bill: tell us what waxman marquis. waxman liberal guy from california. what would that do? what would that bill do, very quickly. >> waxman markey is the cap and trade bill it would put a price on carbon dioxide emissions between the years 2012 and 2050 com would make energy costs $9 trillion more. these cost also be paid my american taxpayers. bill: if you are a polluter and go over your allotted emissions that the government gives you, you have to pay a tax to the government or you can buy some dispen stationizations from other companies that rund. we got that and g.e. is making technology to monitor the emissions, to do all kinds of other things. also in the trading of the emissions deal in chicago. all right. so, when i say to people because i have done -- you know, this i have done this from the beginning that nbc news is coordinating its pro-obama coverage with the blessing of its parent company g.e., jeffrey immelt, the ceo. that is all a coordinated effort. people say to me you are a paranoid crazy guys, o'reilly. what do you say? >> you are exactly right. i don't c

here is hen i waxman, you know, from the waxman markly energy bill. he said this -- >> the cost of the bill that mr. markey and i in this analysis says the bill will cost the average family less than 40 cents per day. >> you know, i'm not very good with numbers but i think $1,761 is more than 40 cents. i'm not a congressman. if you look at the treasury estimates, waxman is only underestimating the cost by 1200%. now, let's fast forward a little further. listen to president obama. remember, march 9, 2009, department of the treasury. here is their confidential analysis. "dear, mr. president, it's going to cost a lot of money." let's listen to what president owe obama estimated on june 25. >> in a decade, the price to the average american will be about the same as a postage stamp per day. >> wow. i think he just did it, too, 1200%, but he was a little more careful. he did actually say in a decade from now. he didn't mention that today that stamp would cost $1,6761! i'm just saying. he's very accurate, because that's the new stamp. i have a question. did

nevertheless, waxman-markey will now force t.v.a.and every other utility in the country to get at least 12% of its electricity from a narrowly defined group of renewable sources. hydroelectric dams, for example, probably the best source of renewable energy, don't count because well i'm not sure exactly why, but environmental groups have been imposing them since the 1950's. nuclear doesn't count as renewable either, even thoh we've got plenty of uranium and reprocessing the fuel that could stretch it out for hundreds and hundreds of years. instead the t.a. is now requesting bids for 1,250 megawatts of renewable power that it doesn't really need and may not be able to use. wind now produces 1.3% of america's total electricity a 4.5% of our carbon-free clean electricity. yet, according to the energy information administration, wind turbines are being subsidized at three times the rate of all other renewables and 19 times the rate of nuclear power kh-rbgs, by the way, prodes 70% of our carbon-free clean electricity. so instead of a clean

>> you may want to ask chairman waxman why he doesn't want to hold hearings. i think part of it is the psychological of liberals who love big golf. and don't want to think badly of big government. we think between $70 and $120 billion a year is stolen from the tax peayer in medicare and medicaid. greta: i disagree with you. i there are a lot of democrats who would love to be the hero and ride in on the big horse. i think it's about being laysy. >> we'll do most of the work for them if they'll hold the hearings. so far at least chairman waxman has refused to hold 9 hearings. greta: what does he say? >> he's not interestedm greta: how can he not be interested? >> well, invite him on the show and ask him. greta: i'll ask him. he probably wouldn't come on the show but i'd like to know. there's got to be some way, the american people have to have some confidence that the money is really arriving alt its destination and when you read about the fraud it's terribly distressing. >> remember, this is a congress which passed the stimulus bill without even reading it. gre

chairman waxman, ranking member barton, dingle, mr. stupak, mr. walden, members of the committee. it's good to be back before the energy and commerce committee, and i appreciate the opportunity to give you an update on

waxman? are a strong critic f the insurance industry, and you speak with some credibility. çwe haveç outlined a number of things that the insurance companies have done that we should not allow, but our legislation changes so much of whatç theç insurance companies have done in the past. we have a comprehensive package. ççwe regulate the way that thy operate, something akin to a begulated utility. çthey cannot have limited ratig variations. they have to go some exchange. ççand if they do not meet ther roles, çç so i think a lot of your criticisms will not be applicable, whether we have a public option or not. what we need, however, is competition. >> i agree with you. i think the house bill will go a long way towards that. other proposals i have seen would not. >> thank you. >> thank you. i just want to remind again my colleagues and the panel that we have to conclude the meeting by noon, and i want to make sure that we accommodate everyone's questions. >> thank you very much for you

