tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN June 28, 2010 12:00pm-5:00pm EDT
complex trades, like derivatives, must be brought into the light of day. excessive risk-taking and abusive practices must be prevented. consumers must be protected. in the short, we have to do everything in our power to avoid a repeat of the recent financial crisis. finally, we made progress on a range of global challenges that are critical to shared prosperity. . >> we are urging our g-20 partners to do so as well.
this would be one of the most important steps we can take to create clean energy jobs, increase our security, and address the threat of climate change. in my -- and i include my proposal but the g-20 agenda. with a new committed to strengthening and enforcing rules against corruption, economic opportunity and prosperity will be more broadly shared. let me conclude by saying that i know that much of the focus coming into these meetings was that our nations would be /different approaches. but as we have proven repeatedly over -- would be divided by different approaches. but as we have proven repeatedly in the past month, we can continue to build on our shared interests.
indeed, that is the purpose of these meetings. we can coordinate our approaches and we can continue our relentless focus on durable things that put people to work and grows prosperity. i will take questions from my hand the list here. >> using your decision by the g- 20 counterparts is the repudiation of your view of cutting deficits cuttintoo big o fast would affect the global network? and you said yesterday that north korea must be held to account for the sinking of the south korean warship and that there should be consequences for such irresponsible behavior. what kind of punishment would you like to see imposed on north
korea, short of some sort of condemnation from the u.n. security council? >> and darlene, since your the first i will give you two questions. everybody else, i will -- let's try to stick to one, please. especially big questions. with respect to the first question, we helped to draft this communique which reflects our policies. i know leading up to the summit there was some sense of a divide. in fact, the policies that we have been promoting are reflected in the communique and entirely consistent with what the g-20 leaders came up with. keep in mind that we have already proposed a long time ago that we would cut our deficit in half by 2013. the time frame and the measures that have been adopted are
consistent with our view that it is important for us to make sure that in the medium and long term we are paying attention to the big deficits and debts that we have out there. we did say at this conference is that we can all rushed to the exits at the same time. countries that have surpluses should think about how they can spur growth and demand. not all of these involve stimulus. some might involve structural changes in their economy, or regulatory reform so that banks are lending again. but the point is, in each country, we have to recognize that the recovery is still fragile, that we still have more work to do to make this recovery durable. but we also have to recognize that if markets are skittish and do not have confidence that we can tackle the tough problems of our medium and long-term debt and deficits, then that is also going to undermine our recovery.
there are some countries -- greece is obvious -- that have to face measures immediately because they are facing a crisis. and there're the countries where the issue really has to do with -- there are countries where the issue really has to do with how we start doing plans. for example, germany, which cares deeply about fiscal consolidation. if you look at their plans, they are no more fought -- no more front loaded than ours are. in fact, you could make the argument that some of the steps i have already taken, the freezing domestic discretionary funding in my budget for the next three years, many of those
decisions are comparable to some of those decisions that are made by promoting fiscal consolidation. this has been an issue in which there is violent agreement. we have to make sure that we are not rushing to the exits too quickly, but we also have to be mindful that the debt levels and deficit levels that many countries r & r unsustainable. with respect to north korea, our main -- are unsustainable. with respect to north our main focus right now is to make sure that there's stand they engaged in belligerent behavior -- that they understand that they engage in the liver drink behavior --
solyndra vader. our experts concluded that north korea had carried out that attack. it was consistent with south korea's assessment and others who were observers in the process. i think president lee has shown extraordinary restraint given the circumstances and it is absolutely critical that the international community rally behind him and send a message to north korea that this kind of behavior is unacceptable and the international community will continue to step up pressure until it makes a decision to follow a path that is consistent with international norms. my expectation is that those who were here at the g-20, as they look up the evidence, will come
to the same conclusion. it is a bad habit that we need to try to break to shy away from ugly facts with respect to north korea's behavior. -- behavior, unner the illusion that it will somehow help to maintain the peace. >> before the summit, you said it was too early to tell if the revaluation of the rnv would lead to read -- real revaluation. you just said a couple of months. before you set a year. i just want to no. there's a reason for the change -- i want to know if there is a reason for the change. >> let me look at the transcript, but let me make
myself absolutely clear. number one, china has determined that it is in its own sovereign interest to move back toward a path of flexible exchange rates. we think that is a very positive thing. we think, in part, it is a positive thing because an undervalued rmb has given china a significaat trading advantage. we have made clear to them that we do not -- think that is acceptable or go along with sustainable growth that the g-20 countries signed on with. we're pleased that they made this first step. but we know that a lot of other countries our trading partners with china. the proof in the pudding is going to be a meeting.
we did not expect a 20% revaluation in a week. it would be disruptive to the chinese economy and to the world economy. we do expect that as more and more market forces come to bear that given the enormous surpluses that china has accumulated, that the rmb is going to go up and it will go up significantly. " we will pay attention over the next several months to make that -- we will pay attention over the next several months to make that its formula. -- make that happen. i do not have a formula as far as whether it is happening fast enough or not. i will leave that to secretary geithner, who makes these determinations. >> how long you expect people like charles schumer and american manufacturers who have lost so many jobs, how you
expect them to handle this? >> we are not going to have a colloquy here, but my expectation is that they will be serious about the policy that they, themselves, announced. i will work with people like senator schumer, manufacturers, workers who are affected by these trade imbalances. i think we all have the same interest. that is, the united states can compete with anybody as long as we have an even playing field. as i indicated in my opening remarks, we are prepared to enter into trade agreements with korea. one thing we discussed this whether there is a way to reinvigorate the dhanapaldoha r. i agree that trade can be a source of prosperity for
everybody, but it has to be a fair deal. it is not just currency, by the way. we have had discussions with our chinese partners about what they're doing on non-tariff barriers, what they're doing with respect to international property -- intellectual property. there are a host of issues. undoubtedly, they have some issues with us. i think we can manage these trade frictions, but i think it will be important for china to take seriously not just what we are saying, but a number of countries, including countries of canada, are saying. jackie, where are you? >> back here. thank you, mr. president. one of the non-economic issues that you covered here was afghanistan. i believe you said that the talks that pakistan is
reportedly brokering between the taliban and president karzai hold promise? and a related question, not a second question. >> [laughter] >> do you agree with david cameron that we can be totally out of afghanistan in 2015 and turn the lights off? >> i'm not sure that is a statement from david. but i will take the second question first. we have been in afghanistan for nine years. next year, we will have been there for a decade. this is now america's longest war and what that means is that all of us have an interest not an occupying afghanistan, but in making sure afghanistan is stable, can stand on its own 2 feet when it comes to security
issues, and is not a base for terrorist activities launched against the united states of america. i think that we are going to need to provide assistance to afghanistan for a long time to come. they are still building up a national government. they are in a very tough neighborhood. very very poor country. on a whole range of issues, from economic development, setting up courts, setting up effective police forces, a political system that is transparent and fair, as well as with respect to security, we intend to be a border with afghanistan in the long term. but that is different from having troops on the ground. i have been clear about the policy we are pursuing.
it was last november and we are several months into it. the policy involves us setting it -- sending additional troops. we already have approximately 68,000. we put in an additional 30,000 with the intent of providing the afghan government to the space and the time to build up its security forces, for us to be able to help blunt the momentum of the taliban, to clear some areas where the taliban have gotten a fierce foothold. to start moving afghan security forces in even as we are improving the legitimacy and credibility of the civilian government. that is the policy that general mcchrystal was pursuing. that is the policy that general patraeus is pursuing. that is the policy that all of our i s f allies and with
president karzai. now, it is tough. it is a tough challenge for reasons that have been amply reported. this is the third poorest country in the world. it has an extraordinarily high illiteracy rate. it has suffered through 30 years of war. this is going to be tough, but what i expect is that by the end of this year we will have seen progress on the strategies that were laid out, we will conduct a full review. those things that are not working we will fix. of those things that are working will build on, both on the civilian side and the military side, as well as on the diplomatic side. because ultimately, as is -- as
was true in iraq, so will be true in afghanistan. we will have to have a political solution and not simply a military solution. with respect to the negotiations and efforts at reintegration, i think it is too early to tell. i think that we have to view these efforts with skepticism, but also, openness. the taliban is a blend of hard core ideologues, tribal leaders , kids that basically signed up because it is the best job available to them. not all of them are going to be thinking the same way about the afghan government, about the future of afghanistan. if we're going to have to sort through -- we are going to have to sort through how these talks take place, but i think
president karzai's peace jürgen was a useful step. i think that conversations between the afghan government and the pakistani government, building the trust between those two governments is a useful step. i think we can get all of those regional players to recognize that it is in everybody's interest in this region between pakistan and afghanistan is not used to launch terrorist attacks. that will be a useful step and that is what we are moving toward. >> looking ahead to the supreme court confirmation hearings of your choice of elena kagan tomorrow, first, what do you say to the critics who are portraying her as a politically motivated lavorliberal? and given your own filibuster in the senate of a supreme court
nominee, what is your guidance to republicans that may be threatening that at this point? >> i think they should pay attention to elena kagan's record and her testimony. under the constitutional system, the senate is entrusted with the process of providing advice and consent. i am absolutely confident that if you give a fair reading of elena kagan's record and her performance in every job that she has had, what you see is somebody with an extraordinarily powerful intellect, somebody with good judgment, somebody who understands the impact that laws have on individual americans. -- individual americans, somebody was able to broker a differing opinions between people with very different
ideological bents, someone who is extremely hardworking, extremely intelligent, extremely personable, knows how to build a consensus, has been an outstanding lawyer, has been an outstanding team of one of our top law schools. a and even though it is my all modern, notice -- it is my alma mater notice i only said one of. has been solicitor general and has the support of a number of jurists that she has worked with. as i examine some of the arguments that have been floated against her nomination over the last several weeks, is pretty clear. having said that, i expect the republican colleagues and my democratic colleagues should ask her tough questions, listen to
her testimony, go through the record, go tour of the documents that have been provided to the senate judiciary committee, and then vote their conscience. >> [inaudible] >> vote their conscience. >> i have a question with two parts, if i may. [laughter] >> but they are related. >> yes, of course. [laughter] it has been noted the importance of the u.s. treaty that just marked [unintelligible] on this occasion, would you please talk about your long-term vision of the alliance and the
security treaty? is the structure of the security treaty sustainable in the coming days, especially with the chinese currency and unpredictable north korea? will there be more responsibility required on the japanese side? and the related second question is, in your meeting with hu jintao yesterday, you called for the corporation of the chinese and pointed to north korea as a consequence. is that alliance favorable and strong enough to send a clear message to north korea? >> let me answer the second question first. i have a conversation with president hu. i was very blunt. this is not an issue where you have two parties of moral
equivalence who are having an argument. this is a situation where you have a belligerent nation that engaged in a provocative and deadly acts against the other. i think is very important that we're clear about that. now, i am sympathetic to the fact of north korea is on china's border. they have a security interest in not saying complete chaos on the korean peninsula, or a collapse that could have stood-impact on them. i think the u.s. and the international community should be mindful that this is in china's backyard, so when they adopt a posture of restraint i understand their thinking. but i think there is a difference between restraint and
willful blindness to consistent problems. my hope is that the president will recognize as well that this is an example of yawning -- p'yongyang going over the line. this has to be spoken about seriously or we will not be able to have serious negotiations with north korea. every president in the sixth party talks would love nothing more than to see -- every party in the six party talks would love to see nothing more than to see these issues dealt with. so that china and south korea and japan and russia all share the same interests. we would like to see a denuclearized korean peninsula. we would like to see north korea be irresponsible member of the
international committee, which would be good for the -- be a responsible member of the daschle community, which would be good for the korean people. if we're going to be hooest about our basic expectations of how nations be of international -- in international waters. with respect to between the united states and japan, we marked 50 years. i expect the alliance to [no audio] the condition of the alliance is very strong. i have already had the opportunity to meet with and discuss issues with the new prime minister over the past several days. i think he is as committed as i am to making sure that the u.s.- japan alliance remains strong and vibrant. it is good for japan's security and for america's security. by the way, i think it helps to
serve china's interests and south korea's interests. it rather than set it up as a rivalry -- rather than set it up as a rivalry, rather than cede as this year's of it -- see it to do is to say there will always be there for japan. we will always be there for south korea. we're going to be a presence in the south pacific because we are a pacific nation as well as an atlantic 8 nation. but we want to partner -- atlantic nation. but we want to partner with all nations in the exchange of goods and ideas. asia is all -- obviously on the
move. china is on the move. that should not be a threat to anybody. what we want to be sure of is that true dialogue, through forms like the g-20, through some of the multilateral institutions that we have set up that all countries that are meeting their responsibilities even as their rights barack also being recognized. if we adhere -- their rights are also being recognized. if we adhere to the basic principle, the u.s.-japan alliance is something that can continue to be a cornerstone of a peaceful and prosperous asia that will benefit all people.
>> to follow-up on jackie's question, you talk about providing assistance in afghanistan for some time to come, but given the challenges in the -- and the history in afghanistan, what makes you think that after declaring victory in afghanistan that it will not slide back into becoming a haven for terrorists? >> i do not have a crystal ball. i think that right now, the debate surrounding afghanistan is presented as a, either we get up and leave immediately because there is no chance at a positive outcome, or we'd stayed basically indefinitely and do " what ever it takes for as long as it takes." what i said last year i will
repeat, which is, we have a vital national interest in making sure that afghanistan is not used as a base to launch terrorist attacks. it is true that al qaeda right now is in pakistan. where we in afghanistan if the terrorists are in pakistan? al qaeda is pinned down and has been a weekenweakened in part be they do not have the run of the territory. we would be less secure if you return to the situation that existed prior to 9/11, in which they had a government that was friendly to them and willing to house their operations. i do not think anybody would dispute that. a, we've got a vital interest in the region. b, we do not expect because of our involvement in afghanistan that the country is going to
completely transform itself in a year or two years or five years. president karzai does not expect that. the afghan people -- expect that. >> the president closing out the g-20 summit yesterday in canada. live pictures from the u.s. capitol this morning, a fly at half staff for the death of senator robert byrd. the house is about to dabble in for morning our speeches -- for morning ouhour speeches. live coverage is always here on species than -- on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the order. ll be in he chair lays before the house he mmunication from t speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c.
june 28, 2010. i hereby appoint the honorable donna f. edwards to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair would now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 2:00 p.m. today.
>> to this confirmation hearing just getting under way for supreme court nominee elena kagan. on today's agenda, opening statements from members of the judiciary committee as well as from the nominee herself. you can see it live coverage on our companion network c-span3 as well as c-span radio and at our website at c-span.org. once again, a live picture of the u.s. capitol here, the flag being flown at half mast today for senator robert byrd, who passed away this morning. he was 92 years old. he served more than 50 years in the u.s. senate, longer than anyone in history. we will now show you in the interview with senator byrd
from 1989, in which commemorated 200 years of senate history. this last about an hour. >> senate -- senator robert c. byrd, you have a new book out called "the senate, 1959 to 1989." why did you do that? >> i want my colleagues and americans to understand -- to better understand the role these institutions play. we need to develop an institutional memory. so many of us there now do not have the institutional memory
and we are unable to accurately interpret today's events and for see what will happen in the future. to do these things, we need to look backward into the past. >> this book is 800 pages long. how did you put it together? >> that is what i've referred to as in many manhattan project. they're almost 300 pictures in that book. there are 39 chapters. those 39 chapters came from 42 speeches which are delivered on the senate floor. these speeches were carefully researched. i read them on the senate floor. i did not put them into the record. the pictures came from many, many sources. it took a lot of people working together to do this job. the library of congress, the senate historian and his staff.
i have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours on it myself. i have proof read the book five times. i know every word that went into it, every,, every! -- every exclamation point and comma. i went over the design of the book and it took many months and years on the part of a lot of people. >> explain what this design is. >> that design shows the eagle and is all on lettered paper. it is an exquisitely bound book. the title is very simple, "the senate 79 to 1989 -- 1789 to
1989. >> can the general public by this? >> the public can buy this from the printing office. they can buy it at a cost of $55 per copy. they can send their checks to the superintendent of documents of the government printing office and they will have the book. let me hasten to say that i make no royalties. i get no benefits from the book. i would like to see it to sell because i want the contents of the book to become known are around this country. i want the senate of the united states to be better appreciated then what it is. not only by the people on the outside, but the people on the inside, and the people in media. >> tell us how you came to give
the first speech and what day was it? >> it was march 21, 1980. i was the majority leader. that year, i told my colleagues that we would have no will call votes on fridays. the senate would be open. we could make speeches, carry on business by grass vote and so on. in the gallery that day and my granddaughter. with a class of students and with a teacher and her father. i felt that in as much as -- there was so little going on, i should take some time and talk about the senate so that the clause would feel like it had benefited by its visit. that is out the first speech came about. the following friday, my older granddaughter was in the gallery with a glass, and she was one of the students. again, she was with her teacher. again, the same father, my same
sun in law, was there. i thought i would treat her -- the same sun in law was there. i thought i would treat her the same way i had rather granddaughter, but i wanted my son in law to hear a different speech. that is how it came about. those were the first two speakers. other senators who have read the speeches or had heard them at that time on the swap boxes -- we did not have television in the senate then. they said the pages to other people around the senate, doorkeepers and so on. they commented that they liked them and they wanted to hear more. that planted the idea, why don't i developed the history of the senate? ii could take a long time. i have delivered over 100 speeches on it. over the next seven to eight years are delivered speeches on
the history of the senate so that there are 100 speeches that i have made. there will be a second volume and very likely be a third volume because there is enough material. and maybe even a fourth volume. >> did you deliver all of your speeches without copy in front of you? >> oh, no. going from the first two, which were the extent during is because the circumstances just came about -- which were extemporaneous because the circumstances just came about, once i started researching the history of the senate for a series of lectures on the senate floor, then i began to prepare speeches. >> what is this picture from? >> that was a picture that was taken at a conference in room
207 just off the senate floor. president reagan came to the conference the day. he had been newly elected. we had a joint meeting of democrats and republicans. it is the mansfield room, 207. the camera caught me looking over the president's head. >> 300 photographs. i've heard this from people who have picked this book up, that is one of the most handsome books that people have ever seen. the paper, the printing -- who did it? >> the government printing office -- that is a senate document. the government printing office -- and the senate authorize the printing of it. the government printing office and did the work on that. the government printing office is not accustomed to doing this kind of work. there were a lot of bugs in it for a while.
