i think we are good. we have gotten better since last year. we have many excellent employees. to many of them are not yet excellent. that is what we're working on. we are still searching for the exact crowd. it is a tricky process. we have replaced a lot of them already because we have to get in the mix. that is our goal. that is a little bit about the game experience and the customer experience. i hope you are having fun any night you come to the ballpark. i thought that it would be better in terms of our neighborhood. the economy has hit all of us in so many ways. the development that we all thought we would see by now has not happened yet. we know what is going to happen but it has been delayed. when that happens, it will make the experience even better than is now. the last thing a lot to talk about is the most important in many ways. the thing that is least talk about the reluctance talk about that. if you know anything about me, i never read. i like to talk to extemporaneously, but wanted to bring some materials to talk about because i did not want to leave anything out.

, and we said we don't, but then we hear the administration say yes, we do. we are going to use this information with which to make coverage decisions and treatment decisions so either we are or we aren't and there isn't a plan our word and prohibit. that doesn't deny the dissemination of this information. it doesn't deny the actual beginning of knowledge from the spread of good research that might cause us to save money. but there's a big difference between wanting to save money and rationing care and that is what we are talking about. rationing care because cms will use the information to limit the availability of new and advanced techniques to save people's lives, to extend their lives to increase the quality of their lives because it saves money. and that is what the state is all about. it is about whether cns kits to practice medicine. and the intent of the administration has stated is that they want cms to practice medicine and what that does is puts the government in between the patient and the doctor. it denies the art of medicine. i readily admit we

[applause]. >> yeah, and we did it because we dug deeper and we were more determined than we had ever been before. we extanneded -- when al fanken is seated, i guess we have the official 60 members. [applause] we all worked incredibly hard electing him to be our president. with that election, the work we did was a frans transformational election. how we talk about issues, the economy, race, what mattered. about how we saw policies and government. getting rid of trickle down -- understanding that government was good for all of us. it helped us understand what grassroots can do. people came toble together because they -- people came together because they wanted to build a movement for change, not just take little steps for change. i think that's what this campaign was about, to build a grassroots election about making change happen. that's what we did, and now it's what we need to do, which is actually not just have the opportunity to make change happen, but actually make it happen. our country needs to more than we've ever needed it before, because president obama really inherited a me

it is important that we have these discussions, that we continue to me, that we make sure that we can articulate our interests and positions but professionally, to be able to worker way through that. i'm hopeful that we will see increasingly robust opportunities. >> time for one more question. >> currently you have combined a joint force -- task force operating in the persian gulf. stressing thae mil to mil relationships, if china was to become part of that, which you entertain allowing some sort of mil to mil contact to be established with the iranian navy? >> i would see the type of relationship that would develop would be one that would be based on the broader national interests and then the question also becomes their reveries various elements in iran that are operating maritime forces and with whom with the relationship be, but that is our decision that is part of the broader diplomatic context and we will conform

we said, we will have to live with a view. what i want to emphasize is, the importance of identifying the rest, before we say, make certain we know what the problem as before the solution. if i can say one other thing, to go back to where you started just now, at the family level. we did not increased as for the banks, the american household owes 130% of their income. we have been heading numbers that are unprecedented, they have never even been close at any time in history. when we reform the financial products and put some safety in so that families are economically stable, and they are not introducing into the stream of financial commerce, these high risk and high profit instruments, we turned down the rest overall and frankly we can deal with this with a lighter touch. those who were worried about the heavy hand of government on the back end, would do well to observe that modest changes on the front and could mean that we require less intervention and less supervision. we will be -- if we can change is at the beginning thi

so we node that we can do more. economic conditions, health benefits, really taking serious action to make sure that we have enough primary care providers and do a much better job of coordinating care for those with chronic diseases, we'll really have a dramatic impact on americans and the cost to all of us. that's what we're going to do. we heard some others talking about the need to do medical research. we believe strongly in that. we've made very, very good commitment to doing that by putting more money into that by putting $10 million more into n.i.h. in the recovery and reinvestment act. we do want to see better treatment and cures. that takes dollars for medical research and a commitment to the science of biomedical research and some new products and devices. it also takes prevention and it also takes better coordination of care. we -- patients with chronic diseases need access to primary care providers. we need to be able to make sure they get good ongoing chronic disease management. i've introduced legislati

we knew we were onto something when we could not stop crying.y time we got a letter it was an emotional experience whether personal writing about their mother or father or men or women writing about their children or women advising obama's they had prayed for her. we never doubted we could do it. but one thing that was so power fall it is that black women have these incredible network all of these reports that say we don't use the internet is not true. not only that we use it but black women has established this base around the world because black women were sending us letters from africa and it says i just got to ethiopia we've found black women whether the buenos aires, italy, ethiopia all over the world and they were writing to say is this the real deal? are we actually going to see these letters in a song form? is a possible peace could go to the white house? is it a hoax? no it wasn't it is an extraordinary response we have gotten from them and i might add another thing we were struck is the diversity of things they were housewives, a forme

