this book, edited by tim johnson, is a unique volume. the editors have assembled a series of essays written by journalists who covered the supreme court. each focuses on oral argument and the case before the supreme court and offers lessons on the court and the role of oral arguments. the supreme court's to sit in making process is a uniquely closed process to the public. virtually all the court's deliberations occurred behind closed doors. one of the only objections to the secrecy is oral argument. when the court spend an hour in public discussion of the case. oral arguments present the unique window on the supreme court decisionmaking. the panelists have observed countless cases of oral argument, having had the unique opportunity to observe what the court does in oral argument, their experience gives us an interesting perspective on the public face of the supreme court. on our panel today we have one of the actors, tim johnson of the university of minnesota, and the authors of 4 of the lf and essays, dahlia lithwick, legal corresponden

one, strengthening our unique american civilization. two, strengthening our national and homeland security. three, building a productive america with the best jobs and the greatest prosperity in the world. first, we must strengthen our unique american civilization. mrs[applause] >> let me be clear. i am not a citizen of the world. [applause] >> i think the concept is intellectual nonsense and stunningly dangerous. [applause] >> there is no world sovereignty, there is no world system of law. there is in fact no circumstance under which i would like to be a citizen of north korea, zimbabwe, venezuela, cuba or russia. i am a citizen -- [cheers and applause] >> i am a citizen of the united states of america. and the rest of this speech is about the united states of america. [cheers and applause] >> america is an unique civilization. calista and i a couple of years ago did a movie called "rediscoverying god in america" which ises a walking tour of this city. we did it deliberately. it was our answer to the ninth circuit of court which is in

i do think we have a unique moment in our history a unique recognition of the problem a growing consensus of the key elements even if we can agree on the final outcome. iso think we have a unique set of characters in washington that make it is more possible. the president has assembled an amazing team beginning with senator tom daschle and his assistant gt lambrew to have health care reform this and peter orszag has studied health care at the cbo issued report after report and understands the problems that larry summers the national economic coordinator also understand his most important academic paper is on health care and finally my brother who understands how to get things through. [laughter] but i did not say that about him. and but congress senator baucus and senator kennedy our committee chairman of the finance and house committee really want to get something done and we have had not have that combination and on the house side there are many powerful and smart people committed to healthcare reform henry waxman is among one of the leaders that is a unique combination of talent that w

there's nothing gravely unique about the conclusions and recommendation that's will come out of the center for health outcomes research and evaluation. the center will merely be one source of information regarding professional standards in the practice of medicine. there are many organizations today, academies of professional organization that's have studied and commented on what the standard of care should be in a particular medical situation. expert witnesses from both sides, routinely allude to these sources of information in their testimony. information on the relevant standard of care comes from professional societies, medical schools, studies done at nih and fda and other government agencies, learned treatises and journals and no reason to exclude information from one source if a court determines it to be relevant in a particular case. neither the center for health outcomes research or any other source of medical research sets the legal standard of care. no organization or national academy sets it. many sources are considered relevant about what information was available to providers

i think it's inappropriate and uniquely disqualifies a piece of evidence without proper reason and i think it's one sided. i would urge my colleagues to vote no. >> senator? >> i think a piece we left out of the bill is something that deals with medical liability, we're talking about costs. we've got to have some ways of con training the costs and i think a lot of people on both sides of the aisle recognize that that leads to a lot of dup my indication and this is one approach for solving that. we have looked at the -- in another committee we looked at the converse of that, which is protection from any liability suit if you were following the best practices of -- of cer or whatever we listed as best practices. some kind of protection so that they don't have to have to go to extraordinary lengths. one of downsides of doing that was if you follow the best practices, you can't be sued but then that encourages people never to go outside of those lines. if they've got a special case, they won't go outside of those lines, they don't want to lose everything they've got. that isn't why they

we're all unique. one of the things that medicine must recognize is our uniqueness as individuals and not get into the habit of saying, well, there's a sort of size that fits all year and we're going to say that if doctors will treat everybody with this particular medical device or drug or treatment, then we'll pay for it, but we're not going to pay for it if they do anything else. that would not be a good medicine. that inserts the government in between the patient and the physician. we're saying that can't be done by using the comparative effectiveness research. the bill also makes clear that nothing prohibits the f.d.a. commissioner from responding to drug safety concerns under his authority obviously if a drug is not safe, the f.d.a. needs to say the drug is not safe and the federal government isn't going to pay for it. that's obvious. but the point here is that this comparative effectiveness research should not be use bid the government to deny, delay or ration care. the reason for it is, obviousl