i went over the galley proofs, as i said, five times and finally, it was put into shape and then contract developed by the government printing office. an excellent publisher and binder actually did the final piece. >> who did it in the senate itself? courts in the senate itself, the senate historian and his staff. -- >> in the senate itself, the senate historian and his staff. i, for the most part, did all of the work of the than the help from the senate historian and his staff. >> what is the feeling about this book? >> the senators are exuberant about it. everybody who i know that has seen it, loves it -- seen it
loves it and wants a copy of it. >> any idea how many copies the government printing office had printed originally? >> i believe about 10,000 or 11,000 copies. copies have gone to all of the depository libraries throughout the united states. those that are on the government printing office's list have received them. i have sent other copies to various colleges and universities, law professors or i have had access to the names because i want that book to get exposure. there are people that would like to have the book. it is limited in number.
there can be an additional printing, but there are people who will look at it, look at the pictures, look at the index to see if their names are in the index and then they will put it on the shelf. it is a beautiful piece. but i want people who would see class as and i want the media especially to absorb it so that they can get their facts straight. and i want senators today to read it, and the senator's 50 years from now, so that they will have -- and senators 50 years from now, so they will have a deeper appreciation. >> this picture comes from what era? >> that was a picture that was taken when mr. nixon was vice president or senator. it is a strange picture. it has only mr. nixon and he is
seated in the back row. i never really understood why the picture was taken, but it is quite a unique picture. >he is seated in the back area f the senate. no, he is not. he is seated in his chair, the vice-president chair. the chamber is empty. one guy is here, a tourist. there is a doorkeeper of the here. and the president -- the vice president is sitting there in his chair and he is looking back to someone who has a camera. >> do you have a favorite part of this story? >> there are so many favorite stories in that book. >> a favorite senator in this
history? >> i have several favorite senators. webster calhoun clay was a student of history. senator russell, i will have a chapter on him in the next volume. and senator and vice president karen burmaaron burr, i will haa chapter on him. >> i am looking at the compromise of 1850. i will get to that in just a second. there is a photograph in your of daniel webster. the you know when photographs were first taken of senators? >> i do not remember.
>> talk about daniel webster. and what you like about him in history? >> he was a great orator. we have to keep in mind, however, that in those days, senators had more time to they could memorize their speeches and after they spoke them, they could take their transcripts to the boarding houses. few of them had homes in the area at that time. they could take the transcripts of the speeches to the boarding house and work on them, edit them. what we read is not necessarily the speech as it was given.
>> do you think he would be a great orator today compared to what we read about him? >> i think he would be a great orator any day. but if things are different now. -- but things are different now. men do not have the time to reflect and right. and i assume that he mesmerized many of his speeches, as great orators did in that day. >> you mentioned clay. >> he was a remarkable man. he became speaker of the house on the first day he became a member of the house.
>> would that happen today? >> no, i do not think that what happened today. >> what about calhoun? >> kettleman was a four -- kowloon was a fiery speaker -- calhoun was a fiery speaker. each of these three was somewhat unique in his own right and each brought qualities to his speeches that perhaps the others may not have. you spoke of webster a moment ago. webster was on the payroll of mr. biddle's bank and during one of the great debates in the senate with respect to a national bank, webster took the
occasion to write to biddle and remind him that he had not received his check and ask the question, do you wish to retain a logger? -- retain me longer? that was an egregious thing in our day for one to be on the payroll of an institution about which the legislation is being acted upon and debated on the senate floor. >> going back to modern times, this jump in right here, i just read a story in the paper about him today. who are these two? >> senator mansfield and senator scott. senator mansfield was the majority leader, that time and senator scott was the minority leader. there were the first to go to
china when president nixon opened -- they were the first to go to china when president nixon opened the and doors. mr. mansfield had been in china and many years before in his life. >> he served for 16 years as majority leader. >> blooger than any senator house -- longer than any senator has. >> did you work very closely with him? >> i worked very closely with him for years. i was the majority whip for six years and i worked right at his elbow. and i spent as much time on the floor as when i spent a and -- as i spend when i became majority leader. i did practically all of the field work for mr. mansfield. >> what is this picture? >> that is a picture that was
taken at a time when we were meeting with mr. nixon. not in the white house, but in the old executive office building. i forget where we were discussing at that time, but as you can see, my hair was not as great a this now. it was black. jerry ford, he was at that time in the house. and you can see scarlett, who was the month -- see scott, who was the minority leader of the time. >> what do you remember about this time frame? >> about the time when mr. nixon was president? >> and possibly win those jamel were in leadership. the >> -- when those gentlemen were in leadership. >> i was before the problems with regard to watergate.
nixon was president with whom i like because he understood how government works. he had been in both houses. i had a fine feeling for him even though he later had problems. >> another picture of senator mansfield. what was his style compared to yours? >> there is a book that was written that answered the depression, so i will let that answer it. mr. johnson was the hard-driving type. the type that could towards arms, threatened hamas cajole,
-- threaten, cajole, to plead, and drive. mr. mansfield was just the opposite. he believed every senator would go his own way and make up his own mind. he did not attempt to twist arms. they have their different styles. they both were good leaders. speaker mccormick is there. the late hale boggs. and carl robert, and there's the late hubert humphrey. and there is mike mansfield with his back turned and his head turned. mike was walking away.
that picture was given to senator mansfield by the late president kennedy who wrote on it something to the effect, to mike mansfield, who knows when to go. it looks like mike is walking away from the center of conversation. >> who is the new arrival in this picture? >> that is the late senator dirksen. senator transco was majority leader and senator dirksen was -- senator mansfield was majority leader and senator dirksen was minority leader. the late martin dies, a representative in the house, was also a great orator. but those two men were the two leaders. they had an excellent report between them and for that
reason -- an excellent rapport between them and threw his massive influence, he helped to bring about the cloture. dirksen was probably the most influential man in the senate at that time. >> why is that? >> he was an excellent politician. he knew how to -- he was excellent. if there was any senator who could change and other centers mind with his speech, it was dirksen. there is a picture of mike mansfield and myself. he was talking with me. we were probably going over some with check. i was the majority whip at that time. we're pro we going over votes.
>> what does the whip do? >> when i did it, i did practically all of the floor work, which has not been the case with others. i stayed on the floor of a time -- all of the time. when i first became majority leader, we had jim allen of alabama who was an excellent senator, an excellent parliamentarian, a family man. he knew how to use the rules and the president'precedents and hew to stand alone. senator alan and i perfected the post closure filibuster. the filibuster that occurs after cloture and vote. that has proved to be a more
difficult filibuster than the pre-cloture philadelphia -- filibuster. when i was majority whip, i would act for the majority leader. then as i became majority leader, those battles would occur between jim allen and me, the parliamentary ibattles on te floor. >> there are some new faces here. there is senator dirksen, senator humphrey. charlie halleck, who is he? >> he was the leader of the minority in the house. the gentleman next to him in the center? >> i see tom kibo over there behind that man -- tom kegle
over there behind that man. the >> would you say about senator paulicjohnson? >> it was difficult to say no to lyndon johnson. i was one of the few to say no to him, but he probably could not say -- operate as he did then today. >> when did you say no to him? >> when he called me on one occasion and asked me to support the civil rights act of 1964 and i told him that i could not vote for it. there were some parts of that i could support, but some that i coull not. he started like this, he said, how bad the the one that judge it? -- how bad do you want that judgeship?
i had a man i wanted to see appointed as a federal district judge. mr. johnson called me on the phone. he was president then. he said, how bad you want that judgeship? and i said i want it. and he said he is not qualified. and i said why? and he said, he is too old. i said, you know, mr. president when you were running for president i went to the convention as a delegate from western virginia and openly announced in support of lyndon b. johnson. i was 100% 4 glyndon b. johnson. i was not a% or 90 -- 80% or 90%. i was 100%. that is the same way i feel about this man who ought to be judged.
by 100% for it. we went -- i am 100% for it. we went around and around for like a a half an hour, about that and then he asked me for cloture. and he said, you love me as well as you do dick russell. and i said to my do, but i'm going to be with dick russell. and he said, why don't i ask you to go on a trip somewhere halfway around the world and you can go on report on it and reboot your constituents and all of that, but then -- and a look good to all of your constituents and all that, but then give me the closure. and i said, mr. president, i am a member of the appropriations committee and i can go alonaroud the world anytime i want. at the end of it, i would not support cloture.
the church choir. elkton to develop his voice. he also got involved in writing plays and in acting, being the actor in some of the plays. he had a natural, a flamboyant way about him. he clowned paid always he acted with great theatrics. the galleries were always filled when they knew he was going to speak, and he had a marvelous mind. he was a big man, a fairly big man physically, but a big man mentally. he had a soul and heart. >> for those who have just joined us, we are halfway through talking with senator robert c. byrd of west virginia, chairman of the preparations committee and president pro tem of the united states senator and author of this book, "the
senate, 1789-1989, addressing the history of the senate." we will have the address on the screen. the u.s. government putting office, washington, d.c., 20402. i do not know that you do this -- i do not know if you know this, but if you buy more than one copy, can you get them cheaper? >> not that i know of. >> 3 senate office buildings, one of the named after senator dirksen, one after senator russell, and one named after this gentleman. who is he? >> that is senator phil hard. he was in the class of 1958, of which i was a member. senator phil hart took on some of the great issues of that day pretty was spoken of and thought of as the conscience of the senate. he often went against what some of the powerful political interests in his state would
have been for, or he went for issues that they would have been against. he demonstrated a tremendous amount of courage. he died of cancer during his time in the senate, so i have his picture there. i have senator howard cannon's picture there, and then there is senator eugene mccarthy. all of those were members of the 1958 class, and i have a whole chapter on that class. i am the last remaining member of that class. the class had some very remarkable senators in it, and they went on to become chairmen of various committees. as such, they were highly instrumental in the passage of very important legislation. >> what do you remember about senator hart ketke of indiana?
>> he was instrumental in many measures. i was thinking about muskie's picture, too. he was very instrumental in a lot of environmental legislation. there is muskie's picture. senator johnson is logging senator muskie's picture in that auding senatoroggin muskie in that picture. >> were you surprised that you were the only one, class of 1958, left? >> well, i guess i may be a little surprised about it. >> here is more of a cartoon, a number of familiar faces. do you recognize any of these? >> yes, i recognize a good many of those pictures.
>> is this senator russell? >> yes, that is senator russell, and there is senator dirksen just behind him. picture, senator bob kerr, senator william morris. >> senator william morris right here? >> yes. senator keating, kenneth keating. >> way over here? >> yes. >> how can someone who is interested in the senate and teaching its use this book? what is the best way to use it if you are a teacher? >> well, i am not a teacher, therefore i do not suppose i should attempt to answer that question except to say if i were a teacher, i would do exactly what i have done with this book. as you can see, i have read it again.
we launched it in february, so that has not been very long ago. but i have read it again since that time, as you can see from all the underlining. >> i want to show the audience because you do this -- we once before talk about how you read the book of senate president's every year -- a senate precedents every year. >> i have read the entire book. since it was published in the last six weeks, i have read it, underlined it, and in the margins i have written little notes as to the highlights of the paragraphs. in that way, i can quickly find some of the highlights that i wish to look up at a particular time, aside from looking in the index.
with all the information in your book, is it available in the congressional record if someone wanted to go that route to get the information there? >> they could do that. they could do that. however, since i made the speeches, some of them have been combined. in other words, the speeches have been put into 39 chapters here. some of them have been brought up to date as well. >> what is this picture? >> the picture over there is the picture of my receiving my law degree from the late president john f. kennedy. he addressed the american university law school commencement in 1963. upon that occasion i received my law degree and had the great honor of receiving it from him. >> so you have to have a law
degree to serve in 1989? >> no, as a matter of fact there were a lot of pretenders who were not lawyers, but most members of the body have been lawyers. i learned years ago when i was starting out, in both houses of the west virginia legislature, that the lawyers seem to be the movers and shakers. they knew more about parliamentary procedure, and i decided i should try to get lawyerly. i just wanted to be a better servant. i wanted to make myself more able. >> do you recognize this picture? >> that picture, yes. i believe that is -- toch i scheck. that is senator dirksen to the left, and then i believe senator spark man is on the other side.
>> let's see what we have here on the next page. >> that is a picture of president eisenhower having a little fun with the late speaker rayburn. i believe that is senator russell mom there in the center. i do not recognize the others in the picture. did youis is 1958 -- see 1958? i cannot see it from where i am. eisenhower was president from 1952 through 1960. where were you at that time? >> i was in the house, 1953, january, when -- i was in the seine at of the last two years of mr. eisenhower's second term. >> it includes joe martin and sam rayburn. who were they? >> sam rayburn -- at the time that picture was taken, you see,
when i was first in the house commend joe martin was the majority leader that first year. republicans had taken control in the 1952 elections, so joe martin was the speaker. mr. rayburn was the majority leader. >> bill mullin. who is he? >> he was the majority leader in the senate. >> if these four gentlemen were here today, with the senate be different than is? >> now, they would not operate like they did today if they were here in the senate. >> how would they change? >> well, the makeup of the senate has changed when lyndon johnson was majority leader, the great issue of that day was the civil rights issue. speaker russell and the southern bloc constituted a homogeneous block, and all the old confederate states of america
were represented by democratic senators. >> did you respect this man? >> the late senator richard russell? yes. because he was a man who revered the senate, and he was keenly astute to its rules and precedents and traditions. >> what would he think of television in the senate today? >> he probably would not have gone for it. >> this photograpp? >> that is a photograph of -- oh, yes -- john burkett pushed the broader amendment. -- john bricker pushed the bricker and then it? >> the remember what the eight
sick -- what the andaman was? >> yes, it had to do with treaties. a substitute for it almost past, but the vote of the late senator kilgore of west virginia, one of my predecessors, who cast the deciding vote against it. that is the picture was taken on the white house steps when mr. eisenhower was -- that was very early in his presidency, and there is mark sullivan there with him. beside her, a new member of the house, sanford dale. beside him and jack brooks, there is a picture of me metcalf. bob monahan of west virginia. and some others. i can't recognize them from here. >> when we first started talking about all this, you said you hoped that the press, students and all, would read this? why does it matter? >> it matters a great deal.
let me explain. the people in the media need to know the history of the united states senate if they're going to accurately report on it and interpret the day's events. to accurately interpret today's events in the light of history. for example, following the tower nomination vote, i heard a very fine news reporter make the statement on a tv show. she was on a panel and she said the senate will never be the same again. well, that reflected to me a lack of institutional memory. the senate is already the same again. i mean, those things come and go. that is why we need to read the history began seeing president
tanner's time for example, 1843 -- said in the name of caleb cushing to be secretary of the treasury. the bill on march 3 because in those days congress wound up its work on march 3. a new congress convened on march 4, and preston -- presidents would come up to the capital and sit in the vice-president's room, which is where the leaders are now, across the old senate chamber, and sent across nominations and sign bills. caleb cushing was sent in and he was rejected by 27-19. the hour immediately sent him back in to be secretary of the treasury. it was then 27 to nine. he immediately sent to cushing's name. then it was voted out 29-2.
kyler's nominee for a minister to brazil was rejected. his minister to france was rejected. his nominee for secretary of war was rejected. his nominee for secretary of the navy was rejected. his nominee for the supreme court was rejected. yet the senate got over it. the same thing can be said with respect to the imbroglio in which the senator from mississippi drew a gun on senator thomas hart benton of misery on the senate floor, the old senate chamber -- of missouri on the senate floor, the old senate chamber. you talk about fireworks, bitterness, and anchor and passion. -- and anger and passion. they were arguing over abolitionist legislation, petitions, the free state vs. the slave states.
