>> i would not characterize the bomb hits case as unfettered power. there are limitations there. but i think it is a central point, true across the board. if you're going to get all of your guidance of that type from the supreme court, he will have a lot of difficulty. just take the steps search examples -- strip search example. it is only when bodies with the on-the-ground responsibility for laying out rules, folks have to get involved, and it is no different than anything else. read a couple antitrust cases, we do not have precise guidance. that is why we have an ftc. i hear the same thing for the patent bar. you hear it from the labour side and the management side. with every stage, there are other people with expertise to have the opportunity to lay out guidance. you cannot expect to get a whole list of regulations from the supreme court. that would be bad, because we would not do a good job that and we would not have the necessary presentation that i think is very important. the flip side of the decision that recently came out was that administrators have immunity because we

>> first, i wouldn't characterize the bong hits case as unfettered power, there are limitations there. but also i think it's a central point, it's true across the board. if you're going to get all your guidance on issues of that type from the supreme court, you're going to have a lot of difficulties. take the strip search example. in many cases, most -- many communities have policies and they say they don't care, typically they don't care what's going on, don't strip search the children. that's where a school administrator gets their guidance. it's only when body who was the on the ground responsibility for laying out the rules haven't done so that the courts have to get involved. it's no different than anything else. businesspeople read our antitrust cases and they say, we don't have a lot of guidance. that's why we have the f.t.c. for the patent bar. you hear it from the labour side and the management side. with every stage, there are other people with expertise to have the opportunity to lay out guidance. you cannot expect to get a whole list of regulations from the supreme court.

>> first, i wouldn't characterize the bong hits case as unfettered power. there are limitations there. but also, i think it is a central point and it's true across the board, if you're going to get all your guidance on issues of that court, of that type from the supreme court, you're going to have a lot of difficulties. just take the strip search example. in many cases, many communities have policies, and they say they don't care -- tippy they don't care what is going on, you don't strip search the children. you have to do this or this or that. that's where a school administrator gets their guidance. it is only when bodies who have the on the ground responsibility for laying out the rules haven't done so that the courts have to get involved. it's no different than anything else. businesspeople, you know, read a couple of our antitrust cases and say we don't have precise guidance. that's why we have a f.t.c. and antitrust division and justice department. the same i hear from folks in the past on civil rights employment cases. you hear it from both on the lab

i do not believe in an unfettered and unchecked executive a branch any more than an unfettered judiciary bench. we all have to expand balances and so to say the executive can assert a state secrets privilege without any review with broader authority, unbridled authority i think goes against the principles of the founding fathers so that is the sort of direction that i'm approaching. >> i appreciate that and as the point of information as a longtime member of congress and esteemed member of this committee on ask if you've ever gone into a classified hearing or classified hearing giving up your plan. cellphone and come back and recovered that and then stepped in front of a television screen in the scene this summer briefing paul already coming out in the news almost simultaneously. i think all of us have so that's the point of my concern i wonder if you care to speak to that. >> you're point is well taken that there is a history and i might say i think that if other branches of government have spoken about what has been classified information the executive branch at we exiles in that, and

unfettered speech and date in this legislative body. in the same way the state secrets privilege advantages greater public good protecting our nation. my first point today is that there is no evidence in the state secrets privilege is being abused or is being used more frequently or in different ways than in the past. data from 1954 through 2008 show that its use is rare. in reported opinions the privilege was asserted seven times since 2007 and just three times in 2008. according to robert chesney of wake forest university it does not support the conclusion that the bush administration used the privilege with greater frequency than other administrations. the data also shows the privilege is being used to protect the same national security interests as in the past. over the previous four decades most state secrets cases concerned intelligence programs followed by military technology and contracts and then diplomatic communications. that is the same pattern as today. the data also showed the government is not seeking harsher remedies suc

i do not believe that an unfettered unchecked excel -- executive branch. we all have checks and balances. here is an executive can assert state secrets privilege, without any review, with broad authority, unbridled authority. i think this goes against the principles of our founding fathers. >> i appreciate that. just a point of intermission as a longtime member of congress, if you have ever gone into a classified hearing, given up your blackberry and cell phone and come back and recover that and then stepped in front of a television screen and seen the similar briefing coming out on the news summit -- simultaneously, like all of us have. >> your point is well taken, that there is a history. there are other branches of government have spoken about what has been classified information, the knicks -- the executive branch excels in that. i think the track record for the court is totally different. they don't have to stand for federal election and the judiciary. they have a track record that is extraordinary and protecting classified information. >> i agree wit