she asked, what do you make of the unique diversity of the georgia supreme court? the second question was whether or not i thought my particular presence and my beliefs made any difference by being there. both of these questions caught me off-guard. there was so much work to do as a justice that quite frankly, i had not spent a lot of time thinking about what i have learned from the differences among the various justices. by the way, for those who do not know, georgia supreme court is not only the most productive court in the nation, but it@@@ h in all honesty, we are all the same in very many ways. we all cherish the common values of freedom and fairness and truth and justice and hard work. we all possess, aspirations. we all want a decent, affordable home, a fulfilling a job, healthy and educated children, and most of all, a loving family. we all feel the same emotions, for the most part. joy at the birth of a child, sadness and loss, at the death of a loved one, and anger at those who disrespect us. but the more i thought about it, the more i realized that my an

we are at a unique moment in the public/private sector, the boundaries of public/private sector, the power of government to solve human problems. now we have the opportunity to make government transparent. omb is a center of a lot of the transparency efforts, the recovery effort, the vice president's office implementing a lot of stuff in the recovery act. in 4 months i tell people it has been 4-1/2 months, we have had 2 budget cycles in the 2010 budget. it has been an extraordinary amount of work. given the economic mess we are in, given just how presidential priorities are implemented through economics and budget, it is natural that omb would pursue this roll. combined with that are some powerful personalities and people that allowed that to happen. >> do you worry that too much authority and power is being sucked into the white house and we are diminishing the role of cabinet secretaries? >> that is not about omb, it is the policy czar. i think this is a unique time, there are extraordinary challenges that need coordination, something that is essential. with the read is the d p c,

it is a unique environment. some of the things that make it unique are obvious. we have a president that does not look like any other president we have had. he brings that moment forward in a lot of ways that are intangible but also create a sense of goodwill that i have never seen in a president before. you can see it across the political spectrum. there is a desire, a widespread desire among all lawmakers to see this presidency to succeed strictly on that basis. people see it as a positive step for the country. in that context, there are enormous challenges we have not seen for many years.

she asked, what do you make of the unique diversity of the georgia supreme court? the second question was whether or not i thought my particular presence and my beliefs made any difference by being there. both of these questions caught me off-guard. there was so much work to do as a justice that quite frankly, i had not spent a lot of time thinking about what i have learned from the differences among the various justices. by the way, for those who do not know, georgia supreme court is not only the most productive court in the nation, but it is also the most of verse -- diverse. it has seven members, two women and three african-americans. i have made great friends on the court and learned a lot from them and from the experience, and today it is part of who i am. so, my first answer was a pat 1. we are all the same, i said. borrowing a line from a former minnesota supreme court justice, gene klein, added, a wise old man and wise old woman will always reached the same judgment. and i believe that, basically. in all honesty, we are all the same in very many ways. we al

he is really uniquely positioned to understand the incredible need for healthcare reform, the politics around healthcare reform, the economics and, of course, the arcane language of scoring which is becoming increasingly important. and i have learned to always listen to bob because not only is he very insightful with his analysis and judgments but he's almost always right. and so i'm always asking him -- not only me but others always asking him to handicap things so here he is. bob reischauer. [applause] >> thank you, nancy. one correction, it wasn't under clinton. [laughter] >> that i served. i predated him but he outlasted me. [laughter] >> so i think to his relief. let me add my welcome to all of you, to that of nancy. i also want to take the opportunity to congratulate -- nihcm has become influential and a respected voice on healthcare policy. it's done this on a number of ways. first through its issue briefs called expert voices, which top analysts summarize succinctly the state of knowledge on a particular issue and then add their unique perspective and for those of you who haven

