these issues come before the united states congress. i think there's a time and place to recognize significant achievements within the united states of america. i am going to ask for a recorded vote on this. it will be an interesting question. my point is, the economy's struggling. we have real issues out there. like i said there is a time and place to make these kinds of recognitions. i just don't know that this rises to the same level as recognizing teachers or nurses who hold people's hands as they are there in the final days of their lives. there are a lot of things that i think we could unanimous consently look at and recognize. i for one don't think that hollywood needs more recognition and with all due respect i for one at leasttwill be voting against this resolution. with that i would like to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. watson: yes, madam speaker. i'd like to give myself as much time as i need. the speake

bill would come under a rule, an open rule, it's hard to believe but as a freshman in this united states congress i will likely go through my entire freshman congress, the 111th congress, having never experienced, even once, an open rule on the floor of the house of representatives. that's a shame. that's a shame. there should be a way for the mechanism where this bill is brought under a rule, open rule, where members on both sides of the aisle, can offer amendments and we can vote on those amendments. unfortunately that's not going to happen. we should not necessarily pass the bill that does not have tough enforcement mechanisms. we can and do much better than this. this body must make tough choices to eliminate wasteful government spending. it should not pass legislation. with great titles, a-plus on the titles given these bills. they are good. who is going to vote against efficiency, effectiveness, and performance. but it doesn't necessarily respect what's in the bill. my colleague, eric schock from illinois, offered a great amendment which was shot down which would put a sunsetting provision

united states army. it is also home to the u.s. army pacific medical center and of course my army reserve unit. all of which i take great pride in representing here in the congress. second, i think it speaks to the strength and vitality and greatness of our nation and our nation's army that i for myself and child of immigrants from thailand and from china had the honor and privilege of calling myself an officer in the united states army reserve. it is a true testimony to the greatness of our nation and the greatness of our armed forces that the child of an immigrant would be allowed to serve as an officer in the most powerful fighting force the world has ever known. third and finally, of course, i am enormouslyyhumbled to call myself a member of the house of representatives. i think it is also testimony to the greatness of our military, our armed forces and to the united states army that i had the privilege earlier today of sitting in a hearing with general petraeus, discussing current actions and operations going on in afghanistan. i think one of the beauties of our army today is the fact that our army is professional, it is well trained and it also is under th

the advancement of colored people, known as the naacp, also known as the conscience of the united states congress. this year the naacp celebrates % its 101st anniversary and its ongoing efforts to produce justice and equality for all americans, not just americans of color, but all americans. i support the gentleman from texas, mr. green, the sponsor of this resolution, and the former president of the houston branch of the naacp for his continued commitment for recognizing the naacp for its historical and contemporary civil rights contributions. as we celebrate the organization on this the 101st anniversary, i'd like to reflect on a few bits of history concerning the naacp. first, acknowledging its history which began february 12, 1909, when the organization was formed by ida wells-barnett, w.e.b. dubois, henry moscowitz, mary white ovington, oswald garrison villard and william english walling, a biracial group that consisted of christians and jews. it is a history that includes some of the most significant moments in our nation's great story where we've come to a more perfect union. the 1954 case

united states senate is still the anchor of the republic. senator byrd was the anchor of the senate. there will never be another like senator byrd. he was a member of this nation's congress for more than 25% of the time that we have existed as a country and longer than a quarter of today's sitting senators and the president of the united states have been alive. his political career spanned countless american advances and achievements. a dozen men called the oval office his own while senator byrd called the capitol building his own. and he would be the first to remind you that those two branches are equal in the eyes of the constitution, and i heard him say so many times, that we work with the president, not under the president. the nine times the people of his state sent him to the senate and the more than 18,500 votes he cast will never be matched. mr. president, as you and i and each of us are fortunate enough to be here, we have the privilege of knowing firsthand it was an incomparable honor to serve with and learn from this giant. by virtue of his endurance, robert byrd knew and worked with many of the greats of the united states senate. because of his enduring virtu

before my colleagues and ask them to join me in recognizing her achievement on behalf of the united states congress, congratulations, well-done. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. courtney: a gaffe is when the politician tells the truth. the republican leader, mr. boehner, proved this point the other day when he was asked point-blank whether he agrees with the chamber of commerce the government should pitch in to pay for b.p.'s oil spill. he replied, i think b.p. and the federal government should take full responsibility for what's happening here. his words clearly misstated the law. b.p. is solely responsible and his staff went into damage control overdrive afterwards to clean up his mess. but this gaffe confirms what everyone knows in their heart, washington republicans for the last 40 years have been allies of the oil companies' push to shift the risk of oil production on to the taxpayer and keep the b