deep passions. foot do 8-foot drew a gun on thomas hart benton. -- foot drew a gun on thomas hart benton. he had made a vitriolic speech title of quote the crime of kansas," and he was sitting at his desk striking out the speech to his constituents, and a relative of sandrenter becker, o had been a subject of senator possible vitriolic invective, came in and said, "i want to settle a little matter with you. i did not like what you had to say about my kinsman. he proceeded to beat charles sumner with a cane. as sumner was rising, he ripped
up his desk and he was out of the senate for about three years. things like that have happened. clay fought a duel with john randolph of virginia representative randolph. clay shot a hole through randolph's coat, whereupon randolph shot into the air with his pistol, through his pistol down, sure cans with clay, and said, you owe me a coat. consider a bitterness over a nomination, that the senate would never be the same again. one will see that the senate has been here a long time, 200 years, and its roots go far deeper than 1789. >> i want you to talk about this set of photographs george tames of "the new york times" took
them. there's a whole series of them. why did you include these? >> theodore francis was about 90 years old when this picture was taken. he was chairman of the foreign relations committee in the senate. one of the newspapers had recommended that green give up the chairmanship. and green was about to give it up, and so stated. well, lyndon johnson wanted green to carry out his decision, but he wanted to make green feel that lyndon johnson, who was the leader, would like for him to stay. that is a picture following a meeting of the committee when johnson had ostensibly to try to prevail on green to stay on as chairman, and green had said he would like to go off in the next room and think about it just for a few minutes. so johnson followed him out of that room. so beginning here at the top, you see talking with green, then
johnson gets a little closer, then johnson gets a little closer, and green backs up and gets across the table. johnson has greenback over the table and here johnson is right up in green's face with that typical pressure action that johnson could bring to bear, talking right up under your chin, looking you in the eye. it is like an old silent picture film, and it shows green backing away. >> anybody in the senate today deal with his or her colleagues this way? >> no, and johnson could not deal with them today. i keep saying that. johnson could not deal with them today. we have a different type in the senate, different types of senators in in those days, as i said, johnson had the southern blot. today many of those old confederate states are represented by republicans, so
johnson would not have had that solid southern bloc packing. >> who are these three gentlemen? >> that picture there is president taft. >> in the middle? >> in the middle. on this side is his son, who later became a senator, and one of the great centers, whose pictures are in the medallions and the senate reception room. >> on the other side is another? is that the robber tap that became the senator? >> no, that sun did not become a senator. this one became the leader of the republicans in the senate, sought on more than one occasion to secure the nomination for president. >> on the other side of the page, we have robert taft again. -- youe the only
describe the taft memorial on the capital. why does that -- why is that there, and could that happen today? >> well, taft was -- he was a powerful force in the senate. he was a great leader of his party. he came here being president -- at least he sought to get the nomination. he was in a very-he was a very influential senator. he was chosen by a committee of senators as one of the all-time five great senators, and those five senators -- their pictures are in the medallions in the reception room just off the
senate floor. >> what did his colleagues think were so great about him -- was so great about him? >> there are things that i have outlined. he was a very influential senator. >> was he a good orator? >> no, he was not an excellent orator, but he was a powerful force. >> was he ough? >> he was tough. many people thought he was arrogant. he was area dite -- he was area diet. he was effective as a leader? he was a statement. >> this picture? >> that is a picture of mccarthy, senator mccarthy and senator tidings. >> whose son, joe tidings, also was in the senate? >> yes, and miller tidings lost the election in maryland.
as the book will explain, he lost to a man who was a protege of mccarthy. as the book states, mccarthy's diatribes and been victims accusations helped to bring about the defeat of tidings. >> when worried -- where were you when senator mccarthy was in the senate? >> i was in the house. >> what did you think about him? >> i did not remember when i thought about him at the time. i was a new member of the house, serving in the house, has served their three terms. i was not a close observer of >> what is this photo? the old senate chamber. i think remember reading where it was a day that for some reason or other you could not
get into the senate chamber itself. >> yes, that is the old senate chamber. they were meeting at that time to debate the nato agreement. that is president barkley. >> alvin barkley, vice-president at the time right here? >> yes. >> was this the proper whole of the senate at that time? >> while they were renovating the chamber in which we now sit, the members moved into the chamber which we now use, in 1869. i remember coming here as a boy scout when they were renovating the senate chamber that we are now in. at that time the senators met in the old senate chamber. >> in the senate and legally
meet anywhere it wants to? >> well, the senate can meet, if it passes a resolution to meet somewhere else, it can do it. as that in the old senate chamber on a few occasions. the president can convene on the united states constitution. the president can convene the senate anywhere he wants to. if there were an emergency, he could convene the senate on spruce knob over in west virginia. it would be hard for the soviets to get there with a battalion or 20 battalions because of mountain areas over there are like it afghanistan. >> senator vandenberg. >> senator vandenberg was a great republican senator, a great statesman. he was the chief spokesman for the republicans at that time in the area of foreign policy.
it was chairman of the foreign relations committee. >> two senators smoke like they used to today? >> now, they do not. >> any reason? >> i think it is like you see anywhere else. smoking is not as prevalent as it was. the survey was not with senators. >> do you recognize these three gentlemen? >> yes, there is senator connolly, tom connally, who is also chairman of the foreign relations committee and 1.3 there is senator vandenberg, the late secretary of state, john foster dulles. he was secretary of state when i was in the house of serbs ended spirit i was on the foreign affairs committee at that time. >> anyone else -- we have a short time left and we have not even begun to look at all the pictures. you said there are 300 pictures come 800 pages. >> yes. >> when you read this book, how do you do it? do you read through at one
straight sitting, or do you come back to it? >> now, i read through. i have read it back many times to certain areas to refresh my memory. i am also -- also when i had the occasion to read it through, i look for any possible errors i may have failed to pick up in my five quick readings. >> how many people overall had something to do with putting this book out, who work in the senate? >> not more they half-dozen or something. >> are there any other seveners today -- senators today that have as much history as you do? >> there are senators that have interest in history. i'm not sure any of the senators have as much interest in
senate history as i do. i hope there will be others and i hope this book sparked a great deal of interest. my roots in history go beyond the history of the senate. i have great interest in the history of england, and the reason -- there are several reasons. one, it is very interesting. secondly, we are related to our english forebears' before the most part, i am interested in the history of england because of its influence on our own history and our own parliamentary procedures and on our own constitution. we value -- the legislative aleupower of the purse. and englishmen fought and shed their blood to establish control over in the purse by parliament.
many of our phrases and clauses in our own constitution have roots in english events. it is for that reason that i would like to know as much as i can about those routes because then i can better evaluate our own constitution. we must remember that the man who wrote the american constitution were fresh in the english experience. >> senator byrd, we're about out of time. here's a color photograph. it looks like it is the old senate chamber? >> yes. >> i'm going to show the audience the front cover of the book. the author is senator robert byrd. it is called "the senate, 17-89- 1989." thank you very much.
>> that was senator byrd in 1989, and we are looking at the u.s. capitol were the flag is being flown at half mast in honor of senator byrd, who passed away at age 92 this morning. president obama reacted to the news of senator byrd's passing with a statement saying he was saddened to hear this morning that the people of west virginia have lost a true champion. the united states senate has lost a venerable institution and the united states has lost a voice of passion and reason with the passing of robert c. byrd the house is back in session today in about 30 minutes to debate a suspension bills dealing with cybersecurity,
special education teachers, and agency payment oversight. we will go live to the house when they gavel back in the meantime, more about the passing of senator robert byrd. we spoke with a capitol hill reporter this morning on "washington journal." you. joining us on the line from "politico." is kady. you wrote -- he is the guardian of a round that so few understood. guest: it is a sad day for the united states senate and for west virginia. if lyndon baines johnson was the master of the senate, robert byrd was the keeper of all of its rules and traditions and things that most americans, when you tune into c-span, don't really understand.
use either terminology unparliamentary removing, but robert byrd was the master. not just as longevity -- more than 50 years -- but through his own hard work, he decided he was going to be an inse player. he would master the roles of the senate. he would figure out through his career how to increase its power by understanding the various ways in which the senate works better than anyone, well into his 80s and 90s. he could still go to the floor and he understood things better than sometimes the parliamentarian himself. so, byrd, he is the author of a history of the united states senate. when you say he wrote the book of the senate, that is literally true. host: legislatively, what will he be best remembered for? guest: it is interesting. it is hard to pick a particular landmark bill, but he is best known by most americans for the
lot of pork barrel spending for hihome state. remember, west virginia was and remains a very poor state. if you have driven through west virginia, and you can see his impact, ings are named after him. federal facilities have been built in the eastern panhandle of west virginia and provided much employment for the state. he was chairman of the appropriations committee until just about a year ago when he got gently pulled aside when became frail, but he is best known for his representation in the approiations committee of his home state. host: earlier in his career he was a segregationist, correct. guest: it is part of his biography. he apologized for it. he not only was a segregaonist but in the early twenties he was recruited by the local clubs klan chapter in southern west virginia. -- local coo clubs klan chapter.
he joined, and later quit. he says he regrets that part of his life. in his time he said that was the way to become politically active. it is an ugly part of his party and personal history. he also filibustered the 1957 civil rights act. civil rights act. it was a classic filibuster. he was a true southern democrat at the time, much like strom thurmond. against desegregation. in the last decade or two, though, he became one of the most reliably liberal votes. a full evolution. host: in 2008 he endorsed barack obama in the primary even though hillary clinton won west virginia by a large margin. guest: the full american experience, a guy who once filibustered the civil rights act was one of the key senators to endorse barack obama before he clinched the nomination.
host: now, he was the last senator to serve from the 1950's. what were his relationships with all the different presidents over the years? guest: they were up and down. he was a huge crit of president bush. he was against the iraq war and he gave some of his most passionate speeches in recent years against the iraq war. i don't know how deep his relations it has been with barack obama because, frankly, he has been fairly removed from the senate and fairly ill the last year and a half. remember, but when all the way back, he challenged the -- going all the way back, he challenged ted kennedy for leader and he beat ted kennedy for senate leader in the early 1970's and that put him on a different path. host: two things you report in your story that are pretty well known. at least one of them, he would
carry a u.s. constitution, a pocket competition. guest: it might seem a quaint to those of us who are on twitter and facebook and on the internet all day, but he carried a pocket constitution and to he would " from it. he said, you know what, this is all i will need iff-- this is all i need. but he was much more intellectual. he could go to the senate floor and in a speech, and he would " caribbean is from the bibleand sorrow for philosophy, and madison from the federalist pape -- he would quote corinthianfrom the bible and thoreau from philosophy. host: here is another quote -- guest: doesn't that seem quite?
-- quaint. host: he served in the u.s. senate since 1954. we want to get your reaction to the passing of senator robert byrd. marjorie from pratte, west virginia. guest: good morning. i can't begin to tell you what a loss i feel this morning. i just absolutely ado him. our state has lost -- pbs did a series about him called the soul of the senate. we have lost a soul of the senate and a soul of west virginia. he did so much for us. when people call him the pork barrel king, that term, i know, is it used as derision but for us here in west virginia, he brought jobs, roads, interstate
highway system here. a he really brought us from what i feel was almost a medieval type of existence into the modern state that we do have. but i would like to tell something that he did for my family in particular. my father worked over 60 years in the coal mines, and, of course, we know he was the main person who got the coal mine health and safety laws passed to protect them. when my father became ill with what they called black long -- excuse me -- when he became ill with that disease and was diagnosed with it, the opetors that owed him money for that fought him year after year and finally i just became so frustrated that i wrote senator
byrd a letter and explained my father's plight and asked if he could help. in less than six weeks my father had his removal ration -- real moderation -- remuneration. and my mother is still receiving the payment to help heart live a better life today. so he directly impacted my family and i am so grateful. host: did you ever meet him? guest: know -- caller: no, i did not. my husband met him on several occasions. my husband did work inhe late '80s and the 1990's in coal mine health and safety. he had many occasions to meet senator byrd. host: thank you for calling in and sharing your tory. this is from wikipedia, a little
information. he became the longest serving member. previously he held the record for longest unbroken tenure in the senate. considering his tenure as state legislator from west virginia, his service on the political front exceeds 60 years. byrd, and never losan election, cast his 18,000 boat -- 18,000th vote in 2007. and he became the last living u.s. senator from the 1950's. this means that not only is he the only person in u.s. history to remain in the senate for that entire period, but he has
outlived any other senator who had seniority over him. he is the only surviving senator to have voted on a bill giving states could to a u.s. territory. the next call comes from jim in raleigh, north carolina, on the republicans alike. caller: good morning. i just wanted on behalf of the state of north carolina, as a north cleaning -- north carolinian, extend condolences. he was a great senator. he did it not for the state. as your previous caller just stated, west virginia may not have progressed as far as it had when it comes to infrastructure, etc., had it not been for senator byrd. i st hope that the u.s. senators and all members of congress will take a moment of pause during these times to celebrate his life and reflect on their integrity and their conducin office and what the true dream for this country was.
becaus senator byrd exemplified it. thank you. host: another call on west virginia on our west virginia line. jeff, a democrat from parkersburg. caller: i am a first-time caller. host: welcome. caller: i felt strongly about calling c-span before but never like this morning. i went to bed last night expecting the sad news unfortunately. i w lucky enough to meet senator byrd in 2006 while he was on the campaign trail in west virginia. and anyone who was ever lucky enough to see him speak live, he would we've wonderful stories, ann quite frankly, at the start of the story i wondered, where is he going with this, but he kept my attention and he would pull it all together about his humble upbringing and wonderful
wife and his experiences and wrapped it up with a one of the most brilliant political speeches i have ever heard. host: thank you for calling in. we appreciate it. 202-628-0184 is our west virginia line. again, from wikipedia -- just to point out, he did oppose cameras in the senate for a couple of years prior to that until he wanted to make sure the senate did not become the invisible branch. william, tallahassee, florida. caller: how are you doing today?
i just want to say i mean no disrespect for these guys, but there comes a point where people get too old to be running the country the guy did greatn his younger days but at 90 years younger days but at 90 years old, 92, there comes a point where things were done the way they were done in the past. this is the future. our country is in the position it is in now because of these guys running the country for so lo and not doing a job they should have been doing. he id a great job but i think they could have done better. and if they would not have been in office so long -- two new guys a chance -- our country would be in better shape than it is. host: here is a liitle bit from "the west virginia gazette." his wife died in 2006 --
our next call is from san francisco, robert, on our democrats line. you are on the air. caller: my heart goes out to the families and the people of west virginia and the united states. this man was a brilliant senator. i beg to differ with the gentleman who called adjust -- just a few minutes ago. i feel that senator byrd with a 21st century senator. there are so many people who are in the senate nnw who are young, and i hope that this country would not be like california, where the voters are always legislating instead of the legislators themselves.
it is a same that -- shame that we have term limits here, and nothing gets done and in the shape we are in, it seems like the country is going in the shape as well. putting all that aside, we have lost a great man. he has come full circle and i just hope and pray that someone from west virginia could step into his shoes. thank you. host: speaking of that, this is from the state journal out of west virginia. what does state law say about the details of an appointment to u.s. sate seat?
the governor is currently term- limited. limited. senator byrd is up for election in 2012. if you count the months, there is 2011 and all of 2012, that is 24 months plus a little bit of january of 2013, plus six months left in this year. so, it is right around 30 months, depending on how they figure it. so it could go either way. there could be an appointee where they serve for the full 30 moms or somebody who gets appointed for a short term until the next election. philadelphia, james. caller: how are you doing? he is one of the few senators who carries a copy of the constitution in his pocket. i did not know if ny knew that. i have a feeling the democrats are going to lose that seat.