let's go to congressman henry waxman, a member of the progressive caucus.ou tell us what was in this letter, what do you want to meet about? >> i don't know anything about it. i'm a member of the progressive caucus. if they want to meet with the president, maybe i'll get invited. i'm working on the bill as chairman of the energy and commerce committee. it's a good bill, we have to get it passed. i support the public plan, it's in our bill. it's going to make the whole system honest and keep the private insurance companies with competition and make them live up to their promises. >> senator, this is going to be a mandate on private business in this country. the president said last night, you can't drop anybody once you've got them as a client, and by the way, preexisting conditions are gone. is this going to pass in the house? are the blue dogs going to go along with this? >> i think we'll pass the bill in the house. we're going to bring all the democrats together. that means we have to compromise and look for what will bring us together. we can't draw lines

administration, her job is to defend the law and also the reason why congress passed the law and since waxman was representing mccain and feingold both of them made the same point that go back 100 years. it's one of the consistent themes in american hisry. not everybody agrees but the corporations have the enormous power because of their money and wealth. they have some role and influence on politics. we don't want them to have too much role. if you allow corporations to be funding candidates directly through campaign ads and what not, the danger is you get lawmakers w basically right all of the laws to protect corporations and insance compans d make the problem worse rather than better. >> host: we have a clip of elena kagen. let's listen to that and then i would like to talk about her debut yesterday. >> we are suspicious of congressional action in the first amendment area precisely because, at least i am, i doubt that one can expect a body of incumbents to draw elecon restriions dead to do not favor incumbents. is that cynical of me? i don't think so. [laughter] >> i think justice scalia i

the best news about the energy bill is that it is shepherded through congress by henry waxman, possiblyst desperate congressman there. this thing has a lot of problems with it. i think healthcare is a bigger thet. >> jack's numbers are great but i believe president obama. all this tremendous spending isn't going to cost us anything! >> tea partiers prohe testing wasteful spending in d.c. the money making stock to buy, next. welcome to the now network. right now five coworkers are working from the road using a mifi-- a mobile hotspot that provides up to five shared wi-fi connections. two are downloading the final final revised final presentation. - one just got an email. - woman: what?! hmph. it's being revised again. the copilot is on mapquest. and tom is streaming meeting psych-up music - from meltedmetal.com. - ( heavy metal music playing ) that's happening now with the new mifi from sprint-- the mobile hotspot that fits in your pocket. sprint. the now network. deaf, hard-of-hearing, and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com. >> well, those tea partiers marching i

privacy groups have just called on congress this week actually, some of the key players in the house, waxman and barton and boucher, to take a hard look at how internet companies like google and yahoo! and facebook do collect your data or information about you as you're surfing the web and how that information is then used to serve ads that you presumably are interested in. and i think that's going to b an interesting discussion going forward as the internet companies bring out their heavy weights to prove that, no, we're doing everything right to preserve privacynd what congress does on that front. >> host: kim hart is with the hill, andrew noyes is with congressdaily, and fawn johnson is with dow jones. thank you all for being on "the communicators." >> guest: thanks. >> now c-span2 rejoins booktv with bonus holiday programming. >> in her book, culture of corruption: obama and his team of tax cheats, crooks and cronies, michelle mkin asserts that the era of hope and change died within six months of obama taking office because the people behind it are corrupt. she calls the first lady and v

waxman? >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court, the requirement that corporations fund electoral add okay si, the same way individuals do, that is with money voluntarily committed by people associated with the corporation is grounded in interests that are so compelling that 52 years ago, before buckley was decided. before feca was enacted. before buckley-style quid pro quo corruption was ever addressed this court explained that, quote, what is involved here is the integrity of our electoral process and not less, the responsibility of the individual citizen for the successful functioning of that process. if the court now wishes to reconsider the existence and extent of the interests that underlie that sentiment, expressed for the court by justice frank forter, supporting political candidates, it should do so in a case in which those interests are forthrightly challenged with a proper and full record below. . >> one of the amicus briefs, maybe professor hayward, suggested that the history of