they're a little bit concerned that the united states congress just keeps on spending money but without a budget. so with that i yield back my time and -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. green: i thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. green: while i appreciate the gentleman from texas, his desire to make sure that budgets are balanced and to make sure that we have accountability and transparency, i do have to remind the gentleman that the desire and the need to balance the budget did not start this year, nor did it start last year. we should have had it balanced -- have had a balanced budget for the eight years of the prior administration. and i think that you find this administration burdened with the problem that was create drn -- that were created by past administrations. i believe that in an effort to correct these problems we will have to take some necessary steps toward helping small business. i hear my colleagues on the other side quite regularly contending that small business ne

companies, too many investors are sitting on the sidelines waiting for a clear signal from the united states congress or the united states government quite frankly in terms of policy, and companies, investors, shareholders do not want to invest in technology a of ultimate u.s. policies supports technology b in the meantime too much capital is sitting on the sidelines. if we don't move quickly, and i know you support u.s. energy policy that the longer we wait, the farther ahead the chinese are the germans or the danes will be in terms of the next economic opportunity in in the 21st century clean energy. >> let me just close with this because i think this sums it up. we unquestionably see these signs of progress in one area or another. the fact is, we continue to fall further behind. china is imposing tariffs of up to 30% on some green goods. this is flagrant protectionism, flagrant protectionism. and i want to see the administration more aggressively get those barriers visible. the public needs to know about it and put the bully pulpit on getting them change. i just look at these negotiations, and sec

united states senate is still the anchor of the republic. senator byrd was the anchor of the senate. there will never be another like senator byrd. he was a member of this nation's congress for more than 25% of the time that we have existed as a country and longer than a quarter of today's sitting senators and the president of the united states have been alive. his political career spanned countless american advances and achievements. a dozen men called the oval office his own while senator byrd called the capitol building his own. and he would be the first to remind you that those two branches are equal in the eyes of the constitution, and i heard him say so many times, that we work with the president, not under the president. the nine times the people of his state sent him to the senate and the more than 18,500 votes he cast will never be matched. mr. president, as you and i and each of us are fortunate enough to be here, we have the privilege of knowing firsthand it was an incomparable honor to serve with and learn from this giant. by virtue of his endurance, robert byrd knew and worked with many of the greats of the united states senate. because of his enduring virtu

important to us because they helped us with the appropriations of the wilson center at the united states congress. they may be the most important people here so far as i am concerned. [laughter] janey james and chris tobeck are here. [applause] they do marvelous work on the step of the appropriations committee. i am delighted that jim leach is here who is chairman of the national endowment of the humanities and a former colleague of mine on our board. [applause] i will be introducing sam donaldson in a moment, but i want to say that his wife jan is here and we are delighted to have you here as well. [applause] we have the president of s iemens usa. we have several ambassadors with us tonight ambassador su from the republic of korea, will you stand please? [applause] the ambassador from the embassy of sweden is with us. [applause] the ambassador from japan is here. [applause] the ambassador from mexico is here and we are delighted to have him. [applause] i think the brazilian ambassador arrived. i did not see him personally. [applause] and we have the;djv charged affr from the embassy of south afr

the united states congress and the united states constitution has the final word word. mr. bishop: i appreciate the gentleman from texas, if i can reclaim the time briefly. from changing from just the concept of jobs and indeed the future of space and especially putting the emphasis on the fact that what are we going to do to inspire people to go in science and mat and becoming the engineers of the people, if you home build one new plane for our military once every 40 years or if we're only doing one new adventure into space once every 30 years, that doesn't inspire somebody. in fact, one of the nasa's new goals is to encourage education into space. and i think as the gentleman from texas clearly cited, kids are not dumb and they're realizing, if you're at a whim firing 30,000 engineers and scientists that doesn't give you encouragement to move into that particular area. one of the issues especially is because constellation is the cutting edge of science. it was granted last year by "time" to magazine as one of the 50 best inventions in fact, it was the number one of the 50

united states. the post-script, the footnote which is just amazing to me son his deathbed, the congress of the united states votes to refund the $1,000 to andrew jackson, but all of which to say ii habeas corpus has been a significant part of adjudicating the right principles, the limits, on what can be done to defend the constitution and to defend freedom in america. and the executive branch operates within limits and the legislative branch operates within limits and at times, the judicial branch has operated within limits, althoogh i think they define their own limits and given the fact that they reserve the right to migrate or evolve or morph or what -- when they want to make it sound greenist, they say they have an organic constitution. so they can do it like, what do they call it when the japanese shape the trees and tie them? bonsai, they sort of bonsai the constitution so we make it provide shade and protection in one area. never mind. i'd like to just run through as we get toward events that are so current they are now pending, i would like to run through a series of cases just of habeas corp