we are on the threshold of personalized madison, we know that if we can no your gene map we can probably taylor something that would treat your depression. and on and on. there was a study recently on prostate, they said there are probably 50 kinds of prostate cancer but we don't know how to diagnose that so we treat everybody the same. the same with lipitor. lipitor may not work for me. we can see the future but we can't quite get there. the only way is a capital budget at the federal level, where we borrow the money, make the investments and move the needle. it will save us billions of dollars. [applause] >> congressman gephardt has outlined the objectives of individualized medicine including mental health. let me pose a question this way. what is the rate limiting said? >> everyone says we are not where we should be. >> why not? if we were able to wave a magic wand would be a cap expenditure? what else would you need to say this is where we need to be? >> no question that we have got to make serious investments and assure the scientific community that those investments will be sustain

we are where we are. bring that up because by the way with a letter or without, i think the state felt where the situation was. i appreciate the letter. i think it is good. i don't think that was rediscovering the med terrainian. with that in mind, i want to tell you i dropped the bill. it would rezind the unspent, non-transportation american recovery funds and put them in the trust fund. it would cree a jobs and prepare this country for the long cablet. i want to bring that out there. there is an area we all agree on. that's something we have to do and something that's working. i want to thank all of you for the job you are didding. more importantly, i need to thank you. we may have some differences but have you been sted fast on not only fighting for more money for transportation. but also doing everything in your pow tore make sure the money is well spent. again, we may have our differences from time to time. you have listened to everybody on this committee. in this day and age when the situation is so

if we want a culture -- if we want a culture change in health care, we must start with our largest health care spending program, medicare. if nothing changes in the next eight years the cost of health insurance for families covered by their employer will rise b by $1 -- 124%. the average annual percent to cover a family will increase from $1,000 to $25,000. as you can see increases in the growth of health care costs have rapidly outpaced increases in family income. the median income has risen b by $11,300 in the last decade and projected to increase in the next decade. income growth will stay relatively stable. let's look at growth of health care costs in the same time. in the last decade health care insurance to cover a family rose by $5,400. and now the cost of health insurance for a family will increase by $14,000 in this next decade. this rapid increasing growth is clearly unsustainable. what you can see from this chart, madam chair is that median income in real dollars, the increase, remains essentially flat over these decades. 1996 to 2006, the growth wa was $11,300. 2006, to 2016,

if we get it in place, we can fix it. make sure the infrastructure works together. >> changing plans is one of the problems that has been written about, why prevention has always been a challenge in america. people move around. the plan that person is in doesn't want to spend money on preventive well less. they have done that and a person goes to another planet and spends $10 a month. we have to address that. in europe, as most of us know, they have a 10 to 20 year look and a more robust prevention program, and we have to integrate that into our thinking. the issue of cost you brought up is central. at this panel we are not going to address the issue of where we get $1 trillion or $2 trillion. what can we do, organizations. whether they are organizational, that was shocking. it looked at the cost of care in texas and all passed though which is 13 miles down the road or something. $30,000 per person except for federal medicare. el patch thome was $75 million. quite remarkable. if we don't address that type of issue, becaus

we have had several meetings and ironed this out. we knew we needed to get this right. financial services and reform and the structure is of critical i am importance we knew we had to get it right. we are offering today, our solutions going through you'll see a lot of what we propose here is about transparency and better protect investors, taxpayers and consumers. consumer protection is very important and to hold risk takers on wall street for their actions. for the last two years, queff seen regulations. we have acted with little oversiggete. the american people deserve better regulatory structure. the individuals behind me have worked diligently, contributed to our proposal. during our work, we were guide i by three key principals. these are principals we not only felt but our constituents told us again. no more bail outs. we need to restore financial discipline. and we'll no longer have to endure a command and control of structure from the government. these three principals are ee septemberal to ensuring that we have an exit strategy from the cycle of taxpayer bail o

we are way better than we have been. we are not as good as we will be next year or the year after. so much has to do with understanding each other's organizations and cultures. and now seeing what i call second or third generation effectings, people working together in one place and have a relationship so they can move much more quickly together. general mcchrystal i think set the standard aggressively at the operational level. and that command is serving as a higher sorts of the headquarters. we wake up with 85 members of the special operations command going to work in agencies of government. some you may expect and some you wouldn't, and small teams two to four people, with an o 6 colonel. and we wake up in tampa with those in our headquarters. full members of the team sitting on the discussions and on the global collaborations kind of briefings and this has provided a transparency that is helpful. and it's hard now to imagine back what it was like back when we used to look around the room and see only uniform members. it's a good solid team. >> and that's something that we want