waxman? >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court, the requirement that corporations fund electoral add okay si, the same way individuals do, that is with money voluntarily committed by people associated with the corporation is grounded in interests that are so compelling that 52 years ago, before buckley was decided. before feca was enacted. before buckley-style quid pro quo corruption was ever addressed this court explained that, quote, what is involved here is the integrity of our electoral process and not less, the responsibility of the individual citizen for the successful functioning of that process. if the court now wishes to reconsider the existence and extent of the interests that underlie that sentiment, expressed for the court by justice frank forter, supporting political candidates, it should do so in a case in which those interests are forthrightly challenged with a proper and full record below. . >> one of the amicus briefs, maybe professor hayward, suggested that the history of

in the house, with the excepon of henry waxman, i'm noture they havthe skillful legislors and with ted kennedy gone i don't know who u have in t senate to shepherd this through. i think that's a real problem. >> i d agree wi that. the numberf people whoave experiend putting together complicated pieces of legislation just isn't tre the way there was the 1s. then you havto issue, which rich elud to. part... why isthe bl popular now? i thk one, people have had loofgovernment sved down their throats for od reasons and baover the last couple months, they're a little nervous. it's not a country that's attuned to have having big government. >> rose: are they worried aut vernment or the defit and the cost? >> many my view... and ithink that's why t president understands that, that's whyis rhetoric about themerican characteis so central. america has a tradition. the traditi is lited gornment. and ontop of that you have defici. you have what' going to b.. i don't kn, our public debt to g.d.p. wille 83% by 2019. soou have a great deal of anxiety. then the thi thing is it's almost impossible, it's

i think henry waxman has been there 37 years. finally, he has a good majority, a democratic president, a big economic crisis, and he thinks that the time for socialism has finally arrived. let's get a big government health program. there was a story in a newspaper today that said that socialism is in defeat in europe, and the german socialist party just had its worst results since the 1950's on sunday, and maybe there is a message here for the democratic party. greta: there may be a message, but speaker pelosi, she has people who will not vote for it without the public option, and she has some who are moderate or conservative, and she still has to get it to pass. >> here is what could happen in the future if this continues. they have a slight number of people in in the minority in the house to are on the left, -- people in the minority in the house who are on the left. if he cannot get the left wing of the party because he cannot get a government program, is he willing to reach out to republicans to try to get republicans and mod

waxman, congressman waxman on c-span back about two months ago, i guess it was, maybe a month and a half ago. he sat there and was laughing about a condition that he did not even think existed called restless leg syndrome. he was just laughing about it on your show, and that pretty much shows how out of touch with people who spent 30 years working on cement floors for this country, who do have problems with their legs and making a move all the time. host: on another topic, two very different headlines looking at the mortgage situation. "the baltimore sun," "federal mortgage relief plan growing. lenders really -- lenders increased rate of modification under pressure from lawmakers, treasury." and from "usa today," local modification of troubled mortgages on slow pace." "12% of our worst have begun trial modifications of the mortgages since the start of a $75 billion federal program to rework home loans into more affordable monthly payments. the treasury repair department -- the treasury department reported yesterday." next call. caller: if you would allow me, i would like to make three sh

the waxman bill exempts more small businesses from the employer-mandate requirement.t also has a bit of a different spin on the public option. it is based on doctors and hospitals being reimbursed on a negotiated rate that the secretary of health and negotiate. and the ways and means bill, for instance, it is pegged to medicare rates. the energy and commerce bill is a bit more favorable to the doctors and hospital providers. those are two examples of things that ought to be reconciled. >> we talked a bit about the surtax on high incomes. the energy and commerce had that debate earlier this summer. >> before i begin, let me recognize the distinguished chairman of the ways and means committee, mr. rangel, who is in the room, since this amendment relates -- relates to his committee. it is good that he would be in attendance when i discuss it. mr. chairman, under the pending bill, there is a tax on american citizens depending on their income status. if this bill goes into effect there would be an immediate tax -- surtax on incomes of citizens who made between $350,000 out

why did henry waxman have a revote?with her when she said that she was going to lose her wheelchair payments? sean: we should pay for health care for the world. this is about your view of the role of government. should government pay for people's health care? should everybody have health care from the government? >> yes. sean: should they have in? >> yes. sean: if you are a person and have children and want a job, after the government provide day care? >> yes. i want the government to provide civil rights. in my opinion, it is unfortunate that this has become such a debate between democrats and republicans. this is about basic civil rights. sean: your philosophy in life is to every american based on what their needs are and from every american based on their ability to contribute? >> in my opinion, i do not think that we should go overboard and indulge that theory. i think that we should give people basic human rights. we should take care of necessities. >> the insurance companies will not do it. one last thing for the