host: why do you say that? guest: the direction of the congress and the way va has been going the last election or two, i have a feeling it is going to go republican. host: the governor is currently democrat. the appointee will be a democrat. caller: until the e election. host: independent line, what you think about the passing of the senate. caer: a giant has passed away from the senate. he grew throughout his whole life. it started out as a klansman and became smarter and smarter. probably the smartest senator we have had -- not in terms of formal litigation, but studi hard and he learned and we are all lucky to have had him. host: can you count how many times you voted for senator byrd? byrd? caller: i have never voted for
him because i am a new resident of west virginia. but i would have loved to have. caller: ok, all right. pardon me. he was valedictorian of mark twain high school when he graduated in reynolds county, west virginia. and he went to american university law school at night while serving in the senate. in the late 1950's and early 1960's. decatur, alabama. you are on the air. caller: i want to thank you all for takingy call. of cake, and deepest sympathy to the bird family -- ok, the deepest sympathy to the byrd family. the stimulus package -- will
that continue to go on with him being gone now? would hurt the democrats? will a democrat able to come in and appalled d bush's vision and goals out? host: 57, 41, and two i think is the cuen breakdown. 57 democrats, 41 republicans and two independents. sohis would be 56 and 41 and two independents. so, the democrats still have a big majority in the senate. and the governor of west virginia is a democrat. and he could appoint -- he can appoint anyone he wants, but chances are he will appoint a democrat. and he is term-limited. according to one article, he could possibly appoint himself as well because he is term-
limited as governor. back to the article from "the west virginia gazette." here is how it concludes -- on the republican line is david from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: just wanted to make one point. a democrat who mentioned thahe was in the klan. it just wanted to expound on that -- because if it was a republican we would be talking about his past. he was a 20-year-long membe i did not know the hierarchy. not a member myself. but once i heard the term, grand
-- something like that. maybe the people in west virginia can enlighten me. meaning he was a recruiter, he would bring young men i and send them out to terrorize blacks. interesting you hear black people praising him today. it is really strange. also, he once referred to the black race during the confederate flag talks, way back, called them a mongrel race and he used the n-word on "meet the press" referring to white trash as white -- you know what. just to juxtaposed -- just remember if trent lott had been 20-year-long member of the klan. he never would have gotten into the senate. i think the double standards are amazing. i don't personally believe that white men like this change. i think it is the opportunity. i am not a member of the clan but i'm a conservative who believ in -- has pride in my
heritage and race and i do believe that people like him just decide to stick a knife n the back of their own kind and do what they can to advance themselves and the democrat party. host: what you mean by their own kind? caller: members of our own race. he profited all his life because of his race and like so many others turned on his race through affirmative-action policies and many others. host: according to wikipedia, he is the only senator to voted -- who voted against nominations of thurgood marshall and clarence thomas. ed in for campbell, ky. go-ahead with ur comments. caller: i am saddened to learn about senator byrd's debt. as a politician i did not care for a lot of things. i pulled out a piece o memorabilia that i had. from march of 1979 when senator byrd actually. on the grand old opry in
nashville, tennessee. most of the people on the peak -- on the sheet i am looking at, the program, most of these people are all dead and gone and i remember the weekend he. on the standard candy company portion of the opera -- this is primarily for people like senator byrd -- he autographed by program backstage. i asked him to. the funniest thing i remember about our conversation back there, i have an autographed copy of an album he made called "now and fiddler." most probably are not aware he enjoyed music much less pyed a musical instrument. but he did. and he signed this thing and he asked me who my favorite politician -- i am trying remember part of the conversation. i told him i said, senator byrd, to be honest, i am not really particularly fond of any
politician. his head jerked back and he kind of laugd and he said, well, son, decant be all that bad being here of the grand ole opry on this beautiful saturday night in march. he was just, like a lot of folks i have seen around at festivals of around the country, he loved it. he loved it at at time. i had not heard him speech because i would watch him a lot on c-span, any time i had a chance because i like the man as a person. i did not care much about the politics, like i say, of anybody. host: thank you for calling him. i remember once interviewing him and asking him one question and 60 minutes later the interview was over and i was done. one answer, one question. it was easy. margaret, west virginia. democrat. please go ahead with your
comments. caller: i serve on the west virginia state democratic executive committee. and i feel today it is a very sad day for the people of west virginia. we just came back, just got back last night from charleston, our state cital, where we had our executive committee meeting. and we had banquets and luncheons and we are honored senator byrd with a film at a banquet on saturday night. he was our friend, and he made sure that the people of west virginia knew it. he was always there for us and for the country. he so regreted bush sending the troops and he said at the time that he weeps for his country. and today i personall weep for our state and the people of west
virginia who have lost their beloved senator robert byrd. host: margaret, did you know last night that this was commng? were you pretty suspicious about that? caller: yes, yes. we received word that he was gravely ill. it and we were expecting it. but even when you expected, it is such a loss to our state and to the nation, in my opinion. host: what wahis involvement in the state democratic party? caller: he was very involved. i would like to think ohim as our chief alert -- cheerleader. he always gave hisll. and at every opportunity, he would put west virginia and a positive light. he cared so much for the people. he used to like to stay in private homes when he would be traveling in west virginia during campaigns or other events. he preferred being with the pele. he truly was the people's
senator, and he cared so deeply about everyone, and most of all, i think his beloved erma, when he lost her, it was different. but he came back and was determined to fight. i can honestly say that he was my friend and i loved him. host: do you remember the last conversation you had with the senator? caller: yes, i do, and i also remember when i was honored as an outstanding democrat. he held my hand. host: what was that last conversation? caller: he held my hand -- that last conversation was two years ago. when he was in west virginia to speed -- speak. he met with a lot of us. he really gave us a pep talk about our party, and serving the people.
host: finally, margaret. was there any discussion -- i hate that, i know he just passed -- but was there any discussion last night about a potential appointee that the governor might make? >> we are leaving this "washington journal" segment to go live to the u.s. house. there maybe two bids to the late senator, robert byrd, who passed away today at the age of 92. funeral arrangements have not yet been announced. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father coughlin. chaplain coughlin: in your
creative hands, o lord, every guardon needs more attention. education and formation of character is never a finished product for your people. constant care and oversight, as well as analysis and fresh energy are required daily for governance of a good society. therefore, lord god, grant your servants patients, perseverance, and determination to work hard to attain the goals your providence sets before us today and every day, as long as loif shall last. -- life shall last. reward the long labor of senator robert byrd. grant him eternal rest, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof.
pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, thh journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from south carolina, mr. wilson. mr. wilson: will everyone, including our guesss in the balcony, please join in. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the majority leader rise? mr. hoyer clorks to address the house for one minute. -- mr. hoyer: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: i rise to honor the memory of one of maryland's finest, a member of our maryland state police. maryland state trooper wesley
brown who was shot to death without warning while working on an off-duty security detail in the early morning of june 11. he was 24 years of age. though his life was cut far too short, trooper brown filled the years he was given with service to his community, mentoring young men, and love for his family. it wasn't enough for wesley to serve as a decorated state trooper for more than three years, he also found an organization called, young men enlightening younger men, a group dedicated to teaching life and leadership skills to boys in wesley's seat pleasant neighborhood, just a couple miles from where i grew up in district heights, maryland. many of them came to regard trooper brown was a father figure. i became a young man said one of the pupils at his memorial sr. viss and i'll never forget
that smile -- service and i'll never forget that smile. wesley brown's death was sudden and unfair. but his commute is better because he lived and the seeds he sewed will outlive him. as the pathsor said in the eulogy, i wrote, he showed us how to serve his brother man and no one had to beg him to do it. may all those whom trooper brown left behind, his mother, his father, his fiance, his seven brothers and sisters, and his grandmother find comfort in the memory of his service and the greatness of his contribution. to other young people. we are protected every day by those who have the courage and commitment and love of country and neighbors to defend us here, our domestic defenders. wesley brown was one of those. god bless his soul.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman froo south carolina is recognized for one minute to address the house. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, today all across south carolina residents are celebrating carolina day to commemorate the brave south carolina patriots who defeated the british fleet on june 28, 1786, promoting american independence. this victory saved charleston from british occupation for another four years. it occurred at the first fort on sullivan's island, later named after his commander. the battle is known as the first decisive victory by american revolutionaries. this battle is just one example of the direct role south carolina played in the revolutionary war. throughout the war for independence, more than 200 battles and engagements took place in south carolina. more than any other province. one popular symbol of south
carolina leadership in the revolution is still seen today throughout the world. the yellow flag that reads, don't tread on me. in 1773 -- 1775, colonel gaston was representing south carolina in the continental congress. history recorded that he presented his flag to a new commander in chief of the navy, common door hopkins, before this critical mission. in conclusion, god bless our troops. we'll never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. best wishes to u.s.c. gamecocks in the college world series tonight in omaha, nebraska. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. kucinich: i request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. kucinich: in a little more than a year the united states threw $12 billion in cash, much in hundred bills, shrink
wrapped, loaded on to palettes. "vanity fair" reported in 2004 that at least $9 billion of the cash had gone missing, unaccounted for. nine billion. today we learn that suitcases of $3 billion in cash have openly moved through the kabul armente. one quoted by the "wall street journal" said, quote, a lot looks like our tax dollars being stolen, end quote. consider this as the american people sweat out extension of the unemployment benefits. last week the b.b.c. reported the u.s. military has been giving tens of millions of dollars to afghan security firms who are funneling the money to warlords. add to that a corrupt afghan government. and now roars indicate congress is preparing to attach $10 billion in state education funding to a $33 billion spending bill to keep the war going. back home millions of americans are out of work. losing their homes, losing their savings. their pensions, retirement
security, we are losing our nation to rise above the necessity of war. bring our troops home. end the war. secure our economy. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from ohio rise. is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, address the house this afternoon to remind our nation what happened last 48 hours. discuss of the korean peninsula. mr. djou: i represent a congressional district that is in the flight arc of the ballistic missiles. i'm troubled by "the washington post" report that the korean workers party in north korea is trying to manage a transfer of a dictatorship to his son. i believe the united states needs to double its efforts to change a regime and establish a democratic and united korea. i'm also encouraged by the opportunity and compliment
president obama for committing to a free trade agreement between the united states and south korea. now is the time for us to further cement orr bonds and relationship between the united statee and south korea and make sure that we change the dictatorship in north korea for the betterment of our nation and the world as a whole. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to congratulate the 2010 stanley cup champions, the chicago blackhawks. tounded in 1926 -- founded in 1926, the blackhawks have one of the national hoggy league's original six teams. the team has had a remarkable history, but this past season was very, very special. on april 6, the hawks won their 50th game of the season, set agnew franchise record for wins
in a season during a game the very next night they scored their 109th point of season, setting yet another franchise record. the hawks made the playoffs for the second season in a row this year with a record of 52-22-8. they went on to defeat the nashville predators in the first round of the stanley cup then to vancouver canucks, and san jose sharks before facing the philadelphia flyers in the final round. in a tense game six the hawks defeated the flyers when patrick cane scored the game winning goal in sudden death overtime marking the team's fourth stanley cup championship, their first since 1961. as the world saw during the chicago, the sports fans moved past their long time baseball rivalries and came together. mr. speaker, i would like to congratulate the blackhawks for their title and thank them on behalf of sports fans all over the metropolitan chicago area
for their contribution in making chicago the dynamic sport city it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 , the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the votes incur objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken after 6:00 p.m. today. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from hawaii seek recognition? >> i move the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1244 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1244, resolution recognizing the national collegiate cyberdefense competition for its now five-year effort to
promote cybersecurity curriculum in institutions of higher learning. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from hawaii, ms. hirono, and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, will each control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, i request five legislative days during which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on house resolution 1244 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii is recognized. ms. hirono: i rise today in support of house resolution 1244, which recognizes the national collegiate cyberdefense competition for their five-year effort to promote cybersecurity curriculum at institutions of higher education. their dedication and commitment to cybersecurity instruction serves an important purpose as computer and internet software continue their vital role in
oor digital world. in 2004 a group of educators, students, and government, and industry representatives and cyberdefense gathered in ssn antonio, texas, to address the growing need for cybersecurity education for post secondary students. these individuals's increasing reliance on computer and it net software as well as the national security interest in protecting this vital infrastructure. from the gathering in san antonio the collegiate cyberdefense competition was born. the competition provides students the opportunity to improve their understanding and operational competency in protecting corporate network infrastructure and business information systems. for the past five years the competition has offered computer security curriculum to students at institutions of higher education across the united states. many teens participated in this
year's regional competition with winners including towson university, depaul university, montana tech, northeastern university, university of washington, texas a&m university, university of louisville, and california state polytech university at pomona. students from these universities learned many skills and their education will help meet the rapidly growing demand for cybersecurity specialists in the public and private sectors. mr. speaker, i want to thank representive for introducing this resolution and once again express my support for house resolution 1244 which will recognize the importance of the national collegiate cyberdefense competition and its contribution to our nation's cybersecurity curriculum. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii reserves the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from illinois.
mrs. biggert: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: so recognized. mrs. biggert: i rise today in support of house resolution 1244, recognizing the national collegiate cyberdefense competition for its five-year effort to promote cybersecurity curriculum in institutions of higher education. in april of 2005 the university of texas at san antonio held the first collegiate cyberdefense competition or ccdc for the southwest western region, the ccdc focus the on the operational aspects of managing and protecting an existing network infrastructure. teams acquire points based on their ability to detect and respond to outside threats, maintain availability of existing services such as mail servers and web servers, respond to business requests such as the addition or removal of additional services, and balance security needs against
business needs. the mission of the ccdc is to provide a controlled, competitive environment to assess the students' understanding and competency in managing the challenges inherent in protecting a corporate network or business information system. the competition is supported by members of the cybersecurity industry and by organizations that understand the importance of innovation in the field of cybersecurity. the 2010 winner the 2010 winner was northern university. i was to ask my colleagues to join me in commending this significant achievement, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from texas, mr. rodriguez, for as much time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. rodriguez: thank ou, mr. speaker. thank you for allowing me this opportunity to say a few words
on cybersecurity in this particular exercise done by universities. i rise today in support of h.r. 1244, recognizing the national collegiate cyberdefense competition for its now fifth year effort to promote cybersecurity curriculum and instruction in higher learning. the cybercollegiate defense competition focuses on the operational aspects of managing and ppotecting an exciting commercial network infrastructure. students get a chance to test their knowledge in the operation environment and network with industries -- industrial professionals who are always on the lookout for up and coming engineers. on february 27 and the 28 of 2004, a group of educators and students, government and industry representatives gathered in san antonio, texas, to discuss the feasibility of
establishing such a program. and this particular cybersecurity exercise with a uniformed structure for postsecondary level students. the center for infrastructure at the university of texas at state of the union agreed to host the first collegiate cyberdefense competition for the southwestern region in april of 2005. the university of texas at san antonio is a national center for academic excellence and information assurance education by the national security agency and the department of homeland security. the university of texas at state of the union is in my district, and i have been continually impressed with their pioneering approach to cybersecurity curriculum. they have outstanding faculty and staff, all of which recognizes how critical information assurance is becoming in the 21st century. this year's regional winners include mountain tech,
northeast university, university of washington, texas a&m university, university of louisville and california state polytech nikic university at pomona. i'm also privileged to attending this year's competition and personally had the opportunity to congratulate the winners from northern university. the champions of the national competition. let me just add that it's just exciting to see these young people engaged in this competition, and we're hoping as we move forward that this will become -- will allow other universities to participate and engage. these are the youngsters, in the words of someone who describes themselves as the geek warriors that defend our infrastructure throughout our country and throughout the
world. so it was really exciting to see them not only in the competition but participating, and we have these unique individuals that are extremely brilliant that are out there doing wonderful jobs not only for the private sector but public sector. in conclusion, i want to say that they are poised to expand and grow as cybersecurity becomes increasingly important for the public and the private sector throughout the country and throughout the world. i hope this body can continue its strong work supporting the cybersecurity profession while making sure that we are providing resources to train the next generation of cybersecurity professionals. i want to take this opportunity to thank the theirwoman for allowing this recognition -- the chairwoman for allowing this recognition to come forward. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii reserves. the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: having no further
speakers, i urge support of this resolution and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from illinois yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: once again, i'd like to encourage all my colleagues to support h.res. 1244, national collegiate cyberdefense competition, and i congratulate all of the participants and the winners of this very important competition. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii yields back the balance of her time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1244 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are -- ms. hirono: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the resolution -- ms. hirono: on that -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of takkng this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are
ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii seek recognition? ms. hirono: mr. speaker, i move to that the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 284 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 284, concurrent resolution recognizing the work and importance of special education teachers. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from hawaii, ms. hire ohno -- ms. hirono, and the gentlewoman from illinois, mrs. biggert, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks honor house concurrent resolution 284
-- and include extraneous material on house concurrent resolution 284. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. hirono: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii is recognized. ms. hirono: i rise in support of house concurrent resolution 284, which recognizing the work and importance of special education teachers in our public education system. they serve a unique role in our country's schools and their hard work equips students with disabilities with high-quality instruction and important lifelong skills. the historic ruling in mills vs. board of education of the ddstrict of columbia ruled that all students with disabilities must be offered a public education regardless of the cost and was critical in setting the stage for our current special education system. today, the individuals with disabilities education act opposed this legacy by working to ensure the education of all students with disabilities. it is important for us to continue working towards equal
access to education for more than 6.6 million american students. more than 370,000 dedicated, hardworking and highly professional special education teachers currently serve our nation's students. these teachers educate students with many different disabilities, helping those with learning disabilities, autism, combined deafness and blindness, traumatic brain injuries, hearing, visual, speech, language, orthopedic impairments and other types of health impairments. specific training and teaching practices, special educators can help these students learn regardless of their physical barriers. special educators have earned and rightfully deserve our recognition. they dedicate their time and professional careers to serving students who meet specific and individual educational plans not offered by a traditional
education setting. but special education teachers also recognize that these students are no less deserving than any other students of a high-quality public education. for these reasons and many others, special education teachers are particularly special public servants. mr. speaker, i want to thank representative sessions for introducing this resolution and once again express support for house concurrent resolution 284 which will recognize the immense contributions of america's special education teachers. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii reserves the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from illinois. mrs. biggert: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: i rise today in support of house concurrent resolution 284, recognizing the work and importance of special education teachers. special education teachers work
with children facing a variety of disabilities. some special education teachers work with students with severe, cognitive, emotional or physical disabilities, primarily teaching them life skills and basic literacy. many special education teachers work with children with mild to moderate disabilities using or modifying the general education curriculum to meet the child's individual needs and providing required remedial instruction. these gifted educators work with students struggling with speech or language impairments, intellectual disabilities, autism, combined deafness and blindness, traumatic brain injury and many other health impairments. special education teachers design and teach appropriate curricula, assign work geared toward each student's needs and abilities and, of course, grade papers and home work assignments. they are involved in the student's behavioral, social
and economic development, helping them develop emotionally and interact in social situations. preparing special education students for daily life after graduation also is an important aspect of the job. special education teachers help% general educators adopt -- adapt curriculum materials and teaching techniques to meet the needs of students with disabilities. they coordinate the work of teachers, teachers' assistants and related personnel such as therapists and social workers to meet the individualized needs of the student with inclusive special education programs. whether teaching a class of special education students or working with individual students in a general classroom, special education teachers ensure that all students have access to a quality education. today, we salute them for their commitment and dedication. i support this resolution and
ask my colleagues to do the same. with that i'd reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from illinois reserves the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: does the gentlewoman from illinois have any further speakers? mrs. biggert: i have no further speakers and i would, mr. speaker, then yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from illinois yields backs the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from hawaii. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, in closing, among the educators all across our country who deserves our thanks and recognition, our special education teachers occupy a particularly special place. i ask my colleagues to support this resolution and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii yields back the balance of her time. the question is now will the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 284 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative,
the rules are suspended, the concurrent resolution is agreed to -- ms. hirono: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii rise? ms. hirono: on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to the bill h.r. 3913 as amended.