what we know we can do. public and private options, a public auction that holds the private options accountable so we don't have to depend upon the background of the state legislature or be worried about the philosophy of the governor and to the point as a state insurance commissioner. that is why i am for public auction. but i believe we have no option not to do anything the time is now. the need is compelling. i don't sit here represented interest or institutions. though i represent some pretty terrific ones and ih, fda in my state, daughter of space agencies in my state where those bureaucrats we got to look out i've got a nobel prize winners who work for the federal government and i also have water men and farmers so i am here today thinking about maryland. i am not thinking about centralized this or private that or whatever. i'm thinking about the people who sent us here and i would hope we would think about this people. let's find this common ground. let's find a sensible center. let's come up with it.

we want to make sure we are helping providers computerized so we can get the system up and running. the second step we all can agree on is to invest more in preventive care so we can afford -- avoid illness and disease in the first place. [applause] it means quitting smoking and going in for that mammogram or the screening. it means going for a run or hitting the gym and raising our children to step away from the video games and spend more time playing outside. it also means cutting down on all of the junk foods that is fuelling an epidemic of obesity. [applause] we are putting many americans at greater risk for costly chronic conditions. michele and i are starting a white house of vegetable garden. i say we generously because michelle has done most of the work. [laughter] that is a lesson that we should work with school districts to incorporate in their school lunch programs. building a health-care system that promotes prevention rather than just managing diseases will require all of us to do our parts. it will take doctors telling us what risk factors we should avoid. it will take

we had to prioritize, and we did. today, we continue to combat the risk of attacks by terrorists. we want to protect our communities from fraud and violent crime, as well. . there are many lenses to view the financial crisis, from financial institutions that traded in risk itself, lenders and real estate professionals who sidestepped the practice, homeowners, whose purchases exceeded their pocketbooks. the rest is central in this crisis, much of what led to the financial meltdown was the result of a failure to properly invest -- assess the risks, risks to investors, risk to home owners and the economy at large. there are those who intended to defraud others. in part, the sub prime lending crisis they have been more a matter of greed. the prevailing thought process seems to be that everyone is making money, why should we miss the boat? when it did, some tried to patch the holes with tape, and bail out the water with dixie cups. the fbi plays a role in addressing this crisis. we do so with two distinct ways. first, we are investigating those with criminal responsibility, four aspect

we don't take -- we cannot be sure that if we do not act the pictures won't be released. what we can be sure of is that if they are released and we fail to act we will have taken an action or failed to take an action that will result in harm to our service men and women. thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, i was moved by both the senators, senator mcconnell and senator alexander's discussion of this issue, you described it as a house matter. i believe the house has made its own decision. i think we'll see by a vote that it's different than that which you are concluding. unless aisle mistaken that the second circuit has already acted, they've upheld the lower court's decision, i can't speak for the aclu, but i can speak for my members in the house we feel strongly that this bill was designed to be a bill to support the troops and without this amendment, i think we're going exactly the wrong direction. i urge that members at least on this side to support ms. granger's amendment. >> does the gentleman -- is the gentleman from california saying he'll vote for the bill i

we have to think about how do we change what we do today to accommodate more people.nd i think that's really a core component to thinking about an innovation philosophvelocity to health care. >> but, i mean, here again we shouldn't overdo the problem. as the urban institute study shows they will be an increase of 5% in health spending. so an increase roughly a 5% of use, but not all of that disposition. could be hospital also. a lot of hospitals are empty anyhow so we have the capacity. so you are talking about physicians and possibly nurses. and there's enormous variation across the u.s. in physician population ratios and nurse. massachusetts, very richly endowed, and other much less so endowed. and i think you somehow expect over a decade, 5% gain from that sector is it really asking for that much. and as cleve says, there's enough inefficiency, we could handle that. the primary care physician problem they have in massachusetts and elsewhere, that sort of unique to especially. it's not across the board at all. and i don't really know if we have a shortage of it. i m

we have to look at the maglevs and latrines, if we did the work we needed on amtrak we could go from new york to washington in an hour and 30 minutes, new york to philadelphia in 33 minutes, we could consign the shuttle to the rest heat and by doing that we could improve east/west air traffic along the eastern seaboard. we shouldn't fly people 500 miles or less, we should be putting them on high speed trains. ranking member thune asked a good question. how are we going to decide which of these projects, whether it is $13 million or 5 funded million dollars, how we decide which projects should be given priority? i suggest we create a national infrastructure bank staffed by professionals, not necessarily professionals, all of them in transportation, it could be members of congress. rank project on what they do for transporting people, the effect on climate change, all of those things, an independent ranking system because the public does not want transportation dollars authorized to the same old system and certainly not for project on this magnitude. how are we going to pay for it? $13