so that iran is not think that there is a day after america where it is unfettered in the region. the second macro trend is the idea that its nuclear addition would not happen in isolation. in the fall 2002 in the run-up to iraqi free and there was only one in the persian gulf and it was not iraq, but iran which had just disclosed it had a clandestine nuclear program. today there are at least 14. the list goes on. some undoubtedly sick this capability because they have legitimate energy needs. turkey, for example. i would venture to guess that many, including many such as yemen are in dire need of additional sources of energy are doing this as a strategic move. when we decide what to do this has to do with the balance of power in the region and the fact that our strategy with their nuclear program must be robust enough to deter and contain iran and also the other countries lining up behind iran for whatever various reasons. the outcomes would be the same. we are on the edge of the serious proliferation in the region. the third trend is the impact that this program will have on the

governing structure and understanding of what our founding fathers created that we should not have an unfettered executive branch, and a system of checks and balances is so critical to compensate for the failures of human nature. if you can imagine being in the eight say the branch and having some trouble some litigation filed and you are advised they can claim the state secrets privilege and avoid substantial litigation, and there is a human tennessee with that privilege is there to claim the privilege. -- a human tendency with that privilege is there to claim the privilege there are historical instances where perhaps it was not appropriately claimed. regardless, under our system of government, there needs to be a check and balance and the judiciary is in the right position to do that. that is the third principle that the courts have proven themselves capable of protecting classified information at the highest levels and establishing procedures to balance the interests of secrecy and justice. the illustrations are helping have handled fisa matters, how the classified information procedures act

brief countryman, with support from and recorder of the globe, will not rest until it achieves unfetteredu very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. we all of questions for you. we will start with the right. >> cnn. i have two questions -- can you talk of anything you have heard of what is going on outside of tehran? we have not heard a lot about the situation. obviously, media is not able to get there. also, he spoke very briefly about what the international community can do. specifically, do you think that president obama has struck the right town? is there anything else should or could be saying, or anything else the u.s. should or could be doing? thank you. >> thank you very much. but i can tell you first and foremost is that the extent of violence, unfortunately, is far more widespread than it has been reported by the media, perhaps because of a concentration of media has been mostly focused on major cities, but having received many reports from provinces and smaller towns, there has also been a tremendous amount of repression and conflict there. what could be interesting to all

i hear my friends, i'm not a great exponent of unfettered free trade. but to his credit center mccain is, this is a free trade issue so if you can import food from all over the world and all kinds of products, why in god's name cannot import prescription drugs on the very heavy regulation of the fda whose job it will be to say any product comes into this country has to pass the highest safety ratio. of course, we can do it in if we do it will lower the cost of drugs for the government for millions of american people. now i would say strongly support this amendment and hope we can pass and now appear know i think mr. chairman you can correct me if i am wrong but majority leader read indicated this would come to the floor of the senate -- a couple weeks ago it was taken out, so i think we will have another shot on the floor but i hope we could pass it today. >> mr. chairman it without the more careful safety language in there i can to vote for it. the examples always given of the safe low-cost ones are people that shoveled up to canada and bought their dr

. >> unfettered capitalism, not good for the industry as you describe it in your speech. there is discussion about possible not-for-profit model. do you see any future for that working? >> if changed newspapers in these second-tier towns, if they don't get it together and turn the corner and pull themselves through the keyhole of a pay model online, it is going to fall to starbucks could in baltimore, in san jose, any of these cities that are underserved is going to work. i think you'll be able to hire the cream of the bought out, laid off crop of journalists. if you are committed to putting the money back in, i think you will grow it. if you do the math of six, seven, $8 a month for 10%, 15% of newspapers prior subscription base was and realize that all of that money is now profit, not circulation costs. circulation was a cost center. that has been transformed. on a small scale basis where everybody is committed to just covering the regional area, there is no room for -- a lot of things are not relevant anymore to the local paper. the comex, the crossword puzzle, nationa