. >> hillsdale college is truly unique. we're unique because we will not take government money and we will not take government control. we are unique because of a special educational experience which is at once highly personal and deeply rooted in the values of western civilization, the american tradition, and the judeo-christian heritage. this place represents a liberal arts tradition at its very best. >> we teach you not only what to learn but how to learn and why to learn. >> so how did you get the president to do that? >> i was not there then, but i knew him, too. reagan was interested in hillsdale. there are some letters in which he mentions it. he was on the campus once and appeared at a college event another time, if i remember correctly. that is when i was not working. he took an interest in it because of this dispute had with the departed education. title 4 of the higher education act is four hundred pages long. we have a lawyer here in town who tries to keep the government from giving us money. i once asked him to

we are all unique. at one of the things that medicine must recognize is our uniqueness as individuals and not get into the habit of saying that there is a size that fits all. if doctors would treat everybody with this particular medical advice, a drug, or treatment, we will pay for it, but we will not if they do anything else. that inserts the government between the patient and the physician. the bill also makes clear that nothing prohibits the fda commissioner from responding to drug and safety concerns under his authority. if a drug is not safe, the fda needs to say that the drug is not safe and we would not pay for it. this comparative effectiveness research should not be used by the government to delay or ration care. the reason for it is that we all want to be in charge of our own health care with our doctor. we want the choice. if a doctor says that we think you need this kind of treatment and we can get coverage for their from their insurance, we want to get that care. if we cannot, we want to pr

it's a unique business. it's our universal medium and source for news and information. consolidation is still something that needs to be paid attention to. but at the same time, it wouldn't be right for the sec to ignore the changes in the marketplaces that are apparent and the struggles in the various parts of the traditional media business. congress has required the sec to look at its ownership rules. when congress asks the fcc to look at its ownership rules, it expects it to look at data, understanding the marketplace, understanding thef the principles, understanding the importance of having broadcast outlets and the importance of having newspapers, understanding concerns about excessive con sl dags and run an open, fair process to make smart policy judgment about the right thing to do. >> do you know when that review is up? >> i believe the next review is scheduled for 2010, and i apologize if that's the wrong date. >> i didn't know either, but i would hope you would set it at a higher priority than just waiting for a review period to come up. we have to do somethin

what's interesting here is one is talking about the admission of evidence, which is uniquely something courts are able to talk about, and you might say, well, the supreme court would have more competence to decide whether you have crossed a line where something as so fundamental to the fairness in the criminal process that it you ought to be recognized as a constitutional right. >> right. and the chief justice said in his opinion federal courts should be very reluctant to get entangled in issues of state relief procedures and really only do so when those procedures are, as he wrote, fundamentally inadequate, which he then concluded they weren't here. again, as his -- >> just to contrast that interesting opinion with one that came down this week, the confrontation case -- >> that's the next one, yeah. >> you're going to do it? >> no. go ahead. >> this case was a question about whether there is a difference between the two pairs on the conservative side of the court, justice scalia and thomas, and then chief justice roberts and justice alito. so in this sixth amendment confrontation case

the federal reserve is uniquely qualified intellectually to deal with this issue. and acting secretary geithner has put the responsibility for systemic risk in the right place. treasury runs it, the federal reserve administers it, and have the council of the various agencies to talk about it, and i like that part. there are other pieces of the recommendation that i am not as aware of that all begun, but if we sit there and don't do anything, i think we have done the country a disservice. . we will leave it there. thank you for turning us. will go to the u.s. house of representatives. their very presence or their memory may endow us with strength wrapped in gentleness, forebarnse revealed in practicality and a self-giving love which is a reflection of your creative life and goodness. may the fathers of this nation be the first and best teachers of their children, to find satisfaction and hard work, greatness and moral character and faith in powerful ways. may all fathers be blessed in their work, in their games, in sports, and in the joy of family life. this we ask

effect we are all unique, and one of the things madison must recognize is our unique as individual and give into the habit of saying there is a sort of size that fits all here and we are going to say that if doctors will treat everybody with this particular medical devices, drug entreatment then we will pay for but we will not pay for it they do anything else. that would not be good medicine. that inserts the government between the patient and physician, so we say that can be done using this comparative effectiveness research. by the way the bill makes clear that nothing prohibits the fda commissioner from responding to drug nc to concerns. obviously if the drug is not say, fda needs to say the drug is not sapan the government is not going to pay for it. the point here is that this compared the effectiveness research should not be used by the government to deny it or delay or ration care. the reason for it is obviously we all want to be in charge of our own healthcare with their doctor. we want a choice. at the doctor says we think you need this kind of treatment and we can get coverag