at that time, we won all three because we had a better candidate, and we had better conditions. these things are important because it was easy to forget amid all the criticism and some of the praise, what a profound impact elections have on people's lives. i was thinking about all the trips we took command in the planes when both of us were overweight. [laughter] trying to drum up support for the dlc. we held our breath at that williamsburg conference, and we had a meeting in new orleans. we had a meeting in cleveland. one of my good friends, reverend jackson, called us the democrats of the leisure class. some of the set we were republican light because we talked about trade, national security, and welfare reform and holding families together. they forgot we also talked about strategies to reduce poverty, collect child support, promote education, and that we were very explicit early on in saying we would not stand for discrimination against anybody who played the politics or anything else. we were always in the right place on that. but we thought we needed to break out of the or

we have to control these cars and that's a commitment that we have made and we said we could continue -- >> the parts? the parts? >> we already have 51% of the parts committed. we continue to work on those parts. by the same time period, we plan to have those accomplished as well. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator? >> thank you, mr. chairman. we spent a fair amount of time understanding process. i want to dig a little deeper there. let me start with mr. henderson. mr. henderson, just in terms of how you got to this list of dealers survive, this list of dealers don't, how did you get to that list? did you form a committee at general motors or something like that? >> we went back and looked at history, senator, of both sales effectiveness as well as customer service and a series of other matrix as well but those two would be the most important in terms of evaluating it, not just simply one year but going back multiple years. >> who headed that up at general motors? give me a name. >> his name was ben marklinave. >> what relationship did you have then with the auto task force, the admi

we had a model that we could operate quickly. we used it. in finle, it was used heavily to try to restore. worrying about its partnerscñ data was being ex-fill traded from they are network. >> how do you work that and how does industry respond to that. we don't want this to be used against them. we are proposing some regulation changes. industry folks came back and said fine. we have always shared some practicing. i think we need to grow this model. hoss classified does some of this threat data need to be. can we share it with the banking sector. we think it maybe is a model that can be thrown out to have this broader conference. i think i only answered the first part of your question. the first point is you have to be partnership more generally if something bad happens, the last thing somebody is going to do is reach behind them. that particular model is behind a lot of proposals you see coming out of bodies which some of you were involved in developing. those ideas don't go away. we have to figure out a way to define those i'll call out th

when we look at as a family as to what we do with honor household budgets we don't buy a car, we don't buy a home also know the president is and whether or not we can afford it. the cbo estimates of this bill are at one trying to cover only one-third of the uninsured population. in his important that we make sure that the american taxpayers, the american people know what it is that they're going to be paying for. a few members of this committee publicly said they don't support tax health benefits so how do we pay for the legislation? i want to make sure and that again we spend time working through these difficult issues of. i will tell you that i agree with the comment that was made by secretary of health and human services secretary sebelius. she made a statement and i share her commitment to comprehensive and carefully crafted legislation, those are her words, that reforms are health care system. we should all stand with the secretary on this -- we owe it to the american people to make sure that we carefully craft this legislation with and i will close my comments mr. chairman and i

we scale up our technical assistance. we scale up our refrigerators. we scale up our vehicles, everything else, and then we try and run the committee patient on a pittance usually an often as an afterthought in what has become very, very clear is that certainly to finish eradication, to reach these populations, we had to invest very, very heavily and we had to make sure it was a data-driven. everywhere we built our communications capacity, it had to be in response to who we had to reach and what we were seeking to achieve there. this is a map to show you of the scale of what we had to put in place in northern india to work with the muslim community to engage in any underserved communities in seeking not just the polio vaccine, that any vaccine. olio, they were best vaccinated against polio, in fact. as you can see here we put nearly 5000 part-time people on the ground. these were people from within the communities. we trained them on social mobilization, interpersonal communications, etc., to begin the process of building the community engagement neede

time when we don't know what the bill costs and we don't know what the employer mandates are and we don't know what the do. we'll get language up here that actually has the numbers on it. we can't run the numbers until we craft the language and give them something. >> they've run the numbers and it's a trillion dollars and one-third -- >> we're in unprecedented waters with health care and a lot of the things we're talking about, getting numbers are difficult for cbo and they're under pressure from the house, the finance committee and others to produce numbers on various ideas that we might find commonality with, but it's a chicken egg argument in a sense. you can't get cbo numbers unless you have language. it makes the question one that people raise and that is the obvious one. if i can't answer that question then obviously -- you put on language and you can't run the numbers. we're trying to accommodate that and simultaneously recognize that despite the committee rules of 24 hours or so in a normal process of the bill, that's very difficult to do, so i want to accommodate members as sena

