do you think it would be appropriate for her to respond about whether row v wade was correctly decided? >> you actually asked several questions. one, how i feel about her writing. i thought she was right. she probably may have second thoughts about that now being a nominee. i told hers that one of the areas she is going to be asked, the question about how forts coming. it's been my experience that nominees to the supreme court shouldn't be less than less forth coming. i think she will be asked a number of questions. on row versus wade, if asked that question, i suspect an answer is this is settled law and we should rely on settled law. but as we have seen in some recent hearings, say as as a justice, i'm like an umpire, i call the bals and strikes. and settled law. so one i think she is right in saying that we should get more information. but secondly, i would suspect that it will be difficult to get really specific information. >> so if you could answer the second part. then what's if point aff owl all of this? >> i think you try to get as much information as you can. and there have b

we talked about the tangle of bureaucratic red tapehey waded thrghn der to g pproved for the dollars they were approved fothe fema money, but they hen't reived a penec of the when i asked marie t rell what they had ge thugh ck in june of 2008, not surpringly, the she welled up with tears. mr. speakerour hearts go ou the victims of rent floo an natural dis. yet i fear we suff fromhat oladage, outf sit, outf mind. once the cameras a pked awaynd theews crews leave for thnext breaking stories, what happens to the victs and survivors of these naral disasters? will the families in tennessee orrkansas suff tame fate as wcosis and iowans and see their funding fema frozen,ven after 's been approved? oneou hope the stem of gencyespoe would keep pgging away and assting thfamilies in ne as this country. but we see --e have seenat system completeroken down and this is unacceptable. o yea after their hos were devastatedmy neighbors are still living in temporary housing and enduring financial chaos. one m is homele, another family is on the verge of bankruptcy use of a situation that fema has left

wade. i expect the answer will be something like well, this is settled law. as we have seen at recent hearings, i am like an umpire, i call the balls and strikes. . . there have been times when the hearing has been decisive or even the fact of the hearing is coming up and people start asking questions. when president reagan wanted his name before the year even began, president george w. bush did also. are there dramatic changes? yes. are we going back to the old days? no. she is replacing john paul stevens. i was in the senate when john paul stevens was nominated, nominated by a conservative republican president. it was overwhelmingly democratic senate, and he was confirmed in two and a half weeks. he made courtesy calls to a number of senators. that is not going to be the same for his successor. she has made courtesy calls. i think she has talked to practically every senator, but the questions will be significant. i am concerned with the trend becoming active in this court. we have seen a lot of long standing laws being overturned. you have basically saying

the idea that congress should then weighed in and fix that was what some of the commentators -- wade in and fix that was what some of the commentators said. it causes it to sound like fantasyland. no disrespect to congressman nadler, but i do not think there is a chance that congress could take any action on the voting rights act or any other major piece of civil rights legislation in today's poisoned atmosphere. that is just not a possibility. to the extent that they thought that was a possibility, no one really credibly things that. we do not really know where that goes. i want to make one more point about the title vii cases. last year, we had a case -- the firefighters' case -- this was a disparate impact cases. the short version is that, if you have an employment practice that has a disparate impact on african americans, that is not job-related, then title vii says that is a violation of title vii. in this case, they used an employment practice -- a test -- that look like it had a clear disparate impact, whether it was -- a disparate impact. whether it was job-related was never

reporter: feinstein also raised the issue of abortion rights under the landmark decision roe versus wade and subsequent rulings. >> here's the question. do you believe the constitution requires that the health of the mother be protected in any statute restricting access to abortion ? >> senator feinstein, i do think that the continuing holding of roe and doe versus bolton is that women's life and women's health have to be protected in abortion regulations. >> reporter: herb kohl offered up the names of two current justices and tried to get kagan to say which came closer to her views. >> justice scalia considers himself to be an originalist who interprets the constitution by looking solely at the text. he rejects the notion of a living constitution and only gives the text of the constitution, quote, the meaning that it bore when it was adopted by the people in 1787. in contrast justice souter has criticized this purely textual approach as having, quote, only a tenuous connection to reality. he believes that the plain text of the constitution as written in 1787 does not resolve the conflic