. >> i don't know how much is set for phil jackson because he is a unique coach to hand out books for player that is play for thim. he is on the cusp of his 10th nba title. what would it mean to his legacy? >> same for kobe bryant. it doesn't change it. >> i couldn't be a rooky. i think veterans respond to phil jackson in a great way. he thinks out of the box. the book giving, understanding guys on a personal level. not a lot of people think phil jackson is a great coach, but in my opinion he is because he understands how to manage humungous ego-s. >> also, you take the bulls and laker's team and he hadn't had the dominant player. it's an unconventional way the way he won his first six championships in chicago. the second group had a different cast. you had kobe and shaq and now this kobe led team in 2009. the variety of ways he's been able to win, and done it in an unconventional way. he's not a part of the coaching fraternity. >> if you play for phil jackson, you have to learn to meditate or you don't make the traveling squad, right? >> we'll see how they make out sunday at 7:30 eas

we need to come up with something that is uniquely american. now, what i have said is that point if we are smart, we should be able to design a system where people still have choices of doctors and choices of plans, that makes sure that the necessary treatment is provided but that we don't have a huge amount of waste in the system appeared that we are providing adequate coverage for all people. and that we are driving down costs over the long term. if we don't drive down costs, we will not able to achieve all of those other things. host: eric cantor, a congressman from virginia, where is this legislation? guest: obviously it had a few speed bumps the last couple of weeks. when we see the real cost of legislation beginning to come out, with the congressional budget office saying one hand, the senate finance bill costing $1.60 trillion and i am hearing estimates of a house bill of $3 trillion, it brings into the question this whole notion that we are going to be bringing down health-care costs. if you are looking to spend that kind of money, clea

some of the things that make it unique are obvious. we have a president who doesn't look like any other president we have ever had in brings that moment foreign in a lot of ways that are intangible but also create a sense of good will that i have never seen a company and president to office before. and that would -- you can see it across the political spectrum. and so there is a desire i think widespread desire among all lawmakers to see this presidency's exceeded strictly on the basis because people see it as a positive step for the country. in that context however there are enormous challenges that we also haven't seen for many years , that have defined the landscape. i mean, you think about a year ago when people were talking about on the campaign trail, it is hard to even think of three our four of the most pressing issues because it has been totally put aside by this economic crisis and the country is, all the problems we didn't know existed with the banking sector and what not. so you have a democratic party, we talk a lot about

>> well, it had some scheduling uniqueness. we worked very fast. we had to slow down and work very fast. this statue took about a year and then in storage waiting for scheduling. >> how different does it look as opposed to your studio? >> when i am close to it or had been touching it, he was clay. so he looked very different. now he is the dark classic bronze. in terms of setting the capitol is a lot better than my studio. there is one view that caught my breath from the doorway. if you stand past him and look up into the dome it is incredible. >> how long your work will be viewed by so many people from around the world. >> that is where i tried to ignore that pressure. trying to represent president reagan is one thing. to represent him for history is another. for all of the future visitors and et cetera. those are the things that are hitting me now. >> how did you get the commission? >> a competition. i read the paper and noticed that california had decided to swap out a statue. i realized that would be a new statue. i tracked down the legislature

uniquely, the postal service is supposed to pay $5 billion annually into the retirement benefits trust fund which is overfunded compared to similar companies. and law requires the postal service to shell out billions of dollars to pre-fund retirement benefits regardless of economic or financial conditions. the postal service expects a cash shortfall of $1.5 billion at the end of the fiscal year. and might not be able to meet its financial obligations. this situation is a threat to postal employees and customers. we must act now to address the financial emergency at the postal service and continue to work on it -- the long-term challenges as well. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? ms. watson: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. watson: madam speaker, we need to urgently need to fix health care, for our american businesses and families and for our future. president barack obama and his congress want to reduce y