we have to invest what we need to invest and we have to find a way to do it. and we have to find the political courage to find a way to pay for it. i think a capital budget is long overdue. i testified as -- >> i agree. >> i ran a pretty good size company and i can tell you if -- >> no company would ever -- >> cash basis it -- >> you wouldn't finance your capital means out of operating costs and we do. we finance building a train or bridge the same way we finance paper clips in the federal government. it's nuts. it's time to change. it's time to change and we better do it soon because infrastructure is a lot like that commercial, you can pay me now and he holds up a can of oil filter, $8.75, or you can pay me later, he points toe dilap dated car. it's not getting cheaper. it's not getting cheaper. >> you and i are very much on the same page. and all we have to do is convince about 85 others here that we're doing the right thing there. ms. fleming, in your march, 2009, report you studied high-speed rail service in france, japan and spain. each of these countrie

we will be just fine. there are a lot of things we have to do.here's a lot of change that needs to be had, but california will see better days. host: let me ask about two specific proposals. one would eliminate 900,000 children from a subsidized state health care insurance program. how realistic is that? guest: the democratic majority party will not agree to cut 900,000 kids off the health care rolls, nor will we agreed to eliminate college scholarships which have provided economic opportunity for thousands of californians. we will also not eliminate the most successful program we have which is transitioning people from assistants to work. we will make cuts in each of these areas, but the governor has presented a free market. even with the failed election it comes on the heels of california serving a $36 billion deficit in february. now is proposing another $24 billion solution. $4.5 billion is to build a rainy day fund. you build one in good times in my view, but in california now we are hearing the thunder and lightning and it is raining hard.

we think we should expand the categories. with regard to military personnel, i would want to look and see what the facts show. >> thank you. we will get into that again. one of the other things that you and i discussed during the hearing, and we have a different position on this. i respect your position. you said you would rigorously reviewe laws restricting the second amendment. have you done that? did you do that before you issued your recommendation on assault weapons? >> i am not sure that i have done anything with regard to weapons. i am cognizant of the heller determination and decision. i do not think the department has issued any rules, regulations with regards to weapons. >> in terms of recommendations, you are on record of wanting us to be proposed assault weaponry. the comment you made during your confirmation hearing was that you would do a rigorous review before any recommendations were made. the question is, did you do that and what were the results that caused you to propose a new assault weapons ban? >> have n

we do not need stimulus, we need growth. we do not need temporary fixes, we need real investment and real productivity improvements. it how do we make america the best place in the world for the next factory and the next job? the answer is the opposite of the last's formula. we don't need stimulus, temporary jobs, we need investments to create permanent productivity increases to sustain permanent jobs. for years, the left talked about trickle-down capitalism. let me offer you an observation. trickle-down bureaucracy works even less than trickle-down capitalism. pouring $787 billion in in washington and somehow create jobs is a fantasy of the first order. not that the people that voted for care. their goal was power and paying off their allies. the [applause] you can tell how badly the stimulus has failed, and let's be clear, this is not something president obama inherited from president bush. he got his stimulus delivered by his robots in congress that did exactly what they were told without reading the bill. he can't turn a

host: we want to wreck -- we want to welcome bernie sanders. . guest: our system is geared toward making money for the private health insurance companies. the function of a private health insurance company is not to provide quality health care for the most people in a cost-effective way. you end up not only with 1300 separate health insurance companies, but you end up with thousands of different benefit packages which cost enormous amount of money to administer. the bottom line is we are not only the most expensive, bureaucratic, and wasteful system in the world because we are spending billions of dollars in administration, in profiteering for insurance companies. a fellow who was the head of united health got $1.6 billion in stock options. the goal of health care should be to provide the best quality health care to all of our people in the most cost-effective way. to my mind, the way you do that and what we have learned from other countries is that a single payer system would work. host: this is from a physician from canada who wrote this articl

we understand what we need to do and that's the beauty of this team. we don't hang our head. we encourage each other. we're able to take constructive criticism from one another. i think that's the best thing about this team. the lockerroom tonight is obviously happier because of the victory, but we understand it's still another must-win game come thursday. >> skip, a lot of people would say it's a different playing home and away. is at it difference? >> you're in your own bed, you can do your own think as opposed to being on the road and hiding because of what we have to do on the road. you don't want to rip and run on the road. you want get your rest, stay off your feet. here least you're in the confines of your own home. one thing about basketball if you can play, you can play. if you can't, you can't. and this league is full of guys who can play. >> back left. >> the first two games how shocking was it you didn't shoot well and was it just a matter of time it broke through for the team? >> it was shocking. we have a team that does shoot well. they were doubling dwight in t