the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3913, a bill to to direct the mayor of the district of columbia to establish a district of columbia national guard educational assistance program to encourage the enlistment and retention of persons in the district of columbia national guard by providing financial assistance to enable members of the national guard of the district of columbia to attend undergraduate, vocational, or technical courses. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from district of columbia, ms. norton, and the gentleman from california, mr. bilbray, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentlewoman is recognized. ms. norton: as amended h.r. 3913 would require the mayor of the district of columbia to establish a program to provide financial assistance to members of the district of columbia national guard, to assist in covering higher education expenses. the mayor would establish this program in coordination with the commander of the district of columbia national guard. assistance would be capped at $6,000 per year, per national guard member. h.r. 391 as amnded authorizes the appropriations to the district of columbia for the assistance program. the bill would also authorize the transfer of funds from federal agencies for providing assistance under the program. the initial authorization for the program is $370,000 in f.y. 2011. the bill would permit annual adjustments in succeeding years based on the inflation -- tuition and inflation index used by the secretary of
veterans affairs for educational benefits. as amended h.r. 3913 complies with pay-go requirements. mr. speaker, in addition the bill seeks to name the bill after former general david wherley of the district of columbia national guard. mr. speaker, all told national guard 547th transportational company when they were deployed to iraq about a year ago that i would introduce several d.c. national guard bills considering their service. today we consider the district of columbia national guard and college access act to permanently authorize funding for a program to provide grants for secondary education tuition to the members of the d.c.
national guard. the bill authorizes an education incentive program recommended by former engagor general david wherley and his successor, major general earl schwartz who suggested that education grants would be useful in stemming the troublesome loss of members of the d.c. guard to units in part because surrounding states offer just such educational benefits. i am grateful that the appropriation committee has allotted appropriation funds in some years. with smaller contributions from the district and the defense authorization bill. an authorization is necessary, however, to assure the d.c. national guard members receive equal treatment and benefits to other national guard members on a regular basis, especially with surrounding states that,
in fact, have the higher education benefits we see for the d.c. national guard. the guard for the nation's capital is severely undercompeting for members from the pool of regional residents who find membership in maryland and virginia guards more personally beneficial. mr. speaker, last week on june 27 we marked the one-year anniversary of the commemoration of the metro collision involving two red line trains that took the lives of nine area residents. seven from the district of columbia, including a local hero, engagor general david f. wherley jr., and his wife, ann. this bill remains the bill in honor cherly who not only served his country all his
adult life and never forgot the men and women who served under him at home or at war, but also was particularly attention to the residents of the district of columbia, especially the city most troubled youth. thereafter congressmanner if rano -- congressman ferrano, chair of the subcommittee was good enough to offer this renaming in his appropriation bill last year and appropriate the funds without authorization this year and in prior years. under general wherley's command the d.c. national guard deployed several of its units to the global war on terrorism. general wherley himself served courageously in both iraq and afghanistan, but at home he spent hours with me figuring out ways to get funds for programs for the district's children. we were always successful
because he would show up not only in my office but wherever he was needed to get the funds to do the service for his men and for the children of this city. general wherley was a full service leader. he not only commanded the d.c. national guard, he worked closely with me and with city officials on programs for our city and its disadvantaged youth and keeping our guard competitive as a force at home as well as abroad. as i highlighted in the original bill, the education incentives in this bill serve not only to encourage high quality recruits, but when appropriated have had the important benefit of helping d.c. national guard to maintain the force%necessary to protect the federal presence because this funding helps equalize an important benefit compared with
what is offered by guard units in surrounding jurisdictions which also are opened to d.c. national guard members. while the appropriators have been good enough to provide funding for the d.c. national guard by considering it a programmatic request, it is imperative this important educational initiative be authorized appropriately to ensure its permanent sustainability. i urge my colleagues to support the bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from from the district of columbia reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. bilbray: iam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bilbray: this bill quite appropriately is named in honor
of a individual within the federal district who served the community well and more importantly the context and the substance of this bill gives equity to those men and women who serve in the national guard for the federal district of columbia and gives them equity with those states that surround the federal district. i think that many times washington, congress is asked to take special attention to our residents in the federal district and i think this is one of fairness, equity, one that i think is well within our constitutional motto and our rights and responsibilities to represent not just those in our own districts but recognize the federal district is the district for all americans. at this time i reserve the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i have no further speakers.
is the gentleman ready to yield? mr. bilbray: i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california yields the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is wiil the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3913, as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to theebill h.r. 1439. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution
1439, resolution congratulating the chicago blackhawks on winning the 2010 stanley cup championship. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton, and the gentleman from california, mr. bilbray, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speakerr i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, on behalf of the committee on oversight and government reform i am pliesed to present h.r. 1439 for consideration. the bill congratulates the chicago blackhawks for their victory over the philadelphia flyers in the national hockey league stanley cup finals. h.r. 1439 was introduced by our
colleague, the gentleman from illinois, representative mike quigley, on may 25, 2010. it was referred to the committee on oversight and government reform which ordered it to be reported by unanimous consent on june 14, 2010. the measure has the support of over 50 members of the house. mr. speaker, june 9, 2010, the chicago blackhawks defeated the philadelphia flyers in philadelphia to win the nhl stanley cup final hockey series. with that win, the chicago blackhawks ended 49 years of stanley cup frustration with a 4-3 overtime victory over the philadelphia flyers in a game that was numbered game six. and linched the national hockey league's best of seven championship series. the philadelphia flyers were
worthy opponents and should be congratulated for a hard fought stanley cup series. blackhawks captain, jonathan taez, who scored seven goals in the playoffs and 22 assists, including one of chicago's first goal, was awarded the consmith -- conn smyth trophy. they were no natch for the hard hitting, exciting brand of hockey of blackhawks general manager and the head coach. not since the days of hall of famers bobby hall, stan, and goldie hall have the blackhawks
hoisted the cup. and chicago unleashed nearly 50 years of frustration with a euphoric celebration on philadelphia's home ice. i join my colleagues in congratulating the national hockey league champions, the chicago blackhawks, on their victory in the 2010 stanley cup finals. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. bilbray: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bilbray: mr. chairman, north san diego county i spent a lot of time in the water in the pacific ocean, but i never spent very much time object the ice. as a san diegan i find it interesting the entire concept of somebody playing a game on the ice, but i join today in support being this -- in supporting this resolution and
congratulating the blackhawks in their victory. i still would love to learn more about the game but i would like to do it from afar as long as i can stay warm. at this time i reserve thh remainder ever my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from illinois, the sponsor of the bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. to my colleagues, i appreciate their ability to pronounce names they are not necessarily familiar with so well and i appreciate those who co-sponsored this legislation. about three weeks ago several hundred brave chicago blackhawk hockey fans sat in philadelphia and wondered why patrick cane was flying across the ice in celebration. he scored the goal that no one saw.
the goal that brought an end to 49 years of frustration for blackhawk fans and exercise that goes to the demons of jack lemaire in 1971 and he helped make the chicago blackhawks the stanley cup champions. it was a long, extraordinarily tough road for these players. many of these players competed in over 10 games when you count the olympics. extraordinarily grueling stask for them to accomplish this, but that goal set off a celebration that ended with two million people in downtown chicago in a parade. it set off the celebration in philadelphia among the few fans there from chicago, and among the alumni of blackhawks including bobby, stan, tony esposito, and many others. . and many others who are no longer with us, including hawk
legends such as keith magnusson and but it set off an extraordinary celebration in chicago which for many of us is going on. there are many people to thank. first of which, as far as i understand, the only truly popular onle owner i know in professional sports, rocky wirtz, who combined his full efforts with the dedication to bring a champion to chicago. john mcdonough, the president of the team, jay blunk, stan bowman and scotty bowman who were extraordinary in putting this team together and advising it, along with dale tallon, who is no longer with the team, but we owe a great deal of gratitude. defenseman duncan keith, the james norris memorial trophy winner of this year. to a team of all-stars, including brian campbell as well.
we had several olympians who also competed. we have players who won the gold medal and stanley cup which never happens. the long-suffering, dedicated blalk -- blackhawk fans who enjoyed this victory ever since. fans to cheer for the years in which we didn't quite make the playoffs but they love the mad on madison. i yield back now, but it was a wonderful night and we appreciate your co-sponsorships. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: well, i want to congratulate my colleague, mr. quigley, and understand why he and chicago are ecstatic. i urge my colleagues to join me
in supporting this measure. is the gentleman from california ready to yield back the balance of his time? mr. bilbray: mr. speaker, i'd like to congratulate the gentleman, again, and chicago, which has had a good run the last couple of years. seeing how committed the hockey fans are, i will join with my colleague in urging the members to support the passage of 1439 and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia yields back her remaining time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1439. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- for what purpose does -- ms. norton: sorry, mr. speaker. i'll request the yeas and nays.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does -- the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass s. 1510 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1510, a bill to transfer statutory entitlements to pay and hours of work authorized by the district of columbia code for current members of the united states secret service uniformed division from the district of columbia code to the united states code. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the
gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton, and the gentleman from california, mr. bilbray, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i rise in support of s. 1510, the united states secret service uniformed division modernization act of 2010. the bill was introduced by senator joseph lieberman. it passed the senate by unanimous consent on october 13, 2009. s. 1510 makes long overdue change by transferring the personnel and pay authorities for the secret service's uniform division -- excuse me -- from the district of columbia code to the united states code. it creates a new salary table for the uniformed division and
also provides the secret service with enhanced firing -- hiring flexibility. s. 1510 deals specifically with the secret service's uniformed division. there are approximately 1,300 uniformed division law enforcement officers who help protect the president, the white house, foreign dignitaries and mission officers. the uniformed division helps provide protective arrangements of the president and other foreign dig any nears at venues around the world. it was endorsed by the bush and obama administration in response to the ongoing concerns of recruitment and retention among the u.d. according to the secrettservice uniformed division is currently operating under a salary schedule that is out of parity with other police forces. it performs similar protective tasks but has the additional duties and responsibility of frequent travel in support of
the services protection mission. in addition, the uniformed division has stricter suitability requirements. every officer must hold a top secret clearance and undergo a polygraph examine. it tells us that staffing shortfalls have continued to increase despite new recruitment initiatives. and these short dls falls incur overtime costs. -- shortfalls incurs overtime costs. there are costs associated with these improvements. c.b.o. estimates that this legislation would increase direct spending by $14 million over 10 years. under house and statutory pay-go rules, this direct spending must be offset and this bill is offset. the oversight committee has identified an appropriate set
of costs associated with the secret service bill. the bill we are considering today will result in a net savings for the government. the savings are captured in title 2 of the suspension amendment which willate the text of 2495 to the service legislation. h.r. 2495 or the federal -- enhancement act, which is now title 2 of s. 1510 will make it easier for the federal agencies to sell property they no longer need. this addresses a longstanding concern of the government accountability office and the oversight committee. as well as both the bush and obama administrations. h.r. 2495 was introduced by representative dennis moore of kansas on may 19, 2009, and enjoys bipartisan support as similar legislation did in the last congress. the oversight committee approved a similar bill in the
110th congress and it also passed by voice when it reached the house floor. lastly, in addition to strengthening the secret service and enhancing government efficiency, this legislation would correct an injustice for approximately 40 individuals who returned to government service after september 11. the provisions in title 3 authorizes the secretary of defense to retroactively waive repayment of voluntary separation pay for certain individuals who were reemployed in temporary positions by d.o.d. to help to respond to terrorist attacks. before accepting re-employment, these individuals were assured in writing they would not be required to repay their separation pay. in making these assurances, the d.o.d. components were apparently following guidance from the office of personnel management in forwarding management positions. unfortunately, this guidance was not applicable to d.o.d. at the time and d.o.d. lawyers have determined they do not
currently have the authority to retroactively waive the repayment requirement. as a result, even though these individuals receive written assurances they will not be required to repay, the department has since taken steps to collect the payments from these individuals. this is an injustice created by bureaucratic error and needs to be corrected. this bill provides the secretary of defense with the discretionary authority he needs to waive the repayment requirement for these individuals. i want to thank representative hank johnson and the armed services committee for their work and support title 3 of thi%%s legislation. i ask unanimous consent that a letter from the chair of the armed services committee, mr. skelton of missouri, as well as a response letter from the chair of the committee on oversight and government reform, mr. towns of new york, be entered into the record. i encourage all members to support the good government effort in this legislation. these efforts will strengthen the secret service, enhance
government efficiency and correct an injustice for civilian d.o.d. employees. i thank the speaker and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. majority. -- the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. bilbray: mr. speaker, i issue myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. bilbray: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i compliment the author of this bill. it is one where priorities are being made. many small in the bigger picture but at least the priority is being made. right now we're talking about the -- that we have a need in this country to help enhance the compensation for some very critical public servants, not just us personally but for the country at large. the fact is this bill will create a $15 million savings by looking atsur plus property
that the taxpayers are not only own but have to maintain at this time. sadly, mr. chairman, as that $15 million is a drop in the bucket of what we could be doing. as the office of management and budget estimated, the federal government has $18 billion worth of real property. that it does not need. and rather than selling this property or marketing, we usually give it away one way or the other. to local government, states or nonprofits rather than getting the fair market value. and i know historically we have always taken this attitude is if the federal government can't use it let's give it to somebody else. but i think we all agree with the budget crisis the way it is, we need to rethink those priorities and make sure that we recognize that the federal government is not in position of being a -- giving the largest out to the general -- other governments or nonprofits. now, i have to remind all of us
that this bill does make that priority decision. instead of issuing to other governments or to nonprofits it says, we need the money within the federal family and thus we will liquid ate this asset, create the revenue and spend it which is a high priority. i join you in supporting this bill. it sets an example that we should all be looking at and that is as we take this step the question will be, if $15 million is a good idea, where do we go when we're locking at the $18 billion -- lookiig at the $15 billion that is out there? i think those of us on oversight, especially the subcommittee that i have the privilege of being the ranking member on, procurement and oversight, not only have a right but responsibility to take a look at where else do we have resources that are not being tapped through the american people, where else should we be liquid ating our real estate, put it back in the market and do the magic that
the private sector has done for this country for so long? and how much longer will we horde this real estate when we do not have a foreseen or foreseeable use for it? so, mr. speaker, i join in not only providing the resources to be able to pay our men and women who protect us every day, but i also join in a policy that says we will now look at the resources of the american people as being that of the american people as a general welfare issue and that we will look at how best to be able to pay our bills with the resources we can generate by liquid ating unneeded assets -- liquidating unneeded assets. i think mr. chaffetz of utah brought up a bill that looked a lot like this. i know this house did not support his bill to go after and create that $18 billion fund for the american people, but i think this bill gives us something we can work with following the leadership of the
gentleman from utah and that is let's take a look like any family is doing today and what do we own that we do not think we can use and how do we liquidate that so we can get the resources and funds we desperate leet -- desperately need to pay our bills? i ask my colleagues to join us in passing this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. mrs. christensen: mr. speaker, i yield he to -- ms. norton: mr. speaker, i yield to the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, such time as he may require. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. i first of all want to thank the gentlewoman from the district of columbia for yielding. i rise to support the united states secret service uniformed division modernization act. but i also rise today to
congratulate the chicago blackhawks on their stanley cup win over the philadelphia fliers. as every sports fan in chicago knows, the hawks are proud to share the united center, which is in the heart of my district, with that of a historic team known as the bulls. mr. speaker, as my dad used to say, life is 95% anticipation, on to use the words of the great american value dear, it's been a long time coming, my dear, it's been a long time coming, but now it's here. hawks don't always get -- hockey doesn't always get its due attention in many parts of america, but some of the most memorable moments in sports are found in hockey. who doesn't know of the miracle on ice during the 1980 winter olympics at lake placid, new york, where team u.s.a. defeated the sovene yet team which was
considered the best in the world? well, mr. speaker, this year's stanley cup winner, the chicago blackhawks, were like team u.s.a., the underdogs, the davids to the goliaths of philadelphia. we weren't the fastest or the highest scoring team, but what we had was grit, drive, courage, determination and vision, to go with the fired up fan base. this is the first stanley cup win for the blackhawks since 1961. the blackhawks' recent victory has inspired all of chicago and aroused fans of the team to a fevered pitch. chicago is red and black all over. the hawks dominated because of their perseverance, hard work and dedication to the sport. it was once said, what destiny spins bear, whoever preserves will be crowned. the blackhawks have preserved and have been rightly croined --
crowned. i congratulate the blackhawks' head coach forgiving his team direction and instilling the determination necessary to achieve this well-deserved victory. and while handing out congratulations, let us not forget the blackhawks' team captain, jonathan towes. he possesses superior leadership skills and ability and was able to guide his team through to victory. and so i thank again the gentlewoman from the district of columbia for yielding. i was rushing hard to try and get here before this ended because i am indeed proud to represent the world famous world known, world renowned chicago blackhawks who make up a part of the heart and the spirit of the congressional district that i have the good fortune to represent. so i thank you, mr. speaker, and
yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, in closing i'd like to reiterate my strong support for s. 1510 as amended. the bill is pay-go neutral. it makes important improvements that will strengthen the secret service, it improves government efficiency and helps a handful of d.o.d. civilian employees who have been wronged. i encourage all members to support this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman hags yielded the balance of her time. the question is now, will the house suspend the rules and pass senate bill 1510 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection the title is amended.