sometimes they leave their names and that might be a disservice to their countries because they are unique. i do believe they suffered similar problems. it is not strictly taliban although it uses that moniker, it is a collection of different groups that have turned inward against the government of pakistan and unless they can bring that under control, i think they will have tremendous problems. it also makes afghanistan very difficult because it offers sanctuary which any guerrilla force or insurgency benefit from and makes it very difficult to defeat. it is like burning leaves in your backyard on a windy day, it will keep constantly blowing over and causing problems. we have to see progress in both countries almost simultaneously. >> the 48th brigade of the georgian national guard is back in afghanistan, and again, you and i discuss this. we continue to call on our guard and reserve on a regular basis. it is no longer a volunteer service on their part. we have talked about the seamless integration of the guard and reserve. can you talk for a minute about that? are there any issues about

the dissent by -- noted in the dissent that the court's judgment was -- quote -- "dependent upon a uniquely judicial competence," as if the competence of the congress was to a lesser extent." that was a dissent by justice souter. and justice souter commented in disagreeing with chief justice rehnquist, who said there was an insufficient record, justice souter noted the -- quote -- "mountain of data assembled by congress, including a record on gender bias from task force in 21 states, eight separate reports by the congress." there was a similar finding by the supreme court of the united states in the case of alabama v. garrett, where the supreme court decided that there was insufficient record to support the enactment of title 1 for the americans with disabilities act, even though there had been task force hearings in every state aattended by more than 30,000 people, including thousands who had experienced discrimination with more than 300 examples of discrimination by state governments. notwithstanding that, the supreme court in garrett said that there was an insufficient record. in dissent

over the longer term, we know that the economic future of this country depends on the unique skills of the working men and women of this country, on them getting healthcare and getting those health care costs under control, and on building a clean energy future as we build this new economy. together, these initiatives will not only spur job growth today, but we are absolutely convinced that will serve as a foundation or platform for an economic growth stirred up tomorrow, not based on a bubble, but based on real, sound, economic practices. we are working to build at foundation every day we are here. i think we are making some discernible progress. i remain confident that the country will emerge from this recession stronger and wiser than it was before we went in. we will take steps to reform the excesses' that brought this economy down, and ensure that the benefits of growth are shared with hard-working middle- class families. last time were in recover, we had productivity increase, and people lost 3%. that is not the objective of this administration. when this growth occurs, we hope e

this is my unique platform. it is not about an institution it. it is not about the past. is about where we are now and what we want to go. -- and where we want to go. i will leave that to date to the iranian people to debate in the constitution form of government they want to have. but i sincerely do not believe that this is today's today. the people i talk to on every walk of the iranian families are not focused on talking about the party affiliation or the social economic problems or whether i'm a monarchist or a republican. today, the first priority for us is freedom. we are there to guarantee the fact that no iranian will be left behind in his stores are votes. we are fighting first and foremost for that right to freely decide. i stand, if not with a 17 million. and, -- 17 million armenians, 60 million armenians -- iranians, to upend the system. [applause] >> kyoto news. i have a question about the numbers coming out to the rally spurred we have heard mixed reports about how many are attending. if you have an idea from the sources of whether the numbers have changed g

senator roberts, you have an amendment, hhs, you consider unique characteristics of rural hospitals and low volume hospitals when establishing reporting progress on hospital readmissions. again, i think that adds a great insight and dimension that my original framework was backing. i thank you for that. i'm happy to accept that. >> what number was that? >> that's roberts number two. we accept murkowski three, four and five related to indian health, 60 and 61 also on indian health, roberts number two on unique characteristics. they're telling me how i should talk. i'm 72 years old. i did pretty good so far. roberts number two as modified. we're going to take the rural and low volume hospitals. so we've got those done. so that's two, four, six, eight, ten, we have cleared 11 amendments and we're going to be looking at a couple of others during the break related to hatch and murkowski. >> i actually counted, i have three, four, five, 60 and 61, roberts number two, and i have enzi number 10, 11, 12, 15, 6 and 96. did i miss one? >> 10, 11, 12, 15 and 96. >> and 96. but i was right on the ot