i feel hopeful that we have moved forward as far as we can. that there is a sense around here really from both sides of the aisle that we don't have to debate anymore whether or not there's a problem with the system. there may be differences about how we fix it, but there is a real commitment to fix it. and and the president says he wants to do it on his watch and there is a tremendous commitment to pass the health care package that works for america and get on with it. and i yield to the the gentleman from ohio. mr. boccieri: i thank the gentlelady for assembling this dialogue on health care. this is very important. and americans who might be listening in, those folks who might be awake, after punching a time clock and working long hours, we want you to know we are working on this issue. now it's time to take action. and leadership is defined by action, not by position, but by action. and what i applaud this president is for his bold efforts to step forward and take action on an issue that remains a dilemma for america. this is about us as a

as we will shut down guantanamo, we say we will help you. we will have some of the detainees in france. french is what? is coming back into nato and taking two important command posts. that is what french is about. we are here to work together to achieve results. we're not here watching and saying how much time did you spend with so and so? do you think people are just waiting to see as hand in hand sitting here looking into one another's eyes? of course not. they want us to achieve results. i will tell you one thing. it is very easy to work with the american president. >> president sarkozy speaks quite quickly, so we can get even more done. [laughter] >> i speak fast but you understand fast. >> we will take one last question. do we have a microphone here? >> president obama , the ban on head scarves and veils for young girls in french schools and president sarkozy's position, is this likely to hinder the new approach to is one he presented two days ago? >> this is a process. what i have tried to do in cairo was to open up a conversation, bo

can build and we will build if we care enough. really to join me in that effort? [applause] thank you. >> we have questions for the senator tonight. they were submitted by members of the audience and some were submitted off of our website is we have questions from around the country. before we go to questions i want to make sure i can introduce our former congressman and a good friend of northwest iowa congressmen tom late some who came in [applause] and a tough questions i say call him up. >> the first question and is asking for your thoughts with the general motors bankruptcy filing. >> first of all, i thought president bush made a used huge mistake to bail out the accompanies in the first place [applause] i tried to promote last year that i thought they of our companies should have gone through chapter 11 reorganization they could have reorganize come out stronger at the time the government could have done some of the things they're talking about today, a guarantee warranties so people would feel comfortable than provide debtor

we can be as creative on the way out as we were on the way in. we can be creative with liabilities the way that we have been with the assets. these can be sold out right, or least through a repurchase transaction. another tool is the payment of interest by the federal reserve. without interest on reserves, the rates are raised only by restraining the quantity of what is available in the market. reaching the target may lead to a sharper reduction in the balance sheet. we can raise the interest that is paid in tandem with the target and this will raise the opportunity cost of the banks that are lending. as we announced in march, we are looking for additional tools for legislative action. an example would be the authority to release debt, and expansion of the treasury supplemental plan. now what circumstances will require us to use the tools that we have, and what we may have in the future? one clear concern is price stability. the balance sheets grew in a matter of weeks and remains large. there is a precedence for a large increase in the balance s

do we need that missile defense mr. gingrey mentioned? i kind of think we do. i would like my member of congress to do something about that maybe they'd even go to the trouble to write their member of congress and say i'd like to see you vote on this, vote in favor of it. but how are they going to see it if we're closed off from even offering it on this beloved floor? which of course is the sacred people's house. and that's why we think the rules ought to be opened. mr. gingrey: if the gentleman would yield on that point and just briefly, that's exactly right. that people in these 435 congressional districts, republican or democrat, they need to know how their member would vote on an issue such as that. something that that's important to this country in this time, they need an opportunity to hear that debate on this floor, you know, up or down, they need to know how their member votes and the point the gentleman makes from texas is absolutely on target and i just wanted to emphasize that. mr. carter: reclaiming my time for a moment. i think most everybody under

when we mandate, we say medicine is a check in a box. we deny the fact that madison is personal, that passed -- that medicine dispersis personal, the positions experience -- physicians experience should have an overriding factor. we do not have these protections in here. i think we ought to have those protections. we are the have language that protect that. -- already have a language that protect that. i would suggest that we sick -- except this so we offer the insurance to the american people and providers that they can truly have what is best for them as decided by them and their providers. >> you have amendment no. 9. some of the aspects of this amendment i liked and others gave a concern. i'm going to do with the washington bureaucrats. washington bureaucrats are not going to decide anything. they are going to published reports. let's talk about who we are talking about when we talk about who does research. those washington bureaucrats are called nih. they are called fda. those washington bureaucrats are called the institute's of med