we had to have the waxman-markey bill or des moines iowa will be submerged in the gulf of mexico and bangor, maine will bust into flames and if we didn't get health reform passed by yesterday, billions would die and the few left alive would be bankrupt and homeless if they ever caught a cold. he has taken time to capitulate to russia on polish missile defense shields. we sold the polish people. they're not even taking hillary clinton's calls anymore. what should we get in return for that? ronald reagan won the cold war, in part, by not compromising the star wars defense initiative. i don't know if anybody knows this, but it didn't even exist. they were, like, mr. president, we don't even have that stuff. it would strain the soviet union to the point of collapse trying to keep up with us. that is what ronald reagan knew. it was a negotiating tactic. it was one of the biggest boldest bluffs of the last century, but president obama caves in, while he's holding all of the cards. why, why would we do that? oh, by the way in a totally unrelated story, several massive corporations, some of

henry waxman has been on the trail of major league baseball steroid problems.e's gone after roger clemens. really? no one seems interested are in a group that could receive $8.5 billion in stimulus money. the people that had a seat at the president's table when he set his agenda. he said it himself. is there something wrong with this picture, america? what is it i'm missing? please, please tell me. i think about this all the time. i wake up at 2:00 in the morning thinking what have i missed? isn't this just some type of insane corruption something on which we can all agree? let me bring the discussion full circle. again, this is not about acorn. just like van johns, john holdren, cass sunstein, mark lloyd, others. it is about the people surrounding the president of the united states. during the scandal involving lobbyist jack abrammoff, the president press did everything they could to tie abrammoff to president bush, knowing if they could put two and two together, it would taint the president enough to be the final straw and bring down his president dense sivme

why is not henry waxman having hearings on fraud, or any other democratic chairman?why are we waiting for thanksgiving? we will pay with this -- for this with fraud money? >> a great point, greta care. these cuts i have dealt with in great bcare in my book "catastrophe." a lot of this will be in the medicare advantage program, and one-third of the elderly voluntarily sign up for this because they like the idea of one agency who knows all about their health care to coordinate their treatment. the other part will be cutting reimbursement rates to doctors. now, those reimbursement rates are scheduled to be cut by 21% this year. this cut will be on top of that, so if you are now born to a doctor who is getting $65 for the office visit for an elderly person that they would get $35 and then maybe $30, how much time are they going to spend with patients? what kind of medical care is that going to be? and just for a rule of thumb, we have spent the amount they are going to cut over 10 years, and this whole year's spending was taken out. greta: i have got to go, and for all t

he then abdicated the responsibility of developing a plan to charles rangel, waxman and nancy pelosi, the rad cad fringe in the house and came up with various bills. most talk about hr-3200 which i couldcated they'd support benefits for illegal aliens, can which the president said was a lie, and then the president says it's not true. that's not what i'm saying tonight. not what he said that night but that's where the discussion has been all summer. the american people rejected it including moderate democrats. this is a civil war among democrats so that's why he's in minnesota and talking to the aioico and going to public university in washington. the president has work to do with his own party. >> jamie: let me let julian get in here. how on target is the wt his message as co his -- with his message as he congress returns from the time of the address to congress going forward and what do you think of the venues chosen? are they representative of how the american people feel? so many people happy with the healthcare they have. >> tony is reading talking points from august, rather than

. >> the houseman, authored by congressman edward markey and henry waxman and supported by mr. owe obama would reduce emissions to something called cap and trade, a cap on the amount of carbon emissions allowed each year, which would shrink by 2% each year, which means using less coal and turning to more expensive energy. there is controversy abroad as well, among the three big international blocs, the u.s., europeans an developing countries. >> and therefore, it's very difficult to come to any kind of deal, because each bloc wants to put the economic costs on the other guys, not on them. >> making it difficult to reach agreement. european commission president jose manuel baroso said today that climate talks are dangerously close to deadlock and the whole effort is at risk of an acrimonius collapse. some are clearly hoping president obama's speech can give the talks a little momentum. critics think the process is destined to collapse under its own weight. in washington, jim angle, fox news. bret: tomorrow as the president heads to the united nations general assembly, we will ha