before congress who may have links or people that they prefer to present certain points of view, favorable to russia. i mean this is all a part of an image-building process in the united states that has gone all around the country. even buying public relations companies working in congress and on the hill. that's been very well known. i mean about the extent of russian influence. >> brown: very well known? well what's the timing? what do you make of the timing here? you said it's a week after the visit by president and the two leaders getting together. it's a reset of the relationship. >> i think it's definitely a sign by the obama administration and president obama himself that dmitri, we can have a great relationship. we don't want to go back to the cold war. by the way i'm no pushover. you're doing things illegally in my country. he's basically putting moscow on notice that they can't continue this type of activity. i'm quite surprised by it because i know that i've heard anecdotal incidences of f.b.i. trying to push into the white house, trying to get this thing brought to the attention of the president and trying to get some type of level of action to stop this level of

it is my understanding from the house historian's office that i am the first member of the united states congress of thai ancestry. for myself, thailand is not just a place, not just an ally of the united states, it is someplace where my mother was born and raised and most of my mother's side of the family continues to reside. i, of course, speak in strong support of this resolution asking for a peaceful resolution of the conflict an dispute going on currently in thailand. mr. speaker and members, for us here in this nation, while we%% may have strong disagreements between conservatives and liberals, we ultimately resolve our differences peacefully. right now, what's happen in thailand is saddening, disappointing and something we must all be troubled by. island is an incredible, important ally for the united states and southeast asia. it's been the linchpin of our strategic interests in southeast asia for decades. what i have seen on the streets of bangkok and what my family has witnessed firsthand over the last few months is incredibly disappointing. last month, mr. speaker, my family, when i ta

isn't it a fact that the policy was not the military policy, but a law passed by the congress of the united states, those soldiers may have come back from iraq or afghanistan, they were appearing to recruit on your campus were simply following the policy of the united states congress effectuated by law, not their idea, and that you were taking steps to treat them in a second class way, not give them the same equal access becauue you deeply opposed that policy. why wouldn't you complain to congress and not to the dutiful men and women who put their lives on line for america every day? >> senator sessions, you're, of course, right that the solomon amendment is law, passed by congress. and we never suggested that any members of the military, you know, should be criticized in any way for this. quite to the contrary. we, you know, i tried to make clear in everything i did how much i honored everybody who was associated with the military on the harvard law school campus. all that i was trying to do was to ensure that harvard law school could also comply with its anti-discrimination policy, a policy that

owe it to this institution to produce a budget so that we can debate and discuss it in the united states congress. it's one of the fundamental things we should do, this should congress -- this congress should be embarrassed. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york rise? mrs. maloney: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. maloney: the b.p. has caused a great emergency along the gulf coast. i -- mr. speaker, the b.p. oil spill has caused a great emergency along our gulf coast. i hope as a response we never forget the lessons of the ground zero workers. in the wake of 9/11, thousands of men and women labored tirelessly, driven by a sense of urgent purpose, safety precautions were not taken and assurances were given that proved to be false. the health of far too many of those who worked on that toxic pile they suffered long-term health consequences. now in the gulf, men and women are once again being exposed to a toxic s

the congress of the united states did its job and initiated an investigaon the president of the campaign activities, including the president's watergate committee, congress en went on to have a house impeachment committee which continued to investigate and the commite voted aicles of impeachment against the president. the supreme court of the u.s., led by t chief justice pointed by the preside of the united states, decided the president was not above the l and had to turn over his tapes to a special prosecutor and the president of the united states resigned with bipartisan impetus and desire for that to happen. thati think, is a significant difference in terms of what we have today. i think our political system is not functioning -- >> what i am saying ii think that the idea that you could get a supreme court decision is questionable. the tapes. i do not know. the notion that you would have impeachment proceedings and an investigation during the bush years, it seems to me, i am not suggesting that he should or should not have been impeached, but certainly there was cause for congressiona

authorization act, fiscal years 1990 and 1991, public law 101-246, and as president of the united states, i herebyeport to the congress that it is in the national interest of the united states to terminate the suspensions under section 902-a-3 of the act with respect to the issuance of perm yent munitions export licenses, for exports to the people's republic of china, in so far as such restrictions pertain to the light scanner 32 system used for gene mutation geno typing for individual cancer treatment. licensing requirements remain in place for these exports and require review on a case by case basis by the united states government. signed, barack obama, the white house. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on foreign afrs and ordered printed. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from missouri, mr. akin, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. akin: thank you, mr. speaker. i would now yield three minutes to -- or two minutes over here. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may not yield blocks of time but you may yield. mr. akin: do i y