we tried to do that. perhaps we can try it a different way.i don't know that we need to go that far for electricity. there's a middle ground where the states can work together. in any event, mr. chairman, this is a good hearing. hopefully out of this will come consensus on both sides of taise about what to do legislatively. now when you were talking about the letters of june #th and the comments of the ceo of mid american. first of all i'm very appreciative of what you've said. it was not intended to intimidate. and that you called him to correct the misunderstanding. i appreciate you doing that. let me elaborate why people like myself have expressed concerns. you can't make the best public policy if you don't have witnesses come before this committee and give their full honest assessment of whatever the issue is. if the only witnesses that are going to be received are witnesses that testify to the side of the the question that the majority is supporting. you don't have a full and fair debate on the issue. and in the instance that you alluded

become stronger as we develop the solutions for the air we breathe, water we drink and the solar that we utilize for our own opportunities and routine opportunities throughout life. we can then become this go-to nation which is more critical in the space-race wars in the 1960's because we committed in thinking in bolder terms. change is not easy to get our arms around, but change is what we ought to be about as leaders of legislative policy that can take orders into jop development. mr. polis: it will make sure that a lot of this technology is created here. we worry about the trade deficit. it seems like america doesn't make anything anymore. we are importing everything from around the world. here's our opportunity to start making things again. i visited a company in my district, they got a big order from china, they are exporting solar panels. mr. connolly: i visited a company in my district that manufactures microchips. the manufacturing capacity has shrunk. they have a factory they had to close in the midwest. they are retro fitting and going to make solar panels at this factory sh

i do think we need to take a step back and figure out where we are going and figure out if we have a waste policy that fits with that. before i and, i would say that diversification for diversification's sake would be faulty policy, but i think history has demonstrated diversification is important to stabilize interruptions, whether they be international or domestic. is important we utilize the resources we have at home, whether it is coal, natural gas -- we have upwards of a third more natural gas in reserves that we had one year ago, at least as far as what was projected. these resources need to be harnessed. especially if you look at the transportation sector. we rely on fossil fuels for 90% of our transportation. if you were to magically make that go way, which perhaps some wish, that is going to have a catastrophic effect on the macro economy in this country. >> yes? >> i think the point that mr. guith just made is extremely important, about the abundance of natural gas. this is a function of fixed and variable costs. a lot of people get hung up on the fixed costs, and what the

we affirm that we will not engage in protectionism. we have to make sure we will keep our borders open and companies can move back and forth between the united states and european in providing goods and services to our respective countries. i am very pleased to see the resolution of the opel situation here. we are very sympathetic towards each other. it is not easy to help the car companies restructure and not always popular. but it is the right thing to do. i am hopeful that not only are we going to see these companies to stabilize, but also that they will emerge even stronger and more competitive. chancellor merkel and i discussed security challenges. germany has been a strong nato partner, as all of you now. we had great challenges in afghanistan. and increasingly in pakistan, but our collective commitment to making sure that we are not seeing the kinds of terrorist bases that could pose harm to all of our people. that we maintain that commitment. we also discussed the issue of iran. and not in isolation, but in a broader context of

and we do that two ways. one, we just make the investment. we don't talk about what the programs are going to look like. we've done that. we studied corridors. we know what the alignment should look like. i believe that we just need to do it. we need to step up, fund it, find the funding mechanisms that are needed and make the necessary investment. >> ok. >> i think it's just that simple. >> ok. so my last question. you said predictable, reliable and you had another word. >> dependable. >> you didn't say safe. of course, it's obvious. >> yes, obviously. >> safe, it's got to be safe. my last question deals with the tragedy that happened on the metro line here. we just wrote a letter -- senator rockefeller and i -- to talk about the need to move forward with positive train control and other life-saving measures because we really are going to have to address this. this was awful, and we've seen these things happen in my state. so my question to you, and my last question is, do you intend to move forward with positive train control and do it quic

so help me. >> your referring to the fact that despite the fact we thoug we could have a mac we relied on the -- >> and i'm also going to the point that i believe that when you said you don't just go and tell the feds and paulson that, look, i smell a rat here. somebody of your stature, i can understand if you were some guy that came off the street six months ago and the last thing you did was even though you were a bank teller, no offense to bank tellers, that's all you did, you're a major player. and when you speak, people listen. so i'm trying to figure out, you've got -- you -- i mean, you said there is a problem here. but then you let these folks -- i mean in all due respect to bernanke and the feds and all due respect to paulson, you're the head of this bank and head of bank of america, they are not. you're -- you've got to answer to the shareholders. i'm trying to figure out why -- and this is stuff, it seems to me, if i had this kind of information, i wouldn't even want my shareholders to be voting on something and they did not have full disclosure. i'm trying to figure out whe