for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to the bill, h.r. 5395. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5395 a, a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service llcated at 151 north maitland avenue in maitland, florida, as the paula hawkins post office building. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton, and the gentleman from california, mr. bilbray, -- the gentleman from florida, mr. mica, sorry about the substitute, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i ask
unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. ppms. norton: mr. speaker, i yid myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, on behalf of the committee on government oversight and reform i'm pleased to present h.r. 5395 for consideration. this measure designates the facility of the united states postal service located at 151 north maitland avenue in maitland, florida, as the paula hawkins post office building. h.r. 5395 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from michigan -- the gentleman from florida, representative john mica, on may 25, 2010. it waa referred to the committee on oversight and government reform which waived consideration of the measure to expedite its consideration on the floor today. it enjoyce the support of the entire florida delegation. paula hawkins was a republican member of congress who served a
single term as senator from florida, fighting to protect children and blazing a trail for women. paula hawkins was born on january 24, 1927, and -- in salt lake city, and passed away on december 3, 2009, as the age of 82. paula hawkins was the eldest of three he children born to paul, a naval chief warrant officer, in 1934 the family moved to atlanta where her father taught at georgia tech. her parents split when paula was in high school and they returned to utah. she finished high school in 1944 then enrolled at utah state university on september 5, 1947. paula and walter eugene hawkins
were married and moved to atlanta. the couple had three children before moving to florida in 1955 where paula hawkins became a community activist and republican volunteer. mrs. hawkins was the first woman elected to a full senate term without being preceded in politics by a husband or father. she was also the first woman to be a senator from florida. while in the senate she was the leading sponsor of the missing childrens act of 1982 which requires the federal bureau of investigation to enter descriptive information on missing children into a national computer database that can be used by law enforcement agencies across the country. with incredible courage, she shocked her colleagues by disclosing in a congressional hearing that she had been molested as a child by a neighbor. besides her daughter and her
husband, both of who were there, her survivors include another survivor, a son, a sister of sacramento, 11 grandchildren and 10 great-grandchildren. paula hawkins was truly an inspiration to members of congress and to women everywhere. therefore i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from florida, mr. mica. mr. mica: thank you so much, mr. speaker. and sorry to change committee representatives on you there. i'm pleased to yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's recognized. mr. mica: thank you, mr. speaker. and also, very pleased that ms. norton, the gentlelady from the district of columbia, is here
today. she chairs one of the important subcommittees of government reform and oversight. it's been my honor to serve on that committee for some 18 years and i think most of that time she has been here and done a great job in representing the citizens of the district of columbia. paula hawkins would be very proud that ms. norton is here today. and i served with two of those individuals, both paula hawkins and eleanor norton. many similarities, very determined women, and very accomplished women and women who love the people they represent and do a great service for them. i had the distinction of being the chief of staff sfor senator hawkins -- chief of staff for senator hawkins from 1980 to
1985. before that i knew her in florida, both in the community of maitland. i lived in maitland shores, she lived down the street in the city of maitland. paula hawkins was a wonderful lady, a great human being, a patriot and she really broke a number of the glass ceilings and barriers for women. i might say among her accomplishments are the first -- is the first woman elected statewide in the history of the state of florida and she did that on her own, she started actually in her community working on some local issues and she took those local issues to her fellow citizens and at city hall she had their voices heard. she wasn't elected to any position, just active community leader.
from that she ran unsuccessfully for the state legislator but when people -- legislature but when people saw her talent, they knew that this individual was a fighter for the people. in fact, she gained the reputation when she got elected statewide in the first office as the fighting maitland housewife. and she was known affection atly as the fighting maitland housewife during her entire lifetimex even when she was a member of the united states -- lifetime, even when she was a member of the united states senate. because she fought for the people in her community and she didn't take any hostages, she represents them well and she had her principles and she had her philosophy. she never wavered. i think per personal morality --
personal morality, she was a member of the church of later day saints, a mormon, strong in her beliefs, strong in her philosophy and that was also a guiding light for paula hawkins. along her side during that entire journey was a wonderful individual, gene hawkins, and gene survived her, she passed away, as ms. norton said, december 3 of last year. but her memory and her achievements do live on. not only as you heard ms. norton scribe was she elected statewide -- describe was she elected statewide in the state of florida, but also the first united states female senator in her own right, no family member preceded her, and that was quite an accomplishment. we think now that's some 30 years ago, but it was even an accomplishment in 1980 when she
achieved it. when she came to congress, she set her path and she had her priorities and one of them were -- one of those priorities were our children and youth. in fact, they committed to her care a committee that was called, i believe, family youth -- family, youth and drugs because she was interested in family, she was interested in youth and she was very dedicated to doing away with this scourge of the illegal narcotics. some people who get involved in committee work make their mark, paula hawkins set the mark. she passed, as everyone knows in the country, the national missing children legislation. she knew that missing and exploited children were a national problem but not a national priority. i remember when she said, it's
amazing that an automobile, a refrigerator can be quickly identified by our law enforcement folks but a missing children could not. so she set up the mechanism that long survives her in a national missing childrens center that president reagan opened on june 13, 1984. there are many accomplishments, too, and i'm anxious for this legislation be heard in the other body. simple things like there wasn't a senate daycare center and that daycare center's still operating today. so not just members of the senate and many of them are probably on the age of having -- beyond the age of having children eligible for daycare, but there are many hundreds of employees and staff who do have
children and paula hawkins saw that their needs were taken care of. just a small thing. there is dramatic legislation, most don't know today, almost all of the labor legislation. she was on the labor committee in the senate. it was interesting to watch her because being a male and you know sometimes men think a little differently than women. you don't think of all the problems women have. at that point in life she became their champion. so the labor laws in this country even today reflect her influence. simple things like trying to make certain that a single woman had some way to get to work. some simple way to care for the child. some consideration for the special concerns and needs of women who want to be productive in our society. and even the laws today have
the mark of a great united states senator. so today i know many people are focused on the death and loss of senator byrd and many of us who got to know him mourn his loss and many contributions. paula hawkins wasn't here as many terms as senator byrd. he was here for nearly half a century. paula hawkins was only here for one term, but her deeds and her good works prevail even to this day. so to her husband, gene, to her daughters, jeannine and to kelly and to kevin, her son, we're excited about having in their community and paula's community the maitland post office just down the street from where she lived for many years a small remembrance. and it is fitting that when we do remember folks like senator
hawkins that the public can enjoy their memories. on the maitland post office will be a plaque dedicating that building and that postal facility to the memory of a great american leader, former united states senator paula hawkins. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i thank the gentleman from florida for his kind and generous%comparison of my service with that of paula hawkins. she was much admired for the break throughs that her services -- breakthroughs that her services represented. i will ask the gentleman, since i have no further speakers, if he's prepared to yield back the balance of his time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: yes, i'll yield myself -- how much time is remaining?
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has 10 1/2 minutes. mr. mica: i yield myself the balance of the time and then yield to the gentlelady to close. again, i'm pleased that ms. norton would be here today and honor the memory of my friend. i had the opportunity, as i say, to have worked with senator hawkins, both as she built the florida republican party from precinct to the state level, as she built her reputation and service to not only the community of maitland, winter park, central florida, florida the state and the nation, but it is fitting that we do take this step today to name this structure in her honor, a small token of our
appreciation for her dedication, her service, her patriotism. so with that i'm pleased to yield back the balance of my time and, again, thank the gentlelady, and in closing let me just say that the gentlelady from the district of columbia probably knows some about my traits. but i have to tell her in closing that the one thing i learned from senator paula hawkins is persistence. it beats power, it beats position, it beats wealth, it beats all the cards that may be dealt to you in a positive or negative fashion. but persistence. and i think the gentlelady knows what i mean that i have a persistent -- that i am a persistent person and she knows the rest of the story where that persistence came and it it is from the lady that we honor here today. thank you.
i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: can i only say that the gentleman from florida learned all too learn the persistence from senator paula hawkins. may i say, as well, whenever the gentleman from florida is right in his persistence he'll find the gentlewoman from the district of columbia right there beside him in his corner. mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia yields back the balance of her time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5395. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- ms. norton: mr. speaker. i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking
this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. madam, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on june 28, 2010, at 9:26 a.m. that the senate passed senate 3104. with best wishes i am, signed sincerely, lorraine c. miller, clerk of the house. the speaker pro tempore:
cleanup efforts. >> good afternoon. welcome to the daily press briefing. i am joined by secretary napolitano. she will make comments. i will give you a quick operations update. secretary of paul lozano will provide updates. as you know, tropical storm alex sirte said it is going over the yucatan peninsula. we're watching closely for any impact it might have on the recovery operation. there appears to be two potential impacts.
the discovery enterprise will continue to produce oil for another eight days without a problem. begin. pretty good shape there. and when we did over 5 foot of seas, they will have to stop the preparations for the helix producer, the third production vessel we were born to bring in on the 30 as of june to help to the vertical horizon to increase production of to 53,000 barrels per day by the end of june. we will provide today to date update on up. regarding our production in the last 24 hours, we will able to produce 24,455 barrels in the combination of the discovery enterprise and deatthe q42000. they are beginning the third ranging exercise. that is the exercise where they will work of an electrical cord
down and read to milk the pridd. this will happen several times over the next couple of weeks. they will inject the mud. with that, we want comments from secretary napolitano. >> thank you. thank you for a very productive meeting in session today. i think this is my sixth time to the gulf since the spill began. it is important that we continue to expect everything that we're doing to keep oil off of the vital shorelines, to clean it up when it hits. as we all know, there is no precedents for leak of this size and at this step. the damage continues to unfold over the course of days, weeks,
and now months. if not hours or days, which is the way one normally banks of an oil spill. a disaster this is it leads to unforeseen challenges. i want to emphasize that through this evil the events we have a marshall the largest response in this nation's history. -- we have marshaled the largest response in this nation's history. we have created redundancy wherever possible, from directing bp to employ additional measures to contain oil to finding new ways to keep been cut oil off of the short lines. part of the reason for our visit here today was to make sure that these efforts continued to be as effective as possible, given new and evolving challenges, such as
the arrival of hurricane season. it is also important that everyone understand that the response has grown at every turn since its beginning. about 37,000 personnel are working round-the-clock to protect the shoreline and to clean up the coast. more than 6500 vessels are engaged, including thousands of locally-owned boats. 80,000 claims have been opened so far, and as you know, president obama was able to receive from bp a guaranteed to establish a $20 billion as growth fund dedicated to paying claims that stem from this disaster. we have pushed bp to create additional redundancies in the way that they contain the leaking oil. since the beginning we have dedicated resources to this bilspill as if the worst-case
scenarios would become true. we have spare no effort. we will spare no effort. our priority is that bp stopped the leak as quickly as possible, making sure that delicate shorelines are protected to the greatest extent possible and making sure the damages cleanup and claims are paid. no response will be finished until these things are done. we know that for many of affected communities in the gulf, the process of the recovery will last a long time. we are in the middle of a long effort. we will and are working with a close partnership with state and local authorities. insuring that they have the resources they need to meet the evolving threats from this oil spill. this has included daily out reached from top officials to local leaders, meetings and calls with the president, and dedicated federal liaison offices.
to coordinate closely with local governments and community as they meet the needs of their constituencies. the federal government will be working as long as it takes to make sure that bp stopped the leak, that the clan of the damages, and that the claims are paid. everyone has to continue the effort they have barred the expanded and more as this continues of an evolving catastrophe. we will not stop until the leak is plugged, the oil is clean, in the claims are paid. thank you very much. >> how confident are you that relief wells will be [inaudible] ? >> the current plans for a development drilling is to go
just above the reservoir area. they will insert mud. this is well below that. we have started developed millment driller two. >> this is an alternate source of production and redundancy. >> [inaudible] >> we have talked about connecticut action before. i think that needs to be very closely scrutinized. i do now and we're going there at this point. >> [inaudible]
>> the jefferson parish officials briefed myself and the president on this during his trip to grand isle. there are several the complicating factors that need to be taken into account, one of which are underground pipelines and the environmental impact of closing off the water flows. we talked about an intermediate system where we do a combination of barges to allow the free flow of water that needs to come and go to maintain the ecosystem. we came up with a plan, and it is a matter of executing the
plan. guest: [inaudible] n. >> [inaudible] gue>> there are variations on te same plan. variations on the same team and we're working with both local governments to do that. >> what is the timetable for removing people that are working on the well? >> there is no plan to remove anyone right now. the current and speed and direction of alex does not indicate we should do anything in regard to impact.
we have a set of criteria by which if we thought we were going to get killed force winds, we would start to redeployed the equipment. that criteria is not met in the current storm. >> [inaudible] >> we have not seen any oil being pushed further inland. we have seen it change direction. it was generally heading east because of wind conditions. we are now seeing its enter areas around mississippi. and we're moving forces there as we speak. any storm would cause problems for us. we will face the potential
through the hurricane season should we have any kind of heavy weather. regarding the relief wells, if we have to evacuate the site because of a hurricane, we estimate there could be a break of 14 days to take down the equipment and move it off to a safe place and bring it back and establish the drilling. >> [inaudible] >> if we have to take the equipment of sight because of a hurricane, there will be an interruption. we're watching very closely, and we know what the approximate impact would be if we had to do it, and that would be about 14 days. i think we're all hopeful we will get a break from the weather. >> [inaudible]
>> the last thousand feet is going to penetrate the well is going to be done very slowly. they will pull the drill bit back and put an electronic sensing device and. what you do not want to do is stick thatip the well bore. if that should happen, they could put mud into the well. >> [inaudible] >> it is ongoing because the well is not plug yet. that is bp's responsibility to
close the well. in terms of the assemblage of vessels on the surface of the sea, in terms of getting control of the airspace over the gulf of mexico so that we can control not only the air space, given the number of aircraft that are here, but have been controlled from the air to the sea so the plans as of the oil and to direct vessels to where the oil is to get skimmed and to pick it up, and then also to muster and record number of personnel on the shore line ready to clean up oil if and when they get theiri. the effort on the surface of the sea has kept a lot of oil from reaching the shoreline. given that this is day 69 or 70 since the rig sank.
we keep battling that oil on the surface. we will battle it on the shorelines. where there needs to be cleaned up, we will work with state and local authorities to get the damages paid. >> [inaudible] >> we are still using the persons -- dispersants. there is a coordinated use of dispersants. >> [inaudible] >> operator, do you have called on the line? >> we do have a question. a>> i was wondering what is the action in response to the hurricane activity? >> we've been the maximum
impact could be 10 to 12 peak season. the only impact on emigr operations will be a potential delay for the third vessel. we're tracking that very closely right now. >> the next question is from kristin hayes. >> i understand you will need on wednesday. -- tiyou will meet on wednesday. >> there will be a meeting that involves the science team that has been working on this bill.
they will do an analysis for a second kind of containment and have and whether or not that makes sense in light of the amount of oil that can be collected with a third vessel getting ready to hook up. there is that meeting. it really is evidence once again of the continued adaptation and accordance with the evolving nature of this bill. as this new methodology gets developed to apply to containment. >> the next question comes from terry weber. >> just so i understand you correctly, are you saying that if a hurricane force the
evacuation of workers, that that could shut down operations for roughly 15 days from the amount of time it would take the equipment? >> that is correct. the current estimate right now if we had to break production would be 14 days. there is no impact than the current relief wells that are being drilled as a result of the weather that is passing. the only impact is the delay in the operation to bring a third vessel online. >> thank you. >> your next question comes from richard harris. >> i wonder if you could tell us [inaudible]
? >> there are two different thresholds for the discover enterprise. one is that takes oil ashore. that is around 5 to 6 feet. it depends on the riser pipe and their connection right now. we will become concerned around 12 peet. the decision to disconnect from the cap and riser will be something that is made independent. -- we will become concerned around 12 feet. >> thank you. >> your next cquestion comes impala dietricpala diula dietri.