congress, senator byrd also achieved the distinction of holding more elected leadership offices in the united states senate than anyone in the body's history. his senate service can -- is the body's longest. senator byrd holds the distinction of serving in congress longer than anyone else. his achievements and his unright field archive of accomplishments -- unrifled archive of accomplishments was one sole purpose, to serve others. and he never tired of trying to find ways to help a little more, to do a little better. striving for the next wrung was for senator byrd a lifelong pursuit. he was forever setting goals and he challenged himself, his staff, his colleagues, all of us to meet or exceed those goals. and you know one other remarkable feature about robert c. byrd, he made political contests as bitter as they may seem at the time the foundation of future and lasting friendships. recall, for example, as i know the gentleman in the chair, mr. dicks, can recall as well, senator byrd's one-vote victory over the late senator from massachusetts, ted kennedy, whose son, patrick, was just here on the fl

united states. the post-script, the footnote which is just amazing to me son his deathbed, the congress of the united states votes to refund the $1,000 to andrew jackson, but all of which to say ii habeas corpus has been a significant part o adjudicating the right principles, the limits, on what can be done to defend the constitution and to defend freedom in america. and the executive branch operates within limits and the legislative branch operates within limits and at times, the judicial branch has operated within limits, althoogh i think they define their own limits and given the fact that they serve the right to migrate or evolve or morph or what -- when they want to make it sound greenist, they say they have an organic constitution. so they can do it like, what do they call it when the japanese shape the trees and tie them? bonsai, they sort of bonsai the constitution so we make it provide shade and protection in onarea. never mind. i'd like to just run through as we get toward events that are so current they are now pending, i would like to run through a series of cases just of habeas corpus th

it has earned the right to be recognized by the congress of the united states of america. and i beg that my colleagues would support this resolution. i yield back the balance of my time. you the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the work of congressman green from houston. mr. cohen: i look at him and mr. smith, i think about my weekend trip this past weekend. i went to austin, texas. when i was in austin, i was at the barber jordan airport and the baggage area on the ground floor there's a statue of barbara jordan, what a great member of the naacp she was. and a great american. with that i yield back the balance of my time and ask -- ms. watson requests some time. we'd be pleased if she'd contribute. i yield her as much time as she needs. spoim the gentlelady is recognized. ms. watson: mr. speaker, and to the authors and co-sponsors of this resolution, i just want to add to the testimonies that you have already heard in support of this resolution, commending the naac

important to us because they help us with the appropriations of the wilson center at the united states congress they may be the most important people here so far as i am concerned. [laughter] jenny james and chris topeck are here. would you stand? [applause] they do a marvelous work on the staff of the appropriations committee. i am delighted that jim leach is here who is chairman of the national endowment of humanities and he is a formal college of mine on the board. -- former the government on the board. sam donaldson's white is here. we are delighted to have you, jan. we have the president of siemen's usa. [applause] we have several ambassadors with us tonight. the ambassador from the republic of korea, would he stand please? over here. [applause] the ambassador from the embassy of sweden is with us. [applause] the ambassador from japan is here. [applause] the ambassador from mexico is here. delighted to have him. [applause] i think the brazilian ambassador arrived but i did not see him personally. [applause] and we have the charges d- affaires from south africa. [applause] i hope i have hit

they go to the polls to decide who they want to direct the destiny of the united states of america here in the united states congress. i yield to the gentleman from california. mr. lungren: 441-b is the section that prohibits corporate contributions. so the gentleman's amendment does not do what the gentlelady from california said. which would allow corporations to give contributions -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. king: i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from california. ms. lofgren: mr. speaker, i would urge opposition to this amendment. from the gentleman's comments he favors disclosure. i hope he will vote therefore for the disclose act, but we don't need to open the door to unlimited funds by corporations to candidates. we know it will be sleazy, in order to get disclosure. vote no on the king amendment and yes on the disclosure act. i yielddback. the chair: all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. king: mr. chairman. the chair: the ge

is that we have passed in committee legislation that talks about more unification to the united states congress beyond the high chair, the ranking member in the house and senate. in the house, congressman anxious has -- congressman esh es has worked on some legislation to try to resolve that issue. >> [unintelligible] >> i'm saying that they shall not be paying dividends until they make these people whole, and make a better effort to do this in a timely fashion. these people are coming to us and saying, i have to take out a loan. you know the stories. i have to take out a loan which i can ill afford to repay because bp is now paying. bp has the money. they made $17 billion last year. they went up 12 points in the stock market yesterday. they made $17 billion in profit last year. these people have to struggle to get a few thousand dollars from them when they are on the margin and their livelihood has been destroyed or hard greatly by that. what i am saying is -- and i respect the fiduciary responsibility to the shareeolders, but first and foremost they have the responsibility to pay their bills.