work with -- work in a tandem with our neighbors to ensure that all citizens in our hemisphere are unfettered by discriminatory practices now and the vestiges of those practices of the past. it is in our interest to work toward a more equal hemisphere and we are all at risk if our citizens do not have full faith in the strength of democracy to provide upward mobility. the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. put it best when he said, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. afro latinos face a long-standing struggle against racial discrimination and a lack of opportunities. afro latinos make up approximately 150 million of the region's 540 million total population and awill will long with women and indigenous populations are among the poorest, most marginalized groups in the region. people of african descent comprise a significant amount of the population in several latin american countries and are 50% of the region's poor. for many descendents, endemic poverty exacerbated by isolation, exclusion and racial discrimination in. in brazil, of a ro latinos are 45% of the population bu

and i'm not certain that unfettered, domestic intelligence agency would have the same appreciation of the importance of those particular elements. >> i would like one last point, because ray kelly is here and is a terrific job, and to an certain extent we have learned from right. the next time raise up your talking, ask him about the necessity of combining intelligence with the operations, because he has been one of the foremost advocates of that, he's done a trigger job on it. >> let your foray.

more than ever, we need our markets to function transparently and be insulated from manipulation, unfetterred, excessive speculation. much remains to be done to stabilize and sustain our financial system. chairman shapiro, chairman gensler each bring vast experience to their new leadership posts in this administration and have identified in their brief tenure ways to improve the way we approach regulating securities and futures markets. as the subcommittee prepares to make difficult funding decisions, i look forward theo g hearing about the challenges their agencies will face. in the interest of time, i will ask that the remainder of my statement be made a part of the record so that we will have opportunity for testimony and for questions. i now turn it over to my ranking republican member, senator collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me begin by saluting you for your leadership on this committee. i am just delighted to be your new ranking member. about two decades ago, i spent five years in maine state government as a financial regulator overseeing the bureau of banking, insurance, secur

higher elevations of the nevada desert and in certain pockets across the west, mustangs still roam, unfettered in pretty herds, each herd with its own story. the little book cliff in colorado, in idaho, the hal cha. the mustangs at havasu, gallop, grazing, trying to make more of their own. pawing through the ice in winter to scrounge for forest. appearing in the backyards of the new leva towns that are recommend kiting across the desert, -- replicating across the desert. spreading seed so new grasses can grow, stopping for a drink, trying to cross highways, trappers running from bullets, on they go, but for how much longer, we cannot say. they really belong not to man, will james wrote, but to that country of junipers and sage of deeofdeep arroyos and mesas. now i just want to show you one picture. can you all see this? this is bug, the horse that survived the christmas massacre. outside reno in 1998. this is a picture of her taken last june. i had been visiting with her as you can tell, she's about 11 years old now, and she's just the sweetest and most big hearted horse i've ever met. i thoug

of the financial system by ignoring their warnings, we have not repaired it adequately allowing unfettered access, we have borrowed 13 trillion from these young people to guarantee our problems and we have spent $4 trillion of their money, running $2 trillion deficits which i have to pay and in addition social security is $25 in deficit and medicare is $72 trillion in deficit. we're passing the cost of the care of the elderly to our children and grandchildren, not to allow us. we know what they are stuck with these things because they are too young to vote but even now they have come down and big support of barack obama, a registered to vote in big numbers but still not in the streets are have been a part of this discussion with what to do with the collapse. it does not make any sense to me we would spend $15 trillion of our children's money so our style of living and status level does not have to decline two or 3%. we have 40 said it is unsustainable levels because it is phony lending and money from the chinese problem to be 29 and trustworthy because i feel i could lead the revolution. t

authorized local fund system of the bottom line was, the net consequence was abortion on demand, unfettered, was paid for by public funds by taxpayers. barack obama keeps saying he wants to reduce abortions. the common ground on reducing abortions is proscribing, prohibiting funding for abortion. the gutmacher organization, the research arm of planned parenthood, and planned parenthood itself continues to say about a third of the abortions don't occur when public financing is not available. as a result of the hyde amendment, as a result of an amendment i offered back in 1983 that pro-- proscribed funding under the us a pises of the federal employees benefit plan, the dornan amendment and other amendments actually permitted, facilitating ho -- facilitated those children who otherwise would have been aborted because public financing of abortion wasn't there that's true common ground. taxpayers don't want to subsidize chemical poisoning and dismembering of unborn children. you can talk, people can talk all they want. the cheap so fistry of choice is that it does not bring into the visibility t