where even these highly contentious decisions, like "brown versus board of education" and "roe versus wade" are driven either by unanimous or massive majorities of the court rather than the slenderest possible majority and to try to reach across the partisan divide on the court so it's not just republican appointees acting together. >> senator whitehouse, it's a hard question you pose, because on the... on the one hand, every judge, every justice has to do what he or she thinks is right on the law. you wouldn't want the judicial process to become in any way a bargaining process or a logrolling process. >> but by definition, if the court were to reach beyond the group of five that has driven so many of these recent decisions, they would be less able to move the law as dramatically as they have. that's just obvious, is it not? >> senator, what has... i want to make it clear that i'm not agreeing to your characterizations of the current court. i think that that would be inappropriate for me to do, and... >> i understand that. >> and i'm sure that everybody up there is acting in good faith. >>

wade in 1973 which is a serious development. + touching on what they said about the tea party and glennbeckk 62% of republicans believe president obama is a socialist. 60% believe he was to take away our rights to own guns. 67% believe he is a muslim. 30% of republicans believe president obama is doing many of the things adolph hitler did. glenn beck and the tea party movements are one of the key sources of that. next speaker is the president of the national housing institute which publishes "shelter force." his fantastic book is called "seeds of change, the seeds of acorn." as we know, a corn became a lightning rod in this past cycle and is no longer with us, sadly. can you briefly explain what acorn is and what happened to them? >> i did write a book about acorn. the best way i can answer that is this way -- i am here to warn you about the most dangerous organization in this country. it's an organization that has been accused of stealing a presidential lection, has been crisis, it has been accused of embezzling millions of dollars, is using federal funds, of having relations with a pr

wade boggs 3,000 base hit. among many accomplishments of an outstanding broaddasting career, duane's tats has been honored as baseball's all-time top 101 broaddasters by arthur kirk smith. aside from calling rays games, duane and his wife karla are pillars of the tampa bay community, supporting the veterans and quantum leap farms, a therapeutic recreation alpha silt for our wounded warriors and disabled adults. again, i congratulate duane on the occasion of his 5,000th major league baseball broadcast. many more rays' wwns. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: mr. defazio of oregon.%% mr. grayson of florida. mr. gohmert of texas. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter, is ecognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. carter: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate being recognnzed this hour. i'm pleased to be joinee by several of my colleagues. and i want to raise an issue that is of real concern to the people of the state of texas, sta

. >> you asked about abortion in row versus wade and he said he suspects that she will say it's settled law. do you think that's the big issue that will be controversial in these hearings? >> i don't know if it's the big issue, it's always a big issue or has been in recentyears. i think along with other issues that could come up that are hot buttons such as affirm tiff action, we heard the chairman talk about campaign finance and free speech, the place of religion and separation of church and state. those are all issues. but as you heard him say that he thought she would say that it's settled law. that's sort of code speak for the supreme court decided on that and i'm not going to go any further. and she has written in the past and i think a lot of members of the committee feel and have said thatst not enough. you don't learn much from that answer. so it will be interesting to see if they can break any new ground that hasn't been broken in recent years in these hearings. >> you're the legal affairs reporter for congressional quarterly. how have her sitdowns with senators going? >> the s

the idea that congress should then weighed in and fix that was what some of the commentators -- wade in and fix that was what some of the commentators said. it causes it to sound like fantasyland. no disrespect to congressman nadler, but i do not think there is a chance that congress could take any action on the voting rights act or any other major piece of civil rights legislation in today's poisoned atmosphere. that is just not a possibility. to the extent that they thought that was a possibility, no one really credibly things that. we do not really know where that goes. i want to make one more point about the title vii cases. last year, we had a case -- the firefighters' case -- this was a disparate impact cases. the short version is that, if you have an employment practice that has a disparate impact on african americans, that is not job-related, then title vii says that is a violation of title vii. in this case, they used an employment practice -- a test -- that look like it had a clear disparate impact, whether it was -- a disparate impact. whether it was job-related was never

