's department of health, determine the appropriate number of vaccines for distribution in every state. the following groups will be given priority in the calculation. each stop may add chopped any -- each state may adopt any measures necessary to further public health. as to where and the scheme of things, non-citizens will be considered differently it all reports are deemed relevant. it said problem bill does not address the degree of priority for providing vaccines to aliens, state autho

, only 20% -- 1 in 5 approve congress -- approve the job congress is doing. boy, that's another danger will robinson danger. then when gallup ask the question, do most members of congress deserve re-election and among registered voters only 28% say yes. 65% say no. that is a record low, lower than it was before the last two tidal wave elections in 1994 and 2006. and only 25% of independent voters think that most members of congress deserve re-election. and then but you always hear people say, well, people don't like congress but their like their congressman. and we do hear that a lot. and so gallup asked the question, does the member of congress in your congressional district deserve re-election? and only 49% of voters said yes. and that was almost a record low. and the no, my local member of congress does not deserve re-election was 40%, which is a record high. and by 46 to 43 independent voters said no. that's another danger will robinson, danger, danger. when your opponent is starting off with 40% they don't even know who the heck it is, you know, 40% -- i

when i got elected to the congress, dr. height called again. she told me that the national council is going to put a statue here in, i believe lincoln park, here in washington. she wanted me to come and be part of that dedication. i joined her there that day and from that day on, very often, we would meet, we would talk on the phone, and i just believe that she is very close to being as great a woman as mary mccloud bethune was. i'm pleased to be here to say a few words in honor of her and in memory of her great life and tremendous legacy and with that, i yield back, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. conyers: i'm pleased to yield marcia fudge, one of our newest members of the congress who knew and worked for, studied under, was a meantee to dorothy height -- was a mentee to dorothy height and i yield the gentlelady such time as she may consume. the speaker pro temp

this is part of the afghanistan, but i would really like for the u.s. congress to sit down with the students at the university. i would like them to sit down with the chamber of commerce. i would like them to hear from -- year from a different type of person in afghanistan, to see the real afghanistan. if they sit down with the chamber of commerce, you not just hear about how many people are killed or how about the security is. people need to see the real afghanistan that is out there. it is going to take some time and some changes in procedure to allow americans better exposure to what the afghan people have to offer. >> i am is visiting scholar. >> from khuzistan. >> yes. -- from a news pakistan. >> is. -- yes. if you read articles in the united states and other countries, they expressed doubt about the achievable goals in afghanistan. how realistic are your goals? there is quite a complicated democratic and civil society within afghanistan. >> i do not expect the international community to come to afghanistan to build democracy in afghanistan. that is not par

charlie rangel who have come off republican scandals and new republican scandals which is why the congress as a whole is rated at the lowest point it's ever been rated. president obama's number are dropping. there is a lack of total trust in the institution of politics in washington. >> washington is just totally out of keeping with america. >> of course, it is, but there is a deeper problem that the rnc has. let's be honest at a time when you have the first african-american president and the first african-american chairman of the party of a party with a very dwindling base you may be able to win race-by-race with the tea partyers but you cannot win a national election if you can't bring in a broader coalition of voters. privately people have admitted that, you know, this is not the first time michael steele has been an embarrassment, privately people have admitted part of the reason in addition to the technical aspects of two-thirds vote to vote him out he's an african-american and you have to be very careful about what signal does that send if you

the madeleines of the world. congress has continually resisted the need to act like every family in the united states of america and to budget and live within its means. our debt today stands at over $12.6 trillion. the 2010 deficit is projected to be at a minimum $1.3 trillion and we're borrowing 43 cents on every dollar we spend, yet congress continues to increase spending without any correlating spending cuts. congress's inability to prioritize and manage national needs results in real consequences for americans, whether it be furloughs, market uncertainty that leads to lower investment and job losses, or americans being saddled with higher debt and taxes. if congress keeps approving temporary extension bills throughout the calendar year without finding offsets, congress will have added an additional $120 billion to our national debt. additionally, the senate has already approved more than $120 billion in new federal spending not yet offset even though it passed paygo legislation over the -- over one month ago claiming

i don't think that the congress or the people will long stand for inaction and i don't blame anybody nfor inaction today, an i am opposed to the repeal of the filibuster rule, rule 22, that is part of the fabric of the senate but sooner or later, people make a judgment whether that will happen or not and or on this brink of making that judgment and i don't know what it will be, but, my guess is it will be different from what it is today. i would hope that in the next election, the elections after that, that we'll find a situation where we have an honest competition between candidates and you have honest competition for ideas and they translate into useful policy. that may be too idealistic but that is what i hope. i also hope that we'll come around to the realization that campaigning is not an art, is not an entertainment, is not an art form. it is a way you judge the merits of the people who are offering themselves for service. you did that. you had a very explicit, express set of principles that you proposed. i like to think i did that. and i think that will be the answer, sooner o

since the democrats took control of congress, mr. speaker, in january, 2007, they have raised the debt limit five times and the national debt has increased by 42.4%, or $3.68 trillion. democrats enacted a debt increase in february of 2009 promising that borrowing another $1 trillion would create jobs immediately and unemployment would not rise above 8%. however there were still 85,000 job losses this past january and unemployment has consistency -- contiss tently been hovering around -- contiss -- consistently been around 10% around the country. the white house projects 10.6 trillion in new deficits over the next decade. this is nearly $80,000 per household in new borrowing. it's beyond time to stop digging. the new budget estimates, including an estimated total national debt of $24.5 trillion in 2019 under the president obama's budget are alarming and unsustainable. the result would be the highest level of spending and debt in american history. and we hear now also that our colleagues across the aisle don't even want to present a new

some people have said much of the same thing in congress. ve new layers of taxation, the issue should be taken before the american people when he is running for reelection. the american taxpayer has best to make up for their inability to do what every american household is doing. to live within their means. we should keep the taxes low and reduce government spending, and reduce the deficit. these actions must be taken if we have any chance of providing the same level of economic prosperity for future generations. >> thank you. we may disagree on the analysis of the history and how we got here, but again, one thing we do not disagree on is one thing that i want to say publicly. this is how much i appreciate the seriousness of all that you bring to your job, and the decency that you bring to your job. >> those are kind words. >> thank you, and thank you for all the energy that you bring to this committee. and also, the background, dealing with complex financial matters. you have made a significant contribution. >> i want to begin by applauding