as professor turley has delineated with force and clarity. that being the case, i think congress has a duty to this institution, to the laws and constitution of this country and to the american people to not confirm someone who is not committed to those principles and, indeed, has asserted boldly that she intends to continue in violation of law. i thank the chair and would yield the floor. mr. nelson: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. nelson: okay. madam president, i've just gotten a signal that i'm going to defer to my colleague from connecticut since at 5:00 we will be discussing the nominees which i will speak to but before we do, i -- i just want to point out two things to the senate. first of all, there was a -- the lead story on "60 minutes" last night about the death master file which is put out by social security. interestingly the story was from the extraordinary standpoint that a number of people are told that they are dead when, in fact, they are very much alive and all of the horror that they go

jeffrey toobin and george washington law professor jonathan turley. good to have you both.es this law do, what does it not do and why? >> the core of the law, it says to individuals and to businesses, if you feel that you have a religious obligation to act in a certain way, to do business with one person or not to do business with another, you have the right to do that. and obviously what this law is mostly about, it's about wedding photographers, it's about wedding cake makers, who don't want to deal with gay couples, and it protects them from being sued. >> so there may have been some obvious politics that were driving this, but now we're in a willing situation that is anything but obvious. let's game it out, jonathan. i'm the business owner. you come to me and you say, i'm marrying my partner, another man, and we'd like you to do x service for us. we want you to do the flowers. i say, nope, i'm a christian and being gay is wrong, somebody told me, i'm not supporting what you do. how does the law help me? >> what they would have is an affirmative defense, they could go to

as professor turley has delineated with force and clarity. that being the case, i think congress has a duty to this institution, to the laws and constitution of this country and to the american people to not confirm someone who is not committed to those principles and, indeed, has asserted boldly that she intends to continue chairs the committee committee. >> the meeting comes to order. first of all, i want to welcome all of the witnesses here. appreciate your thoughtful testimony. the hearing is called the title is examining proper payment and errors in the death master file. in particularly we have a very interesting witness who has truly been the victim of in inaccuracy and i have to say when i read your testimony and i would really recommend everybody reading the full testimony, it is quite the story, but i was struck by you made the statements it has been said washington, d.c. is the capital of unintended conscious consequences and we will see that here today. we will start off with ms. rivers testifying and i will offer every senator a

if you come in june ia junior ld have pier peers and colleagues have you one perspective, if you turleytment -- if you are actualing running a department, you see. there are two different perspectives, i dismiss the former one we can argue about needs of u.s. military to serve security interest. kennedy: war has changed. >> it has. kennedy: modern warfare is so different than when we were fighting the coi cold war, i grp in 80s we just assumed we would get bombed by russians, we were going to bomb them, and we would all die. that is why gen xers are so pessimistic, but now battlefield has changed and focus has changed. it seem strange to have massive standing army we have. >> depending on slice of time, change has been inproduct of more advance technology, smart weapon global communication, nature of platform that used to conduct the, but acreage is still acreage, if you want to be able to shape what goes on in a country or region that still takes same number of people because you have other people, you know oceans have not shrank any, and things are morley that wilmore --lethal because

we have legal scholars people like jonathan turley on the loeft who say what the president did, the magnitude, 5 million people that is wrong, that is unconstitutional. so for those reasons we need to get to conference and make sure language that's close to what we pass in the house is the final product. >> let me ask. up' talked so much about it being unconstitutional what the president -- >> because it is. >> so given that you also have another tool that the constitution gives you and that is to file articles of impeachment. if you think that what the president did was so unconstitutional, why not make moves to impeach him? >> we're not going to do that either. look we're focused on this legislation, funding the department at the levels the democrats wanted the levels they agreed to. and making sure -- why did the democrats insist? this is amazing to me. why did they insist on being able to fund something that we know is unconditions city tuesday nal and a federal judge has ruled against? that's the fundmental question. they insist even though the only court says you can't do it. it is wron

turley you -- charlie: you have no regrets from that time. this was a central campaign theme in 2008. dan: right. look. if we could make it better, we absolutely would. looking back on it, there are of course things we could do better. i look at that, it's not just in our outreach to republicans. it's in everything. we came in at a time of tremendous crisis, trying to keep the economy from falling off a cliff. i wish we could have done more things. but we are proud of our accomplishment that we've had through the six years that i worked there. charlie: and you should be. you spent your life doing that you should be proud of what you've done. but there's a piece i read in the new york times, online. about foreign leaders, that the president is cool and businesslike. is that simply what ought to be recognized as his style and don't expect him to be something he's not? dan: he is who he is. he's a person who adores people. like if you see him campaign you see that. he adores -- charlie: voters. dan: voters, the public, interesting people he gets

constitutional attorney turley once said since roosevelt we have made the executive branch stronger and stronger and stronger. but they have actually had a dance partner and that's us. that's us, the legislative branch, both the house and senate. when are we going to stand up for the rule of law? how do i go back to arizona where they define the rule of law? where we allow anybody go past go, collect $200, and go to the front of line. how do we accomplish that without standing up for something? this is that time. this is the time to stand up and not leave everything to the courts. i yield that back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. massie: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: e gentnes. the gentleman from aho is recognized. mr. simpson: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from kentucky ready to close? mr. massie: mr. spea

jonathan turley writing and "usa today's" opinion pages says this.y the way the government accountability office saying today that president obama's decision to go around congress was illegal in not informing them of this swap. inside the "washington times" this morning, here is a quote by the obama administration. that is from the spokesperson of the state department. lucius in memphis, tennessee republican. your thoughts. caller: democrat. host: ok, go ahead. caller: i want to a -- make one statement. no one knows whether that man was under orders to do that or not. and it's not coming out because it secret. i served 20 years in the military and i've been told that. we do that. host: ok. jean in michigan, democrat. caller: bergdahl, when he left his post, he was probably in that morning absent without leave. and then when he was taken to prisoner, he was changed to absent without leave and then to prisoner of war. you are not listed as a deserter until you've been gone for 30 days. to prove desertion in a court-martial, you have to prove that he ne

constitutional attorney turley once said since roosevelt we have made the executive branch stronger andtronger and stronger. but they have actually had a dance partner and that's us. that's us, the legislative branch, both the house and senate. when are we going to stand up for the rule of law? how do i go back to arizona where they define the rule of law? where we allow anybody go past go, collect $200, and go to the front of line. how do we accomplish that without standing up for something? this is that time. this is the time to stand up and not leave everything to the courts. i yield that back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. massie: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: e gentnes. the gentleman from aho is recognized. mr. simpson: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from kentucky ready to close? mr. massie: mr. speake