wade was decided on the privacy of every american, a right to privacy with their health care professionals, there pharmacists, against the government. i live in texas, i grew up in dallas county where the original lawsuit, the family and the doctor, took place. i was adopted at birth. i will not give my date of birth, but i was born in 1972. i can't say i'm a perot or anti- abortion -- pro or anti- abortion, but it is out of control. host: next is a telephone call from philadelphia, democrats line. caller: good morning. my problem is about jobs. it seems like the media doesn't seem to really dig into the problem. the problem is, if you go into any department store -- walmart, to buy a tv -- nothing is made in america anymore. they outsource all the jobs overseas. people don't have jobs that make a good salary, like they used to. if this was during the second world war, we would lose the war. we won the war because we had our own steel companies, we could make everything, everything we would need. but today, everything is outsourced. you go into any store and you have nothing made in americ

wade and she is pro-choice and she is anti-gun. she is very hostile toward the end are a permit -- toward thenra. she wanted to enforce some of the gun controls in order to get points against the nra. host: is your group in favor of having a liberal on the courts? guest: it doesn't matter. we want someone who will faithfully applied the constitution and laws of the united states. if someone goes out by law from a neutral perspective, it should matter what their political views are. host: there is a concern in your view that she was a critic of the nra? guest: this is troubling only because she does not have a judicial history. she has been a politician and effectively for so long that one has to think how she can suddenly switch her entire perspective and have a neutral approach to the law. host: the judicial crisis network used to be called the judicial constitution network. how long have you been around? guest: we have expanded our mission somewhat. we don't look just at confirmations but also at state races. it is a broader view

last time she visited in 1937, she presented virginia wade with the ladies' singles championship. britain has won a singles title -- britain has not won a singles title since. although in decades past the tennis club maintained a tradition of the a bao or curtsey to royal attendees, that practice was dropped in 2003. andy murray says he still might make the bowsprit those are some of the latest headlines on c- span radio. >> this weekend on "book t.d.," alex heard becomes the 1945 death penalty trial of willie mcgee and the beginnings of the civil-rights movement. jere van dyke and his guide spend 45 days in captivity. veteran wall street journal reporter sarah alice and within sight account of report marc klaas purchase of the "wall street journal." more than 30,000 viewers have already joined us. >> starting monday, watch the confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee elena kagan, live on c-span networks and c-span.org. see replay's every night on c- span to. -- on c-span2. providing unique insight about the court. available in hardcover and as an ebook. c-span is now avail

the supreme court was on the side of the american people when it ruled in roe v wade that the constitutional right to pray vassey exists. the court was not taking sides in debate on abortion, it was stating that there were certain matters wit government should not interfere in the privacy of families. these landmark decisions and others continued a forward progression of protections for the american people against the abuse of power, particularly by an overreaching government. such was the case went supreme court ruled in gideon v wayne wright that the constitutional right to counsel in a criminal proceeding was guaranteed, egardless of the wealth of the defendant. the supreme court gave the words "equal justice under law" real meaning. perhaps this decision was to be expected, sincehe oath of office declared by every federal judge makes it clear that he or she will administer justice without respect to person or -- and due equal right to the poor and to the rich. i believe that our next associate justice in the whole supreme court should be guided by legal precedent and the best traditions

wade was correctly decided, and if not, what is the point of these proceedings?u asked several questions. ith

wade decision. there is no indication that she disagreed with this conclusion. the point is that ms. kagan urged that purely political position on abortion that was at odds with what the clinton administration then believed the constitution required. once again it looks like politics trumped the law. another controversy involved the military's ability to recruit at harvard law school during ms. kagan's tenure as a dean. ms. kagan made her personal views and values as plain as anyone can make them, saying repeatedly that she had abhorred the military's policy with regard to homosexuals and calling it a profound wrong and a -- quote -- "moral injustice of the first order." unquote. federal law denies funds to schools with policies or practices that have the effect of preventing military recruiters the same access to campus or to students that other employers have. a group called the forum for academician and institutional rights, or "fair" challenged the law in court. ms. kagan first joined a legal brief found in support of "fair"'s challenge with the u.s. court o