>> [inaudible] >> we are closely monitoring it at this point. >> operaaor, that was the last question. >> we're looking at a live picture of the u.s. capital where the flag is being flown at half staff for senator robert byrd. he served more than 50 years in the u.s. senate, longer than anyone in history. there have already been a number we will have those for you a little bit later in the schedule. elsewhere in washington, confirmation hearings are under way for ileana kagen -- elana kagan. we plan on hearing from her sometime shortly. you can hear the cheering and live on our companion network, c-span3.
a short time ago there was a briefing at the state department to outlined a strategy for making programs more effective and cost-effective. we hear first from secretary gates and then by ashton carter. >> i in the warm up act today. -- i am the warmup act today. [laughter] over the past month i have directed the pentagon to take a hard look at how the department is staffed, organize, and operated. the purpose is to significantly reduce the overhead costs and overt -- in order to modernize and create future combat capabilities. the department has set a goal of finding more than 100 billions in overhead savings over the
next five fiscal years starting in 2012. and as a matter unprincipled, we must do everything possible to make every taxpayer dollar counts. some of the savings can be found by eliminating unneeded activities. the leadership has already taken action in this area, and needs to do more. other savings can be found within programs and activities we do need by conducting them more efficiently. a large part of the activity is done through contracts, $400,000 across the department. in innovation and fiscal responsibility, ash carter, will be leading a major effort to improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the way we buy goods and services. in a couple of minutes before after carter will explain the elements of this initiative in more elements. -- and a couple of minutes dr. carter will explain the elements
of this initiative in more detail. earlier today dr. carter met with hundreds of ceos and military acquisition leaders to discuss the way ahead for this project. like all important and necessary changes, this process will take time, but i am confident we will succeed. how ultimately we as leaders in government look to our men and women of armed services to do what we can to provide them with the best support possible. >> thank you, mr. secretary. good afternoon, everyone. what i am going to describe is part of the efficiency initiative that secretary gates launched at his abilene eisenhower's speech some weeks ago and which debbie keri secretary of defense is also
discussed with you in the press room th. the motivation is that the senior leadership has concluded we cannot support our troops with the capability they need unless we achieve greater efficiency. i am going to describe the framework for a process to obtain 2% to 3% annual growth in war fighting capabilities without a budget increase by identifying and eliminating unproductive or low-value added overhead and transferring the savings obtained to war fighting capabilities. in effect, doing more without more. as the secretary indicated, today i spoke to the acquisition leadership, the other senior leaders are present in the press room with me.
we spoke to the department acquisition leadership from around the country. i also had the opportunity with them to meet with industry leaders this morning and now to speak with you. let me describe how this will work and how this will and gold ended two ways you might be able to think about it. you have the letter that i issued at 11:00 this morning. and then ttree charts that describe the specific initiative. let me begin at the beginning. the focus is on the $400 billion out of the $700 billion budget that is contracted out for goods and services. about equally between goods and services by the way. the charts are framework for the steps we're taking.
the first part is about incentives to industry to increase productivity, and the second is about how d.o.d can adapt management practices. the point is what i used the phrase more without more. this is what economists call productivity growth. that is what we're looking for. in the rest of the economy we expect this. you get a better computer every year and cheaper, but we have not seen productivity growth in the defense economy. more has been costing more. we need to reverse that trend and restore a portability to our programs. -- affordability to our programs. if you look on chart two, it suggests that i will issue guidance to make sure that
contracting officers are using the proper contract type to get the tax payer buying power. an example would is using a fixed price contract for the tanker, which we are doing. the stabilizes design and enhances competition. out of time the material contracts for services, which tend to lead to unnecessary cost growth over time. note that i use the phrase " phasing out." it will take some time. that is why we're setting an annual goal of 2% to 3%, which accumulates over the coming years. there will be a specific target for going down and getting leaner and these different categories. also on chart 2 is an important
item, leveraging real competition. an example is a combat ship. the approach we had been taken was leading to a pattern of directed by is rather than competition. a new approach ignites real competition. one of the reasons the department is opposed to an extra engine is we do not been guilty to real competition, but to direct by. a preferred supplier program . a consistent excellent performance will be rewarded by enhance profit. on chart 3, we're pointing to steps that government can take as part of this initiative to3 and encourage leanness and productivity growth in the defense sector. for example, the first chart emphasizes that while we will be
using independent cost estimates as forecast, for how much the programs will cost, we want the managers to acquire guidelines for what they should cost. chart three emphasizes that as we start the new basic missile submarine, the army's new in ground combat vehicle, a family of systems for a long trenc-rane strike, the presidential helicopter, that we need to make sure affordability and not just apatite are designed in from the start. these are some examples that each of those items will be pursued, and in the pursuit of
the 3% net increase in the fighting capability by removing inefficiencies that have crept into the acquisition of goods and services. over the next several weeks, i will be conferring with the acquisition executives and with the industry about specific ways we can do that, identifying specific targets within the frameworks when that i have provided to you today. at the end of that. -- at the end of that i will issue guidance, and of plantimpg what we have ascertained during that time. let me give you a few additional ways we might think about this initiative as we tried to understand where we're going.
first is why now? we are entering an era where the defense budget will not be growing as rapidly as it was growing in the last decade. we do not expected to decline, we expected to grow slowly. therefore, if we're going to provide the 2% to 3% growth that is necessary to execute the program in front of us to prevent broken programs and instability, we need to achieve a efficiencies. this is different from acquisition reform, and you may have heard that phrase in the past. this is different in the sense that it is focused on specific
alcon's, not on the bureaucratic processes. -- this is different in the sense that it is focused on specific outcomes, not on the bureaucratic processes. this is entirely plausible that after a decade of growth in the defense budget as we have enjoyed that inefficiencies have crept into our processes, and we can find a 2% to 3% savings over the next five years. finally, we are at an inflection point in history of the defense budget. it is not going down, but it is not going at the rate it was in the last decade either. we need to adapt to the game. the earlier we do that and take on this challenge, the greater will be our chance of success. that is why now.
this morning that former secretary of defense perry made comments at the strategic economics for studies, and he remembered the last supper in the 1990's, which i attended. he was careful to say that this is different because that was an era of budget decline. then there is the first decade of the century, which was an era of budget growth. this is neither the 1990's or the last decade. it is different. it is an environment where we will have slower real growth, and the senior managers need to manage accordingly. one way to think about this is in contrast to the 1990's and to
the decade just passed. another way is to think about last year and this year. last year refocused a great deal and the department on eliminating unneeded programs. secretary gates and just said that. more of that can be done. this initiative focuses on the capabilities we do need and providing them more affordably. that is different. second, last year we were heavily focused on the acquisition reform act and implementation of that, which largely have to do with the bureaucratic processes, and rightly so. we have done a lot to implement it. this is different. this is focused on execution and out cocomes.
i would say to anyone that is hesitant about embarking on this path that they need to consider the alternatives, and the alternative is broken programs, turbulence of canada programs, and unpredictability and uncertainty core industry, either version of the taxpayer'' confidence that they are getting value for their money, and above all lost kopit millipore the warsh fighter -- lost capability of the war figh ter. if that is the purpose and the process. the charts and a letter that i gave this morning to the acquisition crude describes in some detail this initiative in the final guidance will be issued by me in some weeks time. with that, let's take your
questions. let's focus our questions on the initiative. >> what impact do you expect this initiative to have on arms makers' profit margins, and what do you think is a reasonable profit margin for the industry to expect in order to maintain the defense industrial base? >> first thing to say about that is this is about cost, not profits. it is about eliminating unnecessary cost. in the commercial world the way you pursue profit is by eliminating costs, and we want to give the same incentives to the defense industry. the second thing is to use profit as an incentive for productivity and the defense industry. we want to do that.
and second, it is backwards to say it is about reducing profit. it is not at all about that. it is about reducing cost. the second thing to say is that a healthy, vibrant, and financially viable defense industry is in the national interest. because we do not build our own weapons systems and the government in this contract. we contracts with private industry. the objective here is productivity and the reduction of unproductive cost. >> as you shift to a greater use of fixed-price contracts and time and material contracts, is it not reasonable to expect the that is going to put pressure on profit margin? . .
this becomes a vehicle for a the environment you are trying to work again and to give incentives tt rid -- reduced cost to the taxpayer. that is why we continue to fix prices. profits can be made in both environments, but in fixed price by performing well. >> are there unnecessary costs that you are trying to lemonade? >> let's take for example, in a weapons system production, if you look at the production process and all the people, are they being used optimal efficiency? are all the subcontractors being
incentivize to control the cost of parts? can the government control eds requirements and not change them, which disrupts the production process? those are examples. >> he say here the number of people working on this versus working on something else? >> we get a lot of that data, and it depends on the industry for some of that data. we scrutinize that and business practices and production practices, and we do the same so that we understand each and every cost that we are incurring in paying for something for the taxpayer, make sure in that we're scrutinizing those processes and tried to minimize them. >> like you said,
[uninnelligible] but some of the costs being billed nottto the pentagon are not necessary. that affects the profits of companies. if you take them away -- >> that is not necessarily profit. if a given production process could be leaned out by using less material or people, that is just economical. those people are being paid now and they are not necessary -- those costs would not be incurred. so in efficiency does not translate into the bottom line. >> if you get some kind of layoffs and job reductions as some result of this? >> spending is not decreasing.
defense spending is not decreasing. we are talking about deploying people in the optimum economic way to help the taxpayer and the war fighter. >> of the $400 billion spent, how much of that is overhead costs? >> is hard to give a general number, because it is different from item to item. overhead -- there is legitimate overhead. not all overhead is illegitimate, where it is appropriate cost of the business transaction between us and the provider of an appropriate part. it depends whether it is goods or services or kinds of goods and so forth. we need to look at each case and make sure that we are
appropriately incentivizing the reduction of unnecessary costs. >> what you said a small businesses would benefit from that the large companies? >> small businesses are an important part of this because of the vitality of small business being an asset and national defence. we want them to be entering the defense sector, lending their technology, the vitality, and yes, their efficiency and productivity. we want companies outside the defense sector to ensure that defense sector because they are lean and efficient, because the commercial economy makes them do so, and we want that influence within the fence. -- within defense. >> [unintelligible]
>> i think that the way that you will see productivity growth in defense is when program costs stop growing or even come down. then we are getting more value for the dollar. we've gotten used to see cost growing inexorably, and that is not something you see outside the defense budget. why is that the case? we would like to arrest that trend. >> how are you going to get the undersecretary to go after the productivity? >> there regulations already that incentivize the right thing, which is productivity growth. >> and has added profit? >> we also use cost as an
incentive for productivity. i cannot emphasize that enough. that is the principle ever that we have. -- principal lever that we have. >> what did they say to you when you came away from those meetings? >> first of all, everybody knows that we are in a new era. we are at an inflection point. therefore we need to adapt our national practices to that reality and play the game that is on the field. secondly, they can do the math, which is that we are going to enjoy some real growth in defense spending but not the kind that we have enjoyed of the last decade. therefore, if you want to continue for fighter capability, if you have to do that by finding efficiencies. the logic is apparent to all.
we are looking for a path ahead. this is a mandate and a framework for that path ahead. on most charts, there are 20 different items which cumulatively look to deliver 2% or 3% in savings. that should be doable. that is an eminently achievable, practical goal. they're looking for a managerial way ahead. >> beyond what is in the memo, at any specifics in terms of how you plan to implement these overarching goals? and also, i wonder why should folks look at this effort as different from past efffrts that have been unsuccessful to curb some of these costs? >> let's say.
the measures we will take and prescribe will be contained in the guidance that i issued in a week's time, which follows the format in front of you, which would be informed by the process of consultation and focusing it goes on -- goes on over the next couple of months, and it directs these activities and specific targets and a specific way of getting there. different from the past in two ways as i have described -- different in substance in this sense that this is not acquisition reform or focused on our internal, bureaucratic processes. that was necessary and we are still doing that. that is important. this is different. and complementary, but different. focused on outcomes and the execution programs rather than our processes and the search for programs.
no. 2, it is different because the era is different. it is not the 1990's in the first decade after 9/11, it is a different kind of period. it requires a different managerial approach. and the third thing is that you say and secretary gates and deputy secretary lynn articulating the imperative. we are at war. our budget will not continue to grow at the rate that it has the last decade. we have to deliver value. we have to get more without more in order to meet our commitment to the war fighter. >> [inaudible] >> absolutely, yes. and here is how this can be done. look attractive it is, look practices, look at your processes, and see where you can
find what are very achievable degrees of savings every year, so that we can take those savings and plow them back into programs. >> [inaudible] >> when you are improving efficiency. if you can have 10 programs for the price of nine by making them more efficient you have more military capability for the same amount of money. that is good for everyone. >> [inaudible] can you explain how that is going to happen?
>> absolutely. he is absolutely right. we need to take a look at global clock. there are excellent acquisition executives who are here with us. he is describing the process which is the very first bullet on the third chart, which distinguishes the real cost from other costs. we're familiar with the process of independent cost estimate. they are an important tool because they represent a different outside look from our+ programs and the contractor supporting them at the cost of the program. they tend to tell us what something will cost if we manage the way that we are managing. i am saying that we need to do something else, which is say how much should this cost?
in other words, let's look at the budget piece by piece and ask ourselves, should we be paying -- is there inefficiency here -- will-cost and should- cost are two different things. we're going to do that for global cost -- global clock because we need to find out why. if you can address the why, and bring that over, it would be a perfect example of what we're talking about. >> can you give more specific details on the importance of that? >> there are six or eight different applications of global call. they have a comparable to aim for it -- air france. different payloads, and different parts of the program.
each of the payload parts of the program, we want to see why they are costing more every year and less like your computer costs less? and then there is another computer program, and the life cycle costs, and all of those things will be scrutinized with an eye to making it affordable. >> i'm interested in your ephesus -- your emphasis on the contracts and development programs. when a company is figuring out how to meet requirements, what tools they need, how to build structures -- aren't they at that point trying to figure out something they do not by definition know how to do yet? and if i am correct in describing that, then why does
it make sense to have a fixee price if i do not know yet how i'm going tt do that? >> it does not make sense as a development program for the reason you describe. no matter whether it is development or production, the real issue is whether the government and the contractor and price risk. if you are doing something that requires invention, then by definition neither you nor i can possibly know what it is one cause. therefore the government contract in that type of activity, it is appropriate that you say we will cover your costs. we do not know what they are and we will audit them. we are going to reimburse you and at a profit on that. that is appropriate for situation where invention is required. on the opposite end of the
spectrum, where we know exactly what we want and do not change our mind, that is where we require discipline and knowledge. and where the contractor knows and has control of his processes and design, and there for four -- therefore realistically give a surprise, a fixed-price contract is more appropriate as a vehicle because it incentivizes productivity gains, as i said. the better that they do it controlling costs, the more that they made. which is fine with us because we've got a price that we want. it is not a matter of development and not. it is a matter of what the circumstances is. for example -- that is not an invention. that is not an invention. that is a commercial aircraft with widespread use, hundreds
are made every year, adapted and a mallet -- are relatively minor way to a more pro britney and operated the way that hundreds have been for decades. it is appropriate for us to know what we want and them to know what they supply in that circumstance. that is a containable type of development. a fixed-price is a program there. -pif we go to something that is more speculative or where we really need a solution for a particular military program. we do not know what it looks like. if we cannot describe it, they cannot describe it, how can we possibly get a price for that? this is a place where the rules need to apply. all choices of contract type, we need to apply the appropriate tradecraft that provides the right incentives to reduce
costs, and to the government to contain its appetite and not change its mind. >> $400 billion huge assent on the way targeting 3% offsets, is there -- are you going to develop a list of programs? >> let me turn that around away. the 2% or 3% that we're looking for is a increase in the war fighting elite. that is surely the objective. that will allow us to continue -- that the type of real growth that historical seemed to be part of the budget. we cannot enjoy way in the defense budget as a whole. we want that within the industry.
we need -- we have either unneeded programs or unnecessary cost and the programs that we have. -- unnecessary costs in the programs that we have. >> [inaudible] >> the specific claim we have is to% to 3% over five years. we could get to 5%, and it was all meat. >> you have a list of those programs for which it developed that list? >> we would look at the issue of any of your publications to see programs where cost has grown and ask yourself, is that reflected -- reflective of real and unavoidable cost growth, or is this a case in which we should not be accepting this kind of cost growth trying to
contain it? >> you have programs right from the start. when you look at these documents as they are coming to you? >> those programs are a special case. we will be looking at ongoing and established programs for the most part, because that is where most of the money is. but it is also true that as we start them, we want to look ahead to the years ahead and make sure we're not creating something or embarking on something that we will not be able to pay for. now's the time to do the engineering trades in which you decide, maybe if i had 90% of performance at 50% of the calls, that is a good deal. now it is time to make those trades. since we are embarking on some investments this year, i want to make sure that those kind of trade-offs are already built in
from the beginning. that will save a lot of money in the near term, but after many years, it could be part of the discipline. >> as far as you mentioned the consolidation of the industry, how would you urge industry to change the closing of facilities, selling things off? >> those of their ideas, but what i asked was to look at your own processes for unnecessary costs, productivity gains, efficiencies. where am i not giving you the right environment, the right regulation, the right incentive to realize that in the way that you would do if you are serving a commercial customer? >> he referred early on [inaudible]
the budget is going to remain stable. congress has a bug in there. they said that deficit reduction is key and that financial security matters. they want to reduce the national debt. defense is a part of that. how confident argued that congress will continue to go along with this? >> the president's budget, as i said earlier, four moderate but real growth and 10 years, that is different. and from the last date, i think that people understand that we are at war. and that a downturn is not appropriate. at the same time, the economic times are difficult and so we're not going to enjoy the double
digit type of growth that we had in the last decade. i think the taxpayer wants to see us get by and do more with the amount of money we are going to have. and that is a perfectly reasonable expectation and that is what this is aal about. >> secretary gates has frequently called into question whether is need for amphibious landing capability and have tried to kill the excursion mary expeditionary fighting vehicle. do expect the department to seek the killed that program? >> that is describing a specific program. when you go back to help canceling unneeded programs complements the effort i am talking about, although there have been program cancellations
over the last two years, and there will undoubtedly be some in the future, but i am not addressing that specific situation you alluded to. we will continue to look through and eliminate the needed capabilities. at the same time, we need to deliver the capabilities that we do need more cheaply. that is what this is about. that is what we're presently focused on in this effort. both are important things to do. last year we focused on on needed programs. now we're moving on to another phase, which is reducing -- reintroducing affordability to the programs that we do need. >> you want 3% growth each year. you've also said that the budget that the president sent as a
real growth component to it. does that increase you talked about include the real growth from the president's budget, or is that exclusive of that? >> yes, if you look at the president's budget of the next five years, you have 1% real growth. i would like this is attained a 2% to 3% growth. since that is not going to come from the top line, we need to try to find it internally. we need to pump those savings back into investment. that is the purpose of this process. >> so the ongoing review about the submarine to cut the cost. you set specific targets for that, or you said, and just did the best you can? >> i am standing back from that. to be specific, there are three
more major design drivers of the submarine. on each of those, if you look at the trade off between extra capability and cost. and you decide at which point in the design that you have gotten most of the capability without paying most of the maximum cost. when you do that item by item, then you end up with the design that our military needs, but night -- might not have all the features that one can think of. it's been 30 years since we last design a ballistic missile submarine in the name of affordability. >> will take a couple more. >> the efficiency initiative.