this is a unique time.there are extraordinary challenges and the need for coordination is something that is essential. i think it is having -- all the various policy councils are playing a creative role in bringing together the thinking around the administration. given the ambition and amount of work that is taken on, it has to happen in a unified way. >> that is kind of bs, maybe. -- a yes, maybe. you work in an office most people think of doing the work that is being suggested. you are deciding which techniques can be used on prisoners when the office of legal policy is not the office of legal counsel but it has an important role in the transparency question. that has been your background. there has been disappointment on the progress of side in that arena -- on the question. there's this case about withholding vice-president cheney's testimony to patrick fitzgerald that came up as a question. tell us about the role of the office of legal policy in driving information policy in particular and how would yo

when we and other states have a white today and they come with their white lab coats, be either uniquely good and having impact of legislators but here is the trouble, it can be hard with being paid for an hour. it is very hard. you have you're own tough times we take a day or two off to go to the state capital and that is hard to do with other responsibilities but what has been done in other states where it had the legislators say it was pretty powerful, there was a hundred or a thousand physicians so again you are here, you're sitting all day with no windows. so i know you folks have made that commitment but i just want to end it with my thoughts once in a generation window, this is a unique time when there is an enormous amount at stake in a separate to do is two have done and do more and get more people involved because i was opposed and i did a lot of work and i never presume to that i thought it was a bad plan and i feel comfortable. i didn't presume it was going to be 16 years before the opening and and i learned my lessons and so as i said because the elected officials don't like

i know immigration is a huge issue there. -- to anything unique there. i can speak to my situation in minnesota. several cities have adopted sanctuary notices. they prohibit law enforcement and others from even asking about someone's immigration status in the course of their duties. from the state's stan. we have out what those kind of ordinances. you have to be kidding that you cannot ask as a police officer what someone's immigration status is. but that is a corrosive the affect on the rule of law. that would be one practical thing i think city should remove if they have them. we have to be able to enforce the law and did determine people's legal status if we want to have a rational attempt to enforce our immigration laws in the country. host: good morning caller. caller: it is fantastic to speak with you. how many bills have been passed in minnesota since the dawn of this whole fiasco with the senate? guest: we have had a whole legislative session since last november. i don't know what kind of bill is you're talking about, but a bunch of them passed.

. >> it's a very unique shareholder at the moment.t seems to me that port of the problem that was created was the whole implicit versus explicit guarantee. and we know that one of the reasons that fanny and freddie is seemingly the only gam in town and their market share of new mortgages roughly doubled, is because of that guarantee. is there any scenario where you would recommend that the full faith and credit of the u.s. be behind all $5.3 trillion of mbs? >> the implicit guarantee was a problem. we talked about it in this room many times and other places that there was no market discipline for these two companies because of that. and we didn't have the powers as the regulator to, you know, control their growth. and the market wasn't doing it either. my view is that there is no reason at this point to make that explicit. i think the $200 billion senior preferred -- given effective guarantee and i think that's all that's necessary at the moment. and certainly, there are buyers of the debt and mortgage-backed securities. >> don't you

i think organizing for america has a couple unique roles in what has been a very, very long battle to get health care reform. the first is we had the ability, i think, to tell very personal stories about why health care reform is so urgently needed. we put out an ad to our list and received hundreds of thousands of personal health care stories about why reform is so necessary. the second is, i do think that we have this network of people because of the lessons that we learned on this campaign who are ready and know how to go out and start engaging people in their community. the important part of this is not just when they are on the clock, and this is something we learned during the campaign. by "on the clock" i mean they are at a campus and they -- they are at a canvas and they know they have to knock on 40 doors, or they know they have to make phone calls. but the real benefit of getting people invest in to this effort is when they are off the clock, when they are hanging out with their buddies, just having conversations, 10, 15, 20 a day, and someone brings this up, they have a wea

he is really uniquely positioned to understand the incredible need for health care reform. the politics around health care reform, the economics and of course the arcane language of scoring which is becoming increasingly important. and i have learned to always listen to bob. because not only is he very insightful, with his analysis, and judgment, but he is almost always right and so i have -- am always asking him, not only me, but the -- always asking him to handicap things, so here he. >> guest: bob reischauer. [applause] >> thank you, nancy, one correction. it wasn't under clinton that i served. i predated him but he outlasted me. [laughter]. >> so i think through his -- to his relief. let me add my welcome to all of you. to that of nancy. i also want to make the opportunity to congratulate nihcm and its staff on the 15th anniversary and after the last decade and-and-a-half, nihcm has been an influential voice on health policy and has done this in a number of ways, first through the issue briefs, called expert voices, which top analysts summarize succinctly the state of k