knowing the congress may have other -- to make its final unless there is an effort in the united states congress to politicize and i want folks to know omy watch i am not going to let that happen. i don't think is right for my state or tax payers and i think it means the objective of the obama administration in this area which was to put this audience before politics that this had been the objective in this area would be substantially de raybould if after all of this work but yearsof effort through open and transparent process over the award was finally made and you have described it in my view as a final word you said a final in your judgment to then at this hour say we are still going to try to overturn the funding. we are going to have the congress try to block the work that is ongoing and think it has great implications for the way science decisions are made. for taxpayers in this country and on my watch i'm not to let that happen. mr. chairman, thank you. >> i want to give you more tools d one of them is enhancing the special 301. this is a bill which basically provides that if a country fa

so, in a macro sense what is the outlook for the balance of power in the united states congress? guest: well, enough seats are in play for the republicans in their takeover bids that there is a possibility, if the circumstances are really clicking for them they could get control of one chamber or the other. again, i have always felt that campaigns matter and the candidate matchups matter. i think that predictions as the caller suggests that say the die is cast already, five months out from election day, are premature. we have discussing that the poll shows that voters across the board are unhappy with their incumbent. the same poll you referred to by the "washington post" showing that three-fifths of the voters are disapproving of the republican party. so, the dynamic this year has not been the democrats coming down and republicans coming up. it is basically the democrats coming down to the low esteem at which the republican party has been held the last couple of election cycles. host: we will let one of our viewers ask this question via twitt twitter. guest: the influence that t

united states, mr. speaker, is not to be a policy sett when it com to areas ere the congress s legislated. that's what we do here. set policy. we set policy her in the united states congress, that's part of the separation of powers. athe risk beingredundt, everybody in this chamber, mr. speaker, shou know th, i think it's getting harder and harder to teach gornment class iour schools today because of the conduct especially of our ecutive anch of government. th separatioof powers, the judici branch will take care of things that have to do we the courts. the legislative brancof government, the house and senate, we set the policy. we write the laws. the executive branch of governme's job is to see that hose laws are faithfully uphe, enforce the law. carry out the fol policy, the will of the people of the united states of america as expressed througe republic, the constitutional publ, the reprtativeshat are elected by the people. and yet we have members of executive branch of government as high as president himself who seem to not derstand that simple concept. a presidt who taught constitional

it is impossible to spend the money twice unless you are in the united states congress and you ignored the rules of financial budgeting. if we did this in a private sector, we would all be in jail. this is fraud and the american taxpayer, that is clear and simple. that is all i'm going said. and this is a responsible way to address this issue? i guess that is why we are 13 trillion dollars worth of debt and we're doubling in five years in tripling in the next 10 years. this is not responsible. this is profligate and not even honest. it is misleading, saying one thing and doing exactly the opposite, spending money twice, by allied it -- violating a law that we wrote -- not all little sense of a law, no beer you can get the attorney general to say, on obligated funds were never listed in the language of what goes back to pay down the debt. it did the money that comes in. well, you can get an attorney to parse the words that way, but everyone understood, beginning with the president down to that person on main street to pay the bill on the interest on the nose that the chinese told, that

socialists still have on their website the proud bond between them and the progressives in the united states congress. and the last time i looked at the list of progressives on the progressives website there was 77 members of congress that were listed and of these 77 members it would be obviously among the most liberal left-wing members of congress. but the people of america don't think of liberal left-wing democrats as socialists. they think of them of people for a little more social justice but they don't think of them as socialists. but they would read the socialists website. i think that might be a pretty good description of what a pocialist is. what you read on the website that they want to nationalize the fortune 500 companies and then you can minimize your dsausa.org website and then go open up the progressive website and read on there what they want to do. well, let me see. they want to nationalize the energy industry in america. they want to nationalize the oil refinery in america. those would be statements written, stated by maxine waters of california and maurice hinchey of new york, respe

democrats on the other side of the aisle that believe the president of the united states, the cabbnet and the pelosi congress and the harry reid senate should be the ones to make these economic decisions to manage the nationalized economy. are we the kind of people that should be nationalizing more of our economy?? i have gone through this list and i can recite it in my sleep. this federal government rkts albeit started under president bush with the support of barack obbma all the way through and most of it picked up by him has nationalized -- and when i say nationalized, owned, managed or controlled of the sectors of the economy, three large investment banks, the three that have been ttken over by the federal government, a.i.g. nationalized by the federal government, freddie mac and fannie mae, the entities that the chairman barney frank saad he would neve+ support a federal bailout, only supported the federal take over of freddie mac and faverple. we have watched chrisler be taken over and a bankruptcy proposal pitched by the administration to the chapter 11 bankruptcy court that dictated the terms of bank