we can change it but we have to be careful about how we change it. the that we are making is that there is an appetite for quality news, not of what the platform, and there will always be an appetite for quality news. we also know we have two audiences with distinctly different desires. first, the local community. readers who come to us for our coverage of everything from local school system to what the obama administration is doing and how it might affect local businesses. second, we have a large and growing national audience but comes to us for coverage of washington -- the of the redskins or the u.s. government. as i said, 90 percent of the page views on the web are from outside the market and we never spent a market the dollar marketing ourselves outside the market. our job is to serve the audience is and what on multiple platforms. at the same time that would cut costs and explore new ways to make money on digital platforms. it is a tall order, but that is what we are doing. we will one of the first major papers to invest heavily in building a w

we know that we can't. it is unsustainable. it is too expensive for individuals and families and businesses and for government for us not to get the costs under control. tt republican resistance to change in health care reform is not surprising. last week we had a cloture vote and 30 hours of debate to proceed to the consideration of a bipartisan noncontroversial bill. we've been through cloture votes an procedural delays all this week. we're in the milledle of -- middle of one right now. that's why those visiting the capitol are wondering were all of the senators are are, this is situation where the republicans decided we're going to wait 30 hours before we do something. a waste of time that we can't afford to waste. and we faced it before. we have to understand that we need to have health care reform. that the president is right that this opportunity comes around so rarely. we have pretty good health insurance as members of congress. but i want to make it clear for the record, we don't have special health insurance. i've hear

we know what to do, we just need the courage to do it. we applaud the approach outlined by this committee that meets many of the principles of our framework for access to care. our efforts in this area were led by carolina hinojosa, she died on sunday as a result of side effects from her breast cancer treatment. c-span3 her last days working on this. we will work our hearts out passionately committed for carolina, but also because we know it is the right thing to do. this system -- we need compared of offensiveness research to reach that goal. we have spent some time understanding the issue beyond the sound bites, and recognize without question the need for this approach in health care. comparative research, is research in a real-life setting, all doctors and patients face. this is an extraordinary time, we are ready to change for the better the system of health care in this country. the infrastructure we build to get their needs consumers and patients at all tables, their perspective is necessary to inshore or decisions regarding health-

we are not saying we are the only alternative worth examining. we are off on the right foot. what the commission will do going forward very briefly is the again, probably in moscow, flushing out the plan. we can assist those governments in outlining their own plans. we will generate greater support for the visions, president obama and president medvedev and members of this commission have embraced getting to we 0. we only have him briefly on the phone, we reject applicable of doing that, igor yurgens who is on the telephone in moscow, he has a few words to make. are you there? >> yes, thank you very much. can you hear me all right? >> we can hear you well. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. i am very excited to speak from moscow. richard gave a comprehensive picture of what we would like to achieve. as you said, very needed. without practical steps. 60 years, we have a full step. it is a gigantic test. president and, confirmed global zero is the target for mankind and the russian situation. we are heartened by this statement and we hope what will be achieved in terms of

guest: we are more ready than we were. i think everyone along the coast is more ready than they were before hurricane katrina, but we have a long way to go. here are a couple of examples. you can look at a map of all the shelters -- the majority are red cross shelters and they are school. if you have a catastrophic flood and people have to flee to shelters, let's say schools better on this map, what happens two or three weeks down the line when you want to open the schools for the children who should be going to those schools? there is no backup plan. number two, unfortunately, the bush administration was stuck on trailers. why? i do not know. if they just could not come up with something else. the obama administration has inherited this plan with trailers. if a hurricane five hits manhattan as it did in 1938 on long island, i don't know how many troops can fit in times square, but it will be interesting to see. -- how many trailers can fit in times where. we finally have a good fema director and has a vision and leadershi

the question of how we get there and how we do this is where the debate is. it is hardly a debate completed or overwith or a fate decome plea, and grappling with the numbers so that it is is a pay or play, and stay in the employer-based plans. that is critically important, if we end up with a massive migration out of the employer-based plans, we have a whole other issue to grapple with. i am the first to admit, this is a difficult set of problems to grapple with and identify, and it has defied solution for over half a solution. but the fact is that 14,000 people a day are losing their health care coverage and those who have it can't afford it, and if they have it, out of pocket expenses make it impossible to play. 80 to 90 million of our fellow citizens in a calendar year are without health insurance coverage. every one of us here in the desk have health coverage and we have the federal health benefit package and while we are worried about the crisis, none of us have to worry about paying for it, because we have a good health care plan, but that is not true f