[laughter] >> this is one of the sectors that has excess capacity. cutting back on the capacity of shipbuilding, would that be an example? >> where there is excess facility and a larger plant or for space for a number of facilities being used to conduct it given activity, then it is necessary to do it, and there are examples like that -- shipbuilding, clearly an example where savings can be had and productivity can be increased. >> how will the contractor follow these guidelines to be more efficient large margin and
you will need to be more profitable if you are leaner. >> one of the reasons that cost one so drastically wrong -- went so drastically wrong, is that you shot for the moon so often, and what structures or incentives are you thinking about to prevent them from going too far? and how are you going to prevent requirements creep? >> i've already described the process that we're using in our large programs to scrutinize. the key of the engineering design trade and that appetite is traded off against cost in the design at the beginning. requirements creep -- there are many ways to prevent that.
until 6:00 p.m. eastern. members will come back to vote in some resolutions debated earlier today. we will return live to the house floor when members gavel back in. elsewhere in washington today, the confirmation hearing got under way for supreme court nominee elena kagan. members of the senate judiciary committee made opening statements this afternoon. we will have all of today's hearing tonight on our companion network, c-span2 beginning at 9:00 eastern. check out our web site, c- span.org/kagan to watch the hearings in high-quality wide screen live or on demand. on demand, you can watch highlights from each day organized by date and senator. you can also watched by elena kagan's previous c-span appearances -- you can also watch kagan's previous c-span
appearances. >> west virginia senator robert byrd serve more than 50 years in the u.s. senate, longer than anyone in history. he appeared on c-span more than 1200 times, along with speeches from the senate floor and congressional hearings. watch our 1988 profile with the senator and his "book notes" interview on the history of the senator. >> c-span. our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and online, and you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube, and sign up for our scheduler e-mails add c-span.org -- at c-span.org. >> in remarks today, the house majority leader set america's debt is a national security threat and that a balanced approach is needed to address the problem. following his remarks, he took questions from the audience on collateral damage in
afghanistan, military tribunals, and guantanamo bay detainees. he spoke at the center for strategic and international studies for about 25 minutes. >> heard i was coming, huh? >> he's got a better voice than me. we're delighted to have as our fourth speaker today one of our national leaders, congressman hoyer. he is recognized nationwide as a person who plays not only a decisive role in our congress, but play is a critical role in shaping of our national policy, collaborating in that respect with the president and the white house. he is going to address us today on the critical issue -- what ought to be the national strategy of the united states at a time of extraordinary complexity. national security in that
context has to be broadly defined. it also has to be historically relevant for our security policy. it has to take into account how the world is changing. it is in this context that congressmen hoyer is going to be speaking, and his speech will be focusing on this broad range of issues. in addition to playing a leading role in our national leadership, congressman hoyer is a distinguished and enduring representative of the state of maryland. i'm not going to go through his biography in detail, but i do want to note that he became a state legislator at the age of 27. he won a seat in the maryland senate, and ever since then, he has represented maryland in the state, locally, nationally, and very much on the international
scene. indeed, back in the 1970's, he played a preeminent role in the helsinki human rights process, which was so critical to the eventual dismantling of the soviet union, so we are very fortunate to have with us here today a national leader, an international leader, and a neighbor from maryland. [applause] >> i would have come today just to hear that introduction, doctor. [laughter] what an extraordinarily distinguished career he has had and what the contribution he has made, not only to the united states, but to the rational policy of international relations throughout the world, and i'm so pleased to be here as well with so many distinguished scholars and leaders in international relations and thinkers in our country on very
complex and difficult issues. i'm also pleased to be here with a number of good friends, whom i have known for half a century almost, i think. i will not out of here, but i'm pleased to be here. steve flanagan, thank you very much for your hosting this event. please give john kerry of my best regards. he is an extraordinary leader -- , and it worked very closely with him when he was in defense, so i'm pleased to be here with all of you. the values of free societies can break down the strongest walls of oppression, and american foreign policy has, at its best, and most creative taken advantage of the fact -- of that fact to keep our nation more secure. as chairman of the helsinki commission, i watched firsthand
as free speech, free association, and free markets became the rallying cry for the brave dissident movements of the eastern bloc. solidarity in poland, tighter 77 in czechoslovakka, to heroes in russia, they found courage in the universal principles of free men and women. they helped usher in an era of new openness behind the iron curtain, and ultimately, they helped bring down an empire. i have never forgotten the lesson. america opposing military is a powerful weapon, but is it not -- but it is not the only one we have. today, we are engaged in a new struggle, one unlike any in our history. our enemy is not defined by borders or governments. the end of the struggle will not be defined by a surrender ceremony.
we are confronting not an evil empire but a network of hate and violence, and the trenton state failure in nnclear proliferation that amplify its liberation, but now, as then, our success will be measured not only by our determination but as well by our creativity. now, as then, we cannot afford to turn our backs on any weapon in our arsenal. the challenge, quite obviously, is greater but no greater than other challenges that our nation has faced and overcome. in fact, america has often overcome the challenges under leadership of my party through two world wars, the content of the spread of communism, the specter of missiles in cuba or genocide in bosnia. democratic leadership has answered the threats that endangered america's security and the world. today, i want to discuss how we can build on that tradition and
continue to keep our nation and its people safe. it is a strategy that rests on the use of four crucial tools -- strength, development, democracy, and fiscal discipline. first, democrats, as i said, has aggressively step up the fight against terrorists. we have strengthened america's military by funding its the equipment after years of war, and we have put new and better weapons into the battlefield, including the body army and mine-resistant and bush vehicles our troops need, as well, of course, as an increase in aerial drones. under president obama, the united states has killed or captured hundreds of terrorist leaders, including much of the top leadership of al qaeda and the taliban, disrupting their ability to fly and attack our country. the attended christmas day bombing and the attended bombing of times square reminded us all,
if we needed any reminder, that our enemies still intend to do us grave harm. those plots were foiled not by chance but by the vigilance of law enforcement and intelligence. first responders, and importantly, ordinary citizens. but even a foiled plot is a lesson in our vulnerabilities, and the ways in which terrorists attempt to exploit them. that is why president obama demanded that our intelligence committee closely study and apply the lessons of those plots. president obama also demonstrated that he learned the lessons of the bush administration's conduct in afghanistan where, frankly, years of neglect allowed for the taliban's resurgence. president obama listen closely to opposing views on the way for work in afghanistan. for the first time in years, we have a clear, counterinsurgency strategy in afghanistan, drawing on important cooperation from the pakistani government.
based on the premise that a terrorist-dominated state will once again, as it did in 2001, pose a direct danger to americans and to our country. but we also have a clear time frame to measure the effectiveness of our efforts. in iraq, we are preparing for a responsible redeployment that will allow the iraqi government to stand on its own feet and, yes, to expect the iraqi government to stand on its own feet, but protecting ourselves against terrorism does not just mean orce of arms. that is why democrats, also -- often in the face of republican opposition, have increased funding for human intelligence collection, cyber security and critical concern, and security for our skies, ports, and borders. unfortunately, both the fiscal year 2010 appropriation bill and the fiscal year 2011 intelligence authorization bill
passed in a partisan way over strong republican opposition. president obama is also strongly committee to nuclear nonproliferation because the more nuclear-weapons in the world, the greater the chance that one will someday fall into the wrong hands. as the president said at the nuclear some he convened in april, if terrorists ever acquired and used nuclear weapons, "it would be a catastrophic -- catastrophe for the world." causing extraordinary loss of life and striking a major blow to global peace and stability. in short, it is increasingly clear that the danger of nuclear terrorism is one of the greatest threats to global security to our collective security. that's somewhat successfully focused the world's attention on the dangers of nuclear terrorism, strengthened cooperation toward the goal of
controlling all of the world vulnerable nuclear materials in four years. and convinced several nations to make commitments such as giving of highly enriched uranium and weapons-grade plutonium. the treaty recently signed with russia serves the same goal, reducing the world's supply of nuclear material and keeping us all safer. finally, economic pressure. we all understand the danger posed by a nuclear iran to our ally israel, to our own nation, to other allies in the region and to the international security. president obama's work to engage iran has not been met, as all of us, i think, would agree in good faith. but it did further isolate iran in the eyes of the world, and i believe that it helped secure
russian and chinese agreement with the strong sanctions passed this month by the security council. congress, defending its own set of sanctions, as you know, to the president's desk last week. they will hit the iranian regime where it hurts -- its petroleum sector -- and i hope demonstrate that the cost of their nuclear pursued our to hide their hear it in all, this is a record of keeping america say, and is one we can be proud of. is the record of democrats, but it embodies bold that deserve the support of both parties and indeed enjoyed by partisan support during the decades of the cold war period during the cold war, a secret of success was the unity with which both parties pursued a consensus strategy to contain and bring down communism. there was fierce disagreement, of course, but there was also
remarkable continuity and a reluctance to exploit threats to america simply for political gain. that could and should be the spirit of this new struggle. but unfortunately, months after 9/11, some shows to exploit america's legitimate fear for the safety in the unprecedented way. we see the lasting effect today in a national-security debate that too often dissolves into an endless series of device political charge wage issues while the larger strategic challenges confronting us go neglected. we see the effects in the recurring partisan effort to paint many of the president's moves as somehow apologetic or week. i recall, as i know all of you do, john kennedy's observation that we must never fear to negotiate, but we must never
negotiate out of fear here you will recall that james baker met with saddam hussein days before we went in to iraq in 1991. whenever the character rears its head, i look at the president's strong record and think -- what president are they talking about? our founders spoke deliberately of the common defense because the threats we face make no partisan distinctions. they are common to us all. second, though force is at times clearly necessary, and i have supported the use, we learn from the cold war that force alone does not win ideological struggles. then, it was the promise of a better life that led so many to abandon communism and its false promise of progress. today, chronic lack of opportunity drives the appeal of
the jihadism of islamic extremists and its hatred of a modern world that seems to have left too many behind. chronic oppression of women and girls condemns nations to poverty and abandons young men to extremist ideology, and the failure of institutions in distant states, as we have seen from somalia to afghanistan, is a direct threat to our own people, so a strong development policy must be a pillar of our national security. international development reflects our moral values and service our economic interests. for an unstable countries make unreliable trading partners and weak markets for american goods and services. and we cannot exert global leadership while neglecting hunger, disease, and human misery. so democrats have made internationally agreed
development goals a prime focus of our foreign policy. president obama has announced major new initiatives on food security and global health, and his administration is working to strengthen them through partnerships with other donors and the private sector -- data- driven analysis and a strong standards for accountability from aid recipients. we're working with wild -- world body's to strengthen international norms against corruption said the foreign aid reaches the people it was intended for and is not squandered by unaccountable regimes. we are acting on the well- founded conviction that ending the marginalization of women and girls is a key to economic development. as larry summer once put it, "investments in a girls' education may well be the highest return investment available in the developing world pecan thirdly, the cold war taught us that democracy, human rights, economic freedom
are the most powerful weapons in -- in an ideological struggle. today autocrats understand that as well as they carefully channeled their own people's frustration into rage against america. the eight years of the bush and administration howed what we already knew -- that democracy cannot be imposed by force, that elections alone do not equal democracy, that democratization and economic growth do not always go hand in hand and that failing to lead by example weakens democracy around the world, but the trials of those years taught us that there are wiser policies to pursue, wiser ways to build democracy and respect for human rights in the world. now that the objective is out of keeping with our character as a nation.
indeed, it is an integral part of that character. today, we meet that objective when we understand that the world's democratic movements in nations from egypt to iran, have a legitimacy that ought to be recognized, not restrain, by their governments. we meet that objective when we support those movements publicly. we meet that objective when we recognize that our strongest alliances are those build not merely on our interests but on a foundation of common values. such is our friendship with the democratic state of israel. such is our friendship with our european allies. such is our friendship with our asian allies and australian and others who join with us in common values to present them to the world and to pursue them as international policy. a bond of generations that no momentary disagreement can undo, and most importantly, we
promote democracy when we live our democratic values here at home. torture is not a democratic value. extraordinary rendition is not a democratic value. overwriting the rule of law when our criminal justice system under president bush and obama has convicted and incarcerated 300 terrorists since 9/11 without incident is not a democratic value. in fact, many conservatives recognize that when american citizens attempt at tax on our nation as we saw in times square. our civilian courts are more than a quick to carry out justice. there may well be times, however, when military commissions are appropriate and should be used. we also honor our democratic values when we honor the tradition of civilian control of the military, as president obama correctly made clear last week.
in sum, when we abandon our heritage, whether for expedience or fear for partisan advantage, we make our principles hollow in the eyes of the world, and we throw away one of the best weapons we have. all of our presidents have understood the value of pragmatism, but they have also understood that it must be balanced with america's historic role as the advocate of democratic values and democratic movements around the world. fourth and finally, every one of these policies comes with a cost. every choice rules out other choices, and i set forth, but one of the things i set forth in a speech that i wish i had put in that i will reference at this point in time, but another critical component of our international security policy must be the pursuit of energy
independence. tom vix made the observation yesterday on -- i think it was "meet the press" in the final closing remarks that if we did not pursue and energy independence policy, we will continue to be undermining our national security and reliance on sources of foreign energy. we have passed legislation to accomplish that objective. unfortunately, the senate has not, but we must pursue energy independence. not only has the still tried to flee and compellingly made it clear to us in the gulf, but certainly, our relationships with those who provide us with energy, which are sometimes strained, give us pause to understand that energy independence is an integral part of our national security. now, let me talk about what is now the fifth, because i added
something in. the deeper our nation sinks into debt, the more our choices will be constrained and the more our leadership will be challenged by nations, especially china, the hold our debt. as a matter of fact, on the path that we are on, the day will come, i fear, when our strength will be sapped by our debt, so it is time to stop talking about fiscal discipline and national security threats as if they were separate topics. dad is a national security threat. unsustainable debt has a long history of toppling world powers as financial historian donald ferguson writes, "this is how and tires declined. it begins with the explosions he can that -- it begins with debt
explosions." that is why i'm urging my colleagues to see the necessity of a budget compromise that is real, politically viable, and a way to restore fiscal balance and health. budget agreement like back pave the way for historic prosperity and for america's ability to act as the sole superpower under the first president bush and president clinton. an agreement like that to be implemented after the economy has fully recovered, is a necessity today with all publicly held debt reaching $9 trillion, defense spending can no longer and should not be exempt from the hard choices pressing on every part of our budgets. democrats took important steps to trim unnecessary spending with an important acquisition reform bill that president obama signed last year with the strong
support of secretary bob gates. in addition, we passed a contract and reform bill that passed the house this spring and is waiting for senate action, but those bills, of course, are simply a beginning. in an important speech last month, secretary gates drew from the legacy of president eisenhower, who held that "the united states -- indeed any nation -- could only be as militarily strong as it was economically dynamic and fiscally sound." it is advice we should take seriously today. last week, i spoke of the danger to our debt to our prosperity and security. i made clear that eliminating unnecessary defense spending has to be part of the deficit equation. i did so with confidence because i know that many of our nation's military leaders see it the same way. secretary gates, as i said, is one of them. he has urged congress to stop
funding additional c-17 cargo planes and an extra engine for the joint strike fighter, not because they are completely without controversy but in terms of making choices, he believed that we had to do so. to fight the rapid cost of inflation and military health care, to cut expenses, to cut unnecessary weapons systems, and to trim the overhead that makes up more than 40% of the defense budget. chairman skelton has told the house armed services committee to scrutinize the budget and see the savings that can be affected consistent with maintaining a defense as strong as necessary to meet any challenges that might be coming our way. some congressional republicans share these concerns. on the same day i spoke of the deficit, congressman paul ryan said, "there are billions of dollars you can get out of the pentagon. we are buying some weapons
systems, i would argue, we do not need any more." choices in this physically challenging environment are absolutely essential. i understand that whatever savings are put on the table will prove controversial and even politically painful, but, as with all budget crunches, the fundamental decision we face is this -- hard choices today or even more painful and draconian once forced on us down the road. let me hasten to add, as i did last week, that a strong economy as well as fiscal balance, is essential and one cannot be the victim of the other. after years of grinding war, we still have the strongest military on earth and thousands of men and women who have given as examples of sacrifice, to which the only proper response is great gratitude in all.
but our history reminds us that arms alone do not win wars, particularly against an enemy that we will rarely if ever meet on the battlefield. nations win wars. the skill of our intelligence officers, the vigilance of our first responders, the creativity of our development policy, the force of our universal values, the discipline of our policy makers, the will and consensus of the american people -- they are all part of this trouble as well. they are all integral to our national security strategy, and we must use every part of that strategy wisely. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much for that comprehensive coverage of a mb