when he began to look at the proposal brought by congressman waxman to the for the house, it would createn elaborate scheme in the federal government to try to control how much co2 is going into the air. that is carbon dioxide. it creates a big government bureaucracy, and taxes everything that uses energy. the president said that no one who made under $250,000 was going to pay a dime more in taxes. here is a proposal that will tax every american to drive -- every american who drives a car, who has a job that uses some energy, or anyone who has the audacity to turn on a light switch. this bill was 1200 pages, but that was not enough. at 3:09 a.m. the morning we were going to consider the bill, they filed a 316 page amendment that no one, obviously, had a chance to read. as the leader, i usually talk for three or four minutes and make my point and sit down. i decided i needed to know what was in this amendment, and i thought my colleagues need to know what was in it. so i took an hour on the floor of the house and walked through some of the provisions of this bill that would require every h

it's with the nancy pelosi, waxman, rangel rob which i think is plain anti-business and anti-you andg people who own stocks. they have another constituency. it's not the stockholder. they're very anti-shareholder. they're very anti-the prospects and profits of business. and i don't think they would even disagree with that, frankly. i think they would say, yeah. >> wear it with a badge of honor. >> i think jim would say that's right, jim got it. i don't feel that way about the executive branch or the treasury secretary. i think there's an antipathy towards business in congress that makes me feel like they don't -- they should all go sit and listen to mr. robertson for a half hour. just for a half hour. maybe they'd get it. >> if you are listening to what he's saying and you're on the other side in recalibrating or fully agree with him, you were saying what would you do right now? >> i'm calling for a correction on my show. i started that yesterday. i felt that i did not -- there was another guest of yours who said -- "fast money" guys, the ast the last half hour i thought was very sig

throughout all this, it is very clear that waxman's driving -- the congressman from california -- he's driving a lot of what's going on. he's always been in favor of biotech against the me-too fa pharmaceutica pharmaceuticals. we've not had an upward tug yet. they've been underperforming. spl j >> jim, what do you read into a market that was down more than 100 points, 130, 140, and now up? is that just a great sign? >> no. the mechanics in the business is requiring any fudge rehedge fun fighting for their lives right now using any weakness to show they weren't foolish enough to avoid the big nasdaq rally. i think we're seeing the mechanics of the money fund business working out, not the mechanics of the fundamentals working out. frankly i'm beginning to think september wasn't such a hot market for the economy. >> that will be interesting. we'll keep coming back to the consumer. jim tonight, 6:00 and 11:00 eastern. you'll see him again very soon. >>> while the market soared this quarter, you heard jim's concern about september. retail investors actually took $15 billion out of stock fun

the waxman bill.n the president was talking about, when you get to the end of the speech, this man is obviously not talking about the bill that we have before us in the house of representatives and only now do we generally know the president was speaking of what he hope to see come out of the senate very soon. >> you've been very vocal about this issue of coverage about illegal immigrants in the health care bill. it southbound like you're giving the president the benefit of the doubt. you're waiting to see it show up on the house floor. >> when i heard the president made that statement, i had the same mistake that joe did. only i didn't say anything. the fact is that anybody listening at that time would have that, wait a minute. the president is dead wrong. he hasn't look at the bill elf hasn't looked at the congressional research service that says that illegals will be able to participate in the house bill. unless you check, unless you do verification to make sure people aren't illegal, you know by h

he doesn't want this to be a pelosi bill or waxman bill. look, lauer, we have seen his face all summer. most polls think he is overexposed. he spoke to the ama, he did a white house press conference on this. he has got to come out and not only prove his points, he has to disprove all of the concerns and then promise the american people and answer that fundamental question, what's in it for me? and he still hasn't done that and i doubt he is going to be able to do it in this speech. >> i actually think there is two things going on here. number one, he did his job in august when there was a lot of misinformation out there. he stepped up to the plate. laura: polls have gone down. how can you say did he his job in it was a disaster. >> he did his job. laura: polls aren't showing results. >> you live by polls. i live by results. laura: i live by what the people are saying. >> what i'm trying to tell you now when we are 80% of the way there people at the table who have never come to the payable before. laura: like who? >> change doesn't come with