. >> do you right now see any fiscal exit strategy out of the united states congress? >> we have this deficit commission that mr. ry is on, but and i hope they will come up with some good recommendations but right now, there is not anything on the table at this point. >> i have been frustrated at this point there've been a number of free trade agreements languishing in congress. do you believe that where the congress to pass free trade or expansion of free-trade it would wod help the economy? >> yes, i d. i think we need to be part of the globalized economy. i think trade is an important source of demand for our goods and also a source of materials as well, so i think generally speaking we have got to push forward on the doha round in the free trade agreements we are looking at. >> finally dr. bernanke, the last set of questions. you testified the federal budget appears to be on an unsustainable path. how will we know when it is on a sustainable path? what triggers what earmarks, benchmarks would you guide the congress on to know that we are on a sustainable path? is t

the congress of the united states did its job and initiated an investigation the president of the campaigns watergate committee, congress then went on to have a house impeachment committee which continued to investigate and the committee voted articles of impeachment against the president. the supreme court of the u.s., led by the chief justice appointed by the president of the united states, decided the president was not above the law and had to turn over his tapes to a special prosecutor and the president of the united states resigned with bipartisan impetus and desire for that to happen. that, i think, is a significant difference in terms of what we have today. i think our political system is not functioning -- >> what i am saying is i think that the idea that you could get a supreme court decision is questionable. the tapes. i do not know. the notion that you would have impeachment proceedings and an investigation during the bush years, it seems to me, i am not suggesting that he should or should not have been impeached, but certainly there was cause for congressional oversight and inv

stanger. >> article i section viii of the united states congress allows issuance of letters of mark. none have been issued to date. so congress has implicitly endorsed our curre policy but has not done so. >> i'm delighted you mentioned letters of mark. last time i checked they got a piece othe action. walter dra francis drake, walter raleigh. they don't go and capture something and take part of the gold. i think that's a highly inflammable statement, ma'am. i think that kind of hyperbole doesn't help us at off. there were a couple of statements, one was the reason we have contractors is so we can fight two wars simultaaeously. i've been in the analysis business a couple of years myself, but i'll ask dr. nagl, if we didn't have the contractor policy we had, could we no longer fight two wars simultaneously? >> sir, as you know, the foresizing con instructed the department of defense used to size itself is based on very different kinds of wars. >> that's right. >> so we could in fact fight the kind of wars we prepad to fight, small high intensity nventional combat against a conventiona

the congress of the united states did its job, and initialated -- initiated an investigation of the campaign activities, including the president's, watergate committee. the congress then went on to have a house impeachment committee which continued to investigate and then the committee voted articles of impeachment against the president. the supreme court of the united states led by chief justice appointed by the president of the united states decided that the president was not above the law and had to turn over his tapes through a special prosecutor, and the president of the united states resigned with bipartisan impetus and desire for that to happen. that, i think, is a significant difference in terms of what we have today, because i think our political system is not functioning -- >> as it was designed. >> what i'm saying is that i think, one, that the idea that you could get a supreme court decision is questionable. the same decision, i'm not sure. the tapes. don't know. but the notion that you would have an impeachment proceeding and an investigation during the bush years it seems to me

united states. it is amazing to me. on his deathbed, the congress of the united states votes to refund the $1,000 to anjou jackson. habeus corpus has been a significant part of adjudicating the right principle, the limits on what can be done to defend the constitution and to defend freedom in america. the executive branch operates within limits and the legislative branch operates within limits. at times, the judicial branch has operated within limits, although i think they define their own limits. they evolves when they want to make it sound greenest, they say they have an organic constitution. what do they call it when the japanese shape -- they banzai the constitution. never mind. i would like to run through -- as we get towards events that are so current, i would like to run through a series of cases of habeus corpus that i think will help put in a frame of reference when this happened over the last century. we will jump from bench to jackson to get up and to the ii area.ii war one case was part of history that somehow escapes my junior year in h

congress on fact-finding. isn't that really what justice stevens calls it, disrespect? >> well, senator specter, as you know, i argued that case. as you know, i filed briefs on behalf of the united states in that case, and in those briefs the government made a similar kind of argument, that great deference was due to congress in the creation of a quite voluminous -- >> i know what you've said. you've talked about that a great deal. my question i very pointed. wasn't that disrespect fful? >> senator specter, as i suggested before, en i walked up to that podium as citizens united, i thought we had extremely strong arguments. i was acting as an advocate, of course, but i -- i thought we had very strong arguments. >> i'm going to move on. i know all of that. the point that i am trying to find out from you is what deference you would show to congressional fact-finding. >> well, may i -- may i try again because i think that the answer to that is great deference to congressional fact-finding. >> well, was it disrespectful or not? >> well, again, i don't want to characterize what the supreme court did. >> i want to move on. if you don't want to characterize, i want to ask my next question. in