now, again, our community was not unique. at that time on average our nation was suffering one pipeline accident every single day. well, mr. president, while bellingham may not have been unique in our tragedy, we were one of a kind in our response. today, 10 years after this unthinkable happened, the story of the bellingham explosion is also now the story of how a community came together to tackle a nationwide problem and protect other americans from coast to coast. as we, together, learned about the problems with inspection and oversight of our national pipeline safety system, the community channeled their grief into action. through research, i found out that there were inadequate laws, insufficient oversight, too few inspections, and not enough trained inspectors as well as really a lack of awareness about these pipeline dangers. i learned that one of the most important public safety offices, the office of pipeline safety, was underfunded and neglected. so i asked the inspector general at the department of transportation to

unique in my experience, and i can only imagine what that lawyer would say when she wrurned. how did it go? well, i got fired. it was an unusual experience. we'll see if she does that on the supreme court. i guess probably not, but you never know. one last point i would like to make before we open to questions is one question often raised 88 with nominees is whether or not they could fulfill a consensus building rule on the supreme court. in other words, whether their personality is such that they would be able to forge consensus, build coalitions on the court, and when people say this i think what they mean is can she persuade justice kennedy. as far as that, who knows. i think one thing that i will note is that it is hard to predict these things in advance. the history of the supreme court in many respects has been a history of individual personalities, and it is very difficult for an outsider to predict that once you have got a new justice in the mix and it is a closed court in the sense that their confidences are closed and no one can be sure of the die unanimous na ims,

you guys are uniquely good at having, i think, impact against legislators. here is the trouble. it can get very hard. you're paid by the hour. it is very, very hard. you have your own tough times to have people to take a day or two off to go to the state capital. it hurts patient responsibilities and others. when it has been done in pennsylvania and florida and other states, the legislators say it was very powerful. there were up 2000 physicians there on that day. again, you are here. you're sitting all day in the room with no windows. i know you folks personally have made that commitment, but again, i want to in my thoughts with what i have said. we're at this once in a generation window. this is a unique time where there is an enormous amount of state. -- the enormous amounts at stake. i was opposed and i did a lot of work against the clinton plan. i never ever presumed that i thought it was a bad plan. i felt comfortable with what i did. i never presume it was going to be 15 or 16 more years before the window open again. i learned my lesson. as i said, because by the way, ele

this is not unique and but what terms of that side of the issue. let me go to mr. thomas. you have now had a brief opportunity, is this the first time you have seen the criteria upon which the decision was made in your wind down agreement? >> i have seen it one other time the last few weeks. i have seen things in this paper regarding the wind down commitment and it appears i made the wrong decision it says in the case of a rejected dealer. >> what page are you want? >> page number five. is as out the very bottom for gm dealers those that have a plan with gmac unfortunately we are with wells fargo, but for gm dealers that have a plan with gmac of the dealer agreement is rejected we expect the dealer would turn in new vehicle inventory which gm would redistribute. the idea of playing out 17 months sounds good and a sense for the employees, but it is a hard sell to convince someone why they should buy a past model car from new when you are not even going to be there. that is tough. >> is the hard to sell a model car from a manufacturer who people were not convinced was going

one of the unique things with u.s. fish and wildlife is when i would visit places they were so excited i was interested in the history of that national wildlife refuge that they would take me to see things. people took me to watch sea turtles. i went at night with the great turtle experts to watch the turtles lay eggs on the beach. after they lay eggs then they moved into the ocean. it felt like the birth of mankind. it was like biblical to watch these turtles. when i would go there i was not just looking at documents. i was trying to experience some of the wildlife edrik directly or indirectly that roosevelt said. the manatee, he would not in florida if roosevelt had not created as a refuge. but when did you do the gerald ford book? >> i did that for the arthur/centre jr sign me up for that series. that came out about that time. -- arthur schlesinger signed me up for that series. gerald ford is a small but. >> that theories, all of them were about 200 pages. >> yes. this book was for me, the book i would live and die