the waxman bill exempts more small businesses from the employer-mandate requirement.also has a bit of a different spin on the public option. it is based on doctors and hospitals being reimbursed on a negotiated rate that the secretary of health and negotiate. and the ways and means bill, for instance, it is pegged to medicare rates. the energy and commerce bill is a bit more favorable to the doctors and hospital providers. those are two examples of things that ought to be reconciled. >> we talked a bit about the surtax on high incomes. the energy and commerce had that debate earlier this summer. >> before i begin, let me recognize the distinguished chairman of the ways and means committee, mr. rangel, who is in the room, since this amendment relates -- relates to his committee. it is good that he would be in attendance when i discuss it. mr. chairman, under the pending bill, there is a tax on american citizens depending on their income status. if this bill goes into effect there would be an immediate tax -- surtax on incomes of citizens who made between $350,000 out a

in the house, with the exception of henry waxman, i'm not sure they have the skillful legislators and with ted kennedy gone i don't know who you have in the senate to shepherd this through. i think that's a real problem. >> i do agree with that. the number of people who have experienced putting together complicated pieces of legislation just isn't there the way there was in the 160s. then you have to issue, which rich eluded to. partly... why is the bill unpopular now? i think one, people have had a lot of government shoved down their throats for good reasons and bad over the last couple months, they're a little nervous. it's not a country that's attuned to have having big government. >> rose: are they worried about government or the deficit and the cost? >> many my view... and i think that's why the president understands that, that's why his rhetoric about the american character is so central. america has a tradition. the tradition is limited government. and on top of that you have deficits. you have what's going to be... i don't know, our public debt to g.d.p. will be 83% by 2019. s

in the house, with the excepon of henry waxman, i'm noture they havthe skillful legislors and with ted kennedy gone i don't know who u have in t senate to shepherd this through. i think that's a real problem. >> i d agree wi that. the numberf people whoave experiend putting together complicated pieces of legislation just isn't tre the way there was the 1s. then you havto issue, which rich elud to. part... why isthe bl popular now? i thk one, people have had loofgovernment sved down their throats for od reasons and baover the last couple months, they're a little nervous. it's not a country that's attuned to have having big government. >> rose: are they worried aut vernment or the defit and the cost? >> many my view... and ithink that's why t president understands that, that's whyis rhetoric about themerican characteis so central. america has a tradition. the traditi is lited gornment. and ontop of that you have defici. you have what' going to b.. i don't kn, our public debt to g.d.p. wille 83% by 2019. soou have a great deal of anxiety. then the thi thing is it's almost impossible, it's

it's been interesting in the waxman markey debate in the house of representatives.spent a lot of time because they knew that climate legislation significantly would hike energy costs, raising the cost of production here, and it would make us less competitive at a time when we need to be more competitive. so, i think we better pay attention to regulations like that. they're far more dramatic in te terms of the potential impact on our ability to trade and ex-sport and any of the tad negotiations. final point, remember that big fight, congressman all wrapped around that? $1 billion in the caribbean. today it's a $6 billion surplus, just in a couple of years. how that has changed, that's a good thing. that's why columbia and panama, where we have the votes in the congress ought to be submitted by the administration so that we can vote those in and the u.s. bulldozers to the panama canal. >> governor, thank you very much for joining us today. great thing you're here. we would love to have you back in the studio with us soon. >> love to be out there if we get better beatl

chairman waxman, chairman emeritus dingell, mr. stupak, mr. walden, it's good to be back, members of the committee. it's very good to be back before the energy and commerce committee, and i appreciate the opportunity to give you an update on the public health challenges of the h1n1 influenza. let them just start by saying the administration is taking these challenges very seriously. the night i was sworn in i went immediately in the situation room because this virus was just breaking out. and from day one this has been very high on my radar screen. we're working in close partnership with virtually every part of the federal government but also with governors, mayors, tribal leaders, state and local health departments, emergency personnel, working with the medical community, the private sector to actively prepare for the virus outbreaks that may develop over the next few months and to have some mitigation strategies in place in the meantime. since the initial outbreak of the 2009 influenza, not only has a worldwide pandemic been declared, it's a