thing we know is that, at the second framing, in the reconstruction era, when congress fundamentally remade the united states -- before the civil war, if you read supreme court decisions that talked about united states, they used the plural. the united states are at war with britain in the war of 1812. after the civil war, that is where you get it being used as a single phrase. the united states is at war. when the reconstruction and amendments were enacted, what they said was -- they gave congress special power to enforce, by appropriate a decision, the guarantees that go into the rights of citizenship, the guarantees of the privileges and immunities clause, the " protection clause, -- the equal protection clause. they distrusted the supreme court. the supreme court is living off of the fumes of brown against board of education. that is why they have such power in our country. at the middle of the reconstruction, they were living off of the fumes of dread scott -- dred scott. you went to the legislature to get equality, not the supreme court. they are given a real-life meaning by congress. if you ask where

the congress of the united states did its job and initiated an investigation the psident of t campaignities, including the president's watergate committee, congress then went on to have a house impeachment committee which continued to investigate and the committee voted articles of impeachment against the president. the supreme court of the u.s., led by the chief justice appointed by the president of the united states, decided the president was not above the law and had to turn over his tapes to a special prosecutor and the president of the united states resigned with bipartisan impetus and desire for that to happen. that, i think, is a significant difference in terms of what we have today. i think our political system is not functioning -- >> what i am saying is i think that the idea that you could get a supreme court decision is questionable. the tapes. i do not know. the notion that you would have impeachment proceedings and an investigation during the bush years, it seems toe, i am not suggesting that he should or should not have been impeached, but certainly there was cause for co

advice that we got, not only as the house of representatives but the united states senate and the white house, with president obama and congress being advised by a team of economists that ranged over the broad spectrum of philosophy in the world of economics, and from the far right thinking to the if a far left thinking, from more conservative view points to the more liberal view points, there were recommendations made by this panel of economists who spoke to the priorities that needed to be embrace -- embraced by this nation and the time had more than passed in the recovery for america. and the results are astounding. when we look at the recovery act we can witness that the bleeding has stopped, the tell tale indicators suggest in many cases that there is slow and steady progress, that the bleeding has stopped and the recovery act can be credited for that. and the investments that were made were in three categories. tax cuts, as the representative, the gentlewoman from florida, indicated, and historically large impact, an historical large middle income tax cut for this nation. that was shared with the middle income community.

people's congress -- there may be a higher percentage of women's represented and in the congress of the united states. -- higher percentage of women represented than in the congress of the united states. i think it is a change for the better. >> do you have any other questions or comments before i turn it over to the ambassador? >> yes prepared -- yes. [inaudible] i do agree with the ambassador. i say that because i know that his job and his mission -- because i know his job and his mission. i would like to emphasize what he referred to and mentioned as a real engagement -- as re- engagement. he mentioned judges and other programs. i believe that is what is going to bring -- i hope that there will be more programs on other levels and other fields with a little bit of a push. i hope that you will succeed. >> thank you. >> ok. >> thank you for all of your questions. i really -- i have a lot of homework to do, to go back and better answer the questions on the reforms, certainly. we have a lot of work to do in this relationship. the only thing i can say is that, 30 years of estrangement is a long, long t

united states. this is the strongest iran sanctions legislation ever passed by the congress. my colleagues, no discussion of iran at this time is possible without condemning the actions of the iran ran regime when they responded to public protests with deadly force. the american people stand for peace and security for the people of iran. we look forward to a lip with them. we look forward to a day when iran is a productive partner for us, its neighbors and the world. until that day, we must ensure that iran is prevented from obtaining the nuclear weapons that would threaten global and regional security. again, i thank our distinguished chairman, mr. berman, ranking member, ms. ros-lehtinen, mr. hoyer and mr. cantor for giving us this opportunity in a strong bipartisan way to support the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability and divestment act and hope we can have a unanimous vote today. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i yield one minute to the the gentleman from arizona, mr. franks, the chairman of the nat

investing in irng's energy sector -- in iran's energy sec term of the act explicitly states the sense of congress that the united states should support the decisions of state and local governments to divest from these firms and clearly authorizes divestment decisions made consistent with the standards of the act. elsewhere, madam president, in the act and the conference report, the legislation, is a provision cracking down on the international black market weapons trade which rogue countries such as north korea and iran have long exploited. under this act, the united states will identify countries that are allowing sensitive u.s. technology that can be used for weapons of mass destruction or terrorism to be transshipped into iran, and it will force these countries to cooperate in establishing appropriate customs, intelligence gathering, and trade restrictions. if they refuse to cooperate with the united states, the act requires the imposition of very severe export restrictions on those countries. the act establishes a very strong, new banking section to be undertaken by the under secretary of the treasury for te