you know, it is so indicative of how those who feel like they have unfettered access to the taxpayers' money, that they have first right of refusele on that paycheck, that people go to work and work hard to earn. so that they can do it for all of these grandiose sounding programs. well, isn't it amazing? with a 12% increase in spending, a 5% reduction is still an increase. i mean, i just love this new math that washington, d.c., spits out across this nation. you would still have an increase. i mean, it is just amazing to me. you just don't get it. you just don't get it. we have people in my district, we have people across this country, mr. chairman, they are losing their jobs be, they are sitting at the tv, at the kitchen table right now watching the tv and going, these people, these elites in washington, they do not understand that we're cutting our budget 50%. i have small business owners that are telling me, we're trying to figure out how long we can keep the doors open and how much we can afford it lose every month and you want to tell me about endangered species and reducing fund

heard the for-profit companies complain that those pesky not-for-profit companies are having an unfettered advantage. and in fact according to health insurance colorado gutknecht which is the only thing i could find this quickly this afternoon-- [applause] hearing it from denver. they are not. in fact the cost of policies is the same whether or not it was a non-profit or profits of the fact that the insurance companies are using it is one of the reasons we can't or we don't want to have a public provider that we need to have profit is part of the, part of the picture is certainly wrong. back to my sister for a second. as the dime robot for hands and into the train the words formed on her lips and we forgive for this small selfishness because first he was five years old, and another is that in this case, the someone else was god, and nancy could be forgiven for thinking he had a much better chance of getting that time then she did. [laughter] we learn something else. we learned those who are dependent on our remembering them and planning for them can be the first to be jettisoned in a momen

structures, in my understanding of what our founding fathers created that we should not have an unfettered executive branch. there are coequal branches of government and its system of checks and balances is so critical to compensate for the failures of human nature, and if you can imagine being in the executive branch and having some trouble, some litigation filed, and you are advised that will we perhaps unclaimed the state's secrets privilege and avoid substantial litigation. and, there is a human tendency when that privilege is there, to claim that privilege. and with the failures of human nature, even though that privilege many times is justifiably acclaimed, there also are historical instances where perhaps it was not appropriately claimed. regardless though, regardless under our system of government there needs to be a check and balance and the judiciary has been in the right position to do that. and that is the third principle i believe that the courts a proven themselves capable of protecting classified information at the highest levels and establishing procedures to balance the in

there is a day after, not in the nuclear context, but a day after america in the sense where it's unfettered in the region? the second, i think, macro trend that we're all concerned about was this idea that the fact that iran's nuclearization is not going to happen in isolation. you're essentially looking at not one nuclear iran, but potentially many. in terms of historical context, in the fall of 2002 in the run-up to operation iraqi freedom, there was one nuclear aspirant in the persian gulf, and that was iran which had just been disclosed as having a clan clandestine nuclear program. today there's 14. tunisia, morocco, yemen, and the list goes on. jordan, turkey, the list goes on. and some of them undoubtedly are seeking this capability because they have legitimate energy needs. turkey, for example, has a really severe energy deficit, and they're looking for a nuclear program as a corrective for that. but i would venture to guess that a lot of them including many of the countries of the gcc, including yemen which doesn't have much by way of running water so it's not so in dire need of add

. >> so unfettered capitalism not good for the industry as you described it in your speech, there is discussion of possible not for profit model. d.c. any future for that work? >> well, i see if the chain newspapers in the second tier towns which have been so is rated in a providing such mediocre product, if they don't turn the corner and pull themselves to the keyhole of it a model on-line, is going to fall into start-ups and, yes, i think in nonprofits are up in baltimore in san jose in any of the cities now underserved journalistically, it's going to work, and i thank you are going to be able to hire the cream of about out laid-off crop of journalists and if you are committed to putting the money back in i think it will actually grow. you do the math, plot a cocktail napkin into the mass of six, seven, $8 a month for 10% or 15% of what the newspapers prior subscription base was and realize that all of that money come all that is now profit. it is on circulation cost. again, we did not see it, but that has been transformed and i think on a small scale basis where everybody is commi

and we would take away the united states military's last unfettered testing and training range. and take it away during a time of war. supporters of opening up the eastern gulf say that we don't -- that we need to do it to help get america off foreign oil. tell me that. why isn't there a clause in the drilling amendment that was passed specifying that all oil and natural gas that would be produced in the eastern gulf that would specify that had to stay in the united states for domestic consumption? but, no, that's not there. because the truth is that any oil that would be drilled could be sent to any other country in the world reducing our use of foreign oil not by one single drop. so if we really want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and you've heard me say this out here, we need to increase the use of alternative energy, energy