unfortunately he voted with henry waxman to allow them to bring it back up again and kill our amendmentnd you can find husbands. we would be happy to get you copies of them. they did occur, unfortunately, the defeated our amendment. >> the you have a follow-up? >> i like to mention that i am very disappointed that the people of south louisiana, who are actually some of my flavor -- some of the most flavor ball in -- flavorful and well- respected people, are blinded by their liberal views. a good old boy is not the -- always the one that works. >> joan --where is the republican health care plan? why is it not publicize? the democrats keep saying that republicans just say no. to the republicans have a plan? >> we have about five different plans. when we did the senate doctor show, he talks about his plan. i encourage you to come to our website and watch the show, possibly, we do reruns'. republican.senate.gov/doc tors but there are many other approaches out there, to deal with the pre-existing conditions that people have, designed to let people who buy their own health insurance have the

arm- twisting and a lot of games that were played, and you can go watch the tape on c-span, henry waxman brought it back up again and it did our amendment using a procedural -- defeated our amendment using a procedural trick. unfortunately, many budget with henry waxman to allow them to bring it back up again and killed our amendment that an abortion in the bill. it reverted back to the form that it was in, which according to national right to life, would result in the greatest expansion of abortion. there was a record vote, we forced that vote, and we would be happy to get you copies of those votes. but they did occur and unfortunately they defeated the amendment. they allow abortion in their bill. >> do you have a follow-up? >> i would like to mention that i am very disappointed that the people south of louisiana, who are actually some of our most flavorful and well respected people, are blinded by their representative and his liberal views. he is a good old boy. [applause] >> joan ingram, where is the republican health care plan? democrats keep saying that republicans just say no. do

rangel, the gentleman who chairs the ways and means committee, possibly he is listening to henry waxman, the chairman of the committee that i serve on, energy and commerce, or maybe his friend from california, george miller, who chairs the education and labor committee in the house. and maybe he's listening to chris dodd, the senator from connecticut who chairs the health, education pension committee, the h.e.p. kept, in the united states senate. but he is not listening to the american people. we don't -- we've come to not expect, my colleagues, him to listen to the loyal minority and to give the minority truly an opportunity to participate on the front end of having input in these very important bills. we're talking about 17% of our economy is health care and john fleming and phil gingrey together probably have 70 years of clinical experience, mr. speaker, in the practice of medicine and i'm talking about where you see patients, i'm not talking about writing papers or teaching at some ivory tower medical facility. i'm talking about in urban and rural america seeing patients across all

party to move towards their socialist wing and to have a very big government, very high tax henry waxmanhat would probably come out of a conference. now, whatever the democrats try to put into it. i think the pressure in their system is very, very heavily towards bigger government and higher taxes? gretchen: let's talk about national affairs, we have the u.n. general assembly going on right now. we have the situation in afghanistan where apparently somebody inside the pentagon released the report from mcchrystal, who apparently is going to ask for a heck of a lot of troops. and president obama has now said that his strategy may be changing when as recently as march, even more recent than that, i think, he said he was in favor of whatever this guy said needed to be done. >> well, you know, i think the president has a growing problem politically at home. the american people don't understand the war. he doesn't want to explain it. and his left, which thought it was clever of him to be against iraq but for afghanistan is not shocked to discover he actually meant he was for afghanistan. remem

waxman sit together. mix it up. >> -- >> mix it together. and they know that, on the shithis e and others, you're going to be true to yourself and true to them and they can say, ok, i and stand. one of the challenges you're going to have -- i understand. one of the challenges you're going to have is being able to understand where that line is and in doing what you need to do to bring everybody to some sense of consensus. the debate we're having right now in this country on health care is lacking the simple approach toward not bipartisanship. in washington, bipartisanship is, if you get something, that means i have lost something. unless i am willing to give that something up, i am not in the mood to be bipartisan,'. it is consensus. what is at stake is not my reelection, it is not my personal views, but the idea that they have that i am going to represent them ultimately in this fight. i am going to work toward some level of consensus on the issues. >> yes. >> and that is a challenge. what you see now and why the young people have reacted th

waxman that day, and his answer was he did not know. i am really trying to be as quiet as i can because i respect the president of the united states as a person and respect the office of the president of the united states, but the speech that i heard this evening is one of the more surreal speeches that i have ever heard from any president in the 25 years i have been in congress. it sincerely does not reflect the substance of the legislation that has been presented by democrat leadership in the house of representatives. it is a disservice to the american people who are taking the time to download teh bill, the amendments, to read it. this is too important an issue to try to give a spin control speech. that speech this evening wasa spin control speech. >> we have been getting a lot of messages saying congressman joe wilson should be censored for yelling out when the president was talking about illegal aliens. were you sitting near him? was he the one that yelled that? >> i don't know how to respond to that because it is a true statement.