come to the table having acted to fix the things we got wrong in the united states, and we are, i believe that the reforms congress will enact will be a good model for the world and will give us enormous credibility in trying to pull the world to those higher standards. >> are there other examples like capital where thh u.s. has to act to be a first mover if there's not a global concert on that particular area? >> again, we are going to try to make sure we're moving in pair less. derivatives is anothee example. anything where they can move quickly to evade the weakest pegulation. derivatives is a great compamplet again, we want to make sure that all these firms and all these markets are operating under much more rigorous standards for disclosure anddtranspareecy. otherwise, again, the risk will move to the dark and will leave us more risk in the future. we will try to make sure that, you know, we are going to dramatically strengthen the competitiveness of the u.s. financial system. as we have done well in the past, make sure we put in high standards for protection for investors nd in the u.s. %%rketplace and we ar

united states. this is the strongest iran sanctions legislation ever passed by the congress. my colleagues, no discussion of iran at this time is possible without condemning the actions of the iran ran regime when they responded to public protests with deadly force. the american people stand for peace and security for the people of iran. we look forward to a lip with them. we look forward to a day when iran is a productive partner for us, its neighbors and the world. until that day, we must ensure that iran is prevented from obtaining the nuclear weapons that would threaten global and regional security. again, i thank our distinguished chairman, mr. berman, ranking member, ms. ros-lehtinen, mr. hoyer and mr. cantor for giving us this opportunity in a strong bipartisan way to support the comprehensive iran sanctions accountability and divestment act and hope we can have a unanimous vote today. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i yield one minute to the the gentleman from arizona, mr. franks, the chairman of the nat

of congress have tried to make it clear to the white house that the united states should stand with our allies, israel and make it clear to israel, to america and the rest of the world that israel has the absolute right to defend itself in this situation and support the blockade and support their actions of the flo tilla. this should be clear to all concerned throughout the world, especially hamas and hezbollah, and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: are there any members seeking one-minute speeches? for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. lungren: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lungren: there is discussion about whether we're going to bring up the disclose act in the rules committee or on the floor this week. and the reason is the special exemption has been to just a select number of groups. starting with the national rifle association. but also not including the gun owners of america including the humane society but not including other agricultural groups in america. in other words, we're sayi

congress and the president do work together. >> when the two are together, the courts find more power, not less, right? >> that is correct. >> now you're still solicitor general of the united states. from that point of view, would you urge this congress to work with the executive branch to create statutes to help the courts better answer these questions? >> well, senator graham, i think i don't want to talk as solicitor general as to legal policy re. >> okay. >> but i will say -- >> go ahead. >> -- as to the legal matter, that it makes a difference whether the congress and the president work together, that courts should take note of that, that courts should -- when that occurs, the action is -- ought to be given the most deference and that there's a reason for that. >> right. >> it because the urts are basically saying congress and the president have come together. congress and the president have agreed upon a policy jointly and there should be deference in those circumstances. >> are you familiar with judge lamberth and judge hogan? >> i don't know either of them. i know who they are. >> fair enough. >> they are d.c. judges, federal district court judges who are hearing habeas a

. >> reporter: by contrast, the united states pavilion had little support from washington. that's because congress restrekt public funding of weird fairs. as of last spring, the money to build the paveilion hadn't been raised and its future was in doubt. >> it is my great pleasure to welcome you on behalf of the american people to the u.s.a. pavilion at expo 2010. >> reporter: secretary of state hillary clinton, who made a visit to the expo last week, it credited from pulling the project from the brink by cajoling major corporations to chip in and putting on top -notch fund raisers at the helm. he put word out that the u.s. could simply not be absent and at the 11th hour found that funds were raised. >> over the curious of the 180 days that this will run, this pavilion will see more chinese visitors than the entire u.s. mission in china will see over 20 years. and they will do it in the context of not-- you know, of just sort of ordinary, fun kind of activities so it's an unbelievable opportunity. >> reporter: the $60 million u.s. pavilion afrz 4-d movie that tells the story of american opportunit

. >> the distinguished former member of the congress of the united states.a good friend of mine from wisconsin. so this question may not be particularly subjective. >> i will try as hard as i can to be neutral. it is so right what you said about arms alone cannot win wars. i think it may be time to reconsider our drug policy in that area of the world. we are alienating a lot of people. it is -- we need to reconsider our drone policy. we have this other " bad guy" we want to kill. we hit a house and killed 12 other people. we can measure what we kill. we do not measure the increasing circle of and around the nation as a result of that.3 wars and along our borders, they were sending planes over the border to hit some people they want to hit. we will not tolerate it. i think it is really hurting our standing in this country, and i hope we will have a chance to review that over time. thank you. >> thank you. i think that, clearly, the complexity of wars today, clearly in every war there have been collateral damage, and that is to be lamented. and there are trage