the waxman bill exempts more small businesses from the employer-mandate requirement.t also has a bit of a different spin on the public option. it is based on doctors and hospitals being reimbursed on a negotiated rate that the secretary of health and negotiate. and the ways and means bill, for instance, it is pegged to medicare rates. the energy and commerce bill is a bit more favorable to the doctors and hospital providers. those are two examples of things that ought to be reconciled. >> we talked a bit about the surtax on high incomes. the energy and commerce had that debate earlier this summer. debate earlier this summer. >> let me recognize mr. rangel, since this amendment relates to the jurisdiction of his committee. it is good he would be in attendance when i discuss it. mr. chairman, under the pending bill, there is a tax on americans, depending on their income status. if this bill goes into effect, there would be an immediate surtax on incomes of citizens who make between $350,000.500000 dollars per year. there would be a 1% tax between citizens who make $500,

space and chairman waxman and ranking member barton, mr. pallone, for acting so quickly on this one, mr. space and i brought it up last week for attention. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i would yield four minutes to the gentleman from ohio, mr. space, who is the sponsor of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, mr. space, is recognized for four minutes. mr. space: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 3663, legislation that i deprooed -- introduced with my friend, mr. terry from nebraska, which will delay implementation of accreditation requirements imposed on america's pharmacies, who offer service to medicare beneficiaries. i think that my colleague from nebraska, as well as my colleague and chairman pallone from new jersey have done an ample job explaining the predicament that we find ourselves in with regards to the accreditation and sure the bond requirements that will be impo

nancy pelosi and harry reid, henry waxman, barney frank. people who probably have lower -- all of them, lower opinion ratings than say a dick cheney, that shows how just one leader for the republican party, one person would step forward, i keep talking about mitt romney. does mitt romney want to be president next time or not? i talk about the fevered swamps of extremism that this country is marching through. if mitt romney wants to be president of the united states, it takes somebody to step out and say -- kids, grow up. that's why, jim, this is an opportunity for a romney or a polenti or somebody else to step forward. -- pawlenty. >> it's true in theory, but i don't think there's a big appetite for that in the republican party. if somebody came in here and tried to be the adult and said, hey, let's try to work with obama, they'd get booed down. it only works in an election. the only time that your romney scenario works is in 2012, when somebody can actually, when people feel like, okay, this person can put us in the white house, therefore

republicans that could have supported that stimulus package, or the cap and trade bill, written by henry waxmana's budget, which is, makes george bush look like a flinty new england cheapskate, and now this public option again, how do you not call him an ideologue when every piece of legislation is only legislation that nancy pelosi and her folks in congress can like. there's a reason this president came in with a 70% approval rating and this morning 51% approval rating, he's lost independents, he's lost moderate republicans, he lost the middle. >> i don't know personally how permanent that is and my sense is that he is, he understands this is fundamentally a center right country, we talked about this a lot and when i read a book, i'm trying to remember the title, the last says hope. and i had a conversation with the author who agreed, i think, with the premise that the real burkian in american politics right now is barack obama because when he came in, he dealt with reality as he found it, and may have gone too far at this point but it's september the 9th. >> brother, you didn't read my book.

he's deferred on cap and trade to henry waxman. he's deferred on health care up until wednesday night. that's certainly something president reagan didn't do his first nine months. >> president reagan never did that. he never let the debate get away from him, joe, as we saw get away from president obama this sum ir. he's up in martha's vineyard, and these town hall meetings are being held, and people are denouncing it and criticizing it. frankly, if he hadn't given that speech last week, this debate would have slipped away from him. he sort of got it back now. i think he's got a 50% chance of getting what he wants. >> it's going to be tough. but frank rich, even yesterday in the sunday new york times, frank rich wrote that president obama has really frittereded away the summer and that he really needs to focus on now winning the votes that he needs. >> you know, joe, somebody used a good line last week. he said obama's got to start being a little less gandhi and a little more lbj in terms of pulling these people together. he's got t