1970S TELEVISION SHOWS
The following is a list of David Susskind Shows possibly housed in a number off-site facilities--if they can be located at all. These listed programs HAVE NOT BEEN INSPECTED thus we cannot guarantee the existence, quality, duration or timely delivery of any of the material listed here. We offer access to these tapes on the following basis ONLY: All tapes are on their original 2" video format. The only way to verify the contents is to screen them, thus we will need to pull them from the inventory, ship and transfer them before we are able to verify content and quality. A $500 fee PER TAPE is required when ordering screening material from this collection. This fee is NON-REFUNDABLE. This fee will cover the cost of 2" tape handling, 2" Fed-Ex shipping (2-way) and 2" transfer. PLEASE NOTE THAT MANY SHOWS ARE ON TWO SEPARATE TAPES, THUS IT COULD COST DOUBLE ($1000) TO SCREEN SOME COMPLETE SHOWS. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN IF YOU ORDER A SHOW BASED ON THE CATALOG NUMBER AND TITLE FROM THIS DATABASE WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT YOU WILL GET THE TAPE YOU ORDER. THIS IS BECAUSE THROUGH THE YEARS TAPES MAY HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE INCORRECT CASES AND THE WRITTEN INFORMATION ON THE CASES IS ALL WE HAVE TO ID A TAPE BEFORE IT IS TRANSFERRED. WHILE WE WILL USE ALL EFFORTS TO EXPEDITE YOUR REQUEST, BUT WE CANNOT RUSH THE PROCESS, AND YOU ORDER THESE AT YOUR OWN RISK. IF WE DO NOT LOCATE THE TAPE THERE IS NO CHARGE, BUT IF WE DO AND IT IS REMOVED FROM THE FACILITY FOR TRANSFER, YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE NON-REFUNDABLE FEES. THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1978-1979 06/24/78 09/24/78 PART I: BABIES FOR SALE -- THE BLACK MARKET IN CHILDREN DAVID LEAVITT, BETTY LIPMAN, LINDA, CONGRESSMAN HENRY HYDE, NANCY BAKER, ROBERT BURNS, JUNE MATZ 29243 CHICAGO 05/31/78 09/24/78 PART II: PORTRAIT OF A WELFARE MOTHER RENEE NATTER 29243 09/28/78 10/01/78 JOHN J. O' CONNOR 30703 CHICAGO 09/28/78 10/01/78 PART II: TURNING OFF THE TUBE -- LIFE WITHOUT TELEVISION A. CHILDREN: FRED IFRAH, DAWN KAYNO, DEREK LIPPNER, CHRISSY MAGLIOCCO, LEAH PIKE, DAVID STEINGLASS B. PARENTS & TEACHERS: JOYCE SUSSKIND, NANCY PIKE, BARBARA GOLDFARB, PAT MAGLIOCCO, JUDITY ROHN, TANYA KAUFMAN 30703 05/20/78 10/08/78 PART I: FED UP WITH THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION - SIX ASEXUALS GAIL RACHLIN, BILL PRIEST, DANIELLA GIOSEFFI, RICHARD MILNER, MARIAN TESSA, GARY NULL 29240 CHICAGO, DC 06/24/78 10/08/78 PART II: HOW TO COPE WITH LONELINESS ERICA ABEEL, DR. JAMES LYNCH, BRUCE JAY FRIEDMAN, TERRI SCHULTZ, MARK KLINGMAN 29240 DC 09/23/78 10/22/78 PART I: WE'RE MAD AS HELL -- THE RADIO CALL-IN RAGE JERRY WILLIAMS, ED SCHWARTZ, IRV HOMER, HERB JEPKO, BERNARD MELTZER 30702 CHICAGO 09/23/78 10/22/78 PART II: THINK RICH -- BE RICH JERRY GILLIS, H. STANLEY JUDD, IAN ANDERSON 30702 CHICAGO 10/12/78 10/29/78 PART I: CAN CARTER CUT IT IN 1980 HENRY GRUNWALD, NICHOLAS VON HOFFMAN, JERALD TER HORST, WILLIAM RUSHER 30706 CHICAGO 10/12/78 10/29/78 PART II: PSYCHICS WHO SOLVE CRIME DOROTHY ALLISON, BEVERLY JAEGERS, DAVID HOY, MIKE CASALE, SAL LUBERTAZZI 30706 CHICAGO 10/21/78 11/05/78 PART I: THE SWINGERS' PARADISE -- PLATO'S RETREAT MARY & LARRY LEVINSON, BONNIE & JACK, PHIL NOBILE 30709 CHICAGO, DC 10/21/78 11/05/78 PART II: "THE DOOMSDAY TAPES" BARDYL TIRANA, HERBERT SCOVILLE, LEONARD REIFEL, LEON GOURE 30709 05/31/78 11/12/78 THEY'RE STILL THE FUNNIEST MEN AROUND -- VETERAN COMICS MAC ROBBINS, JIMMY JOYCE, LARRY BEST, MICKEY FREEMAN, JOEY FAYE, LOU MENCHELL 29241 DC 11/04/78 11/19/78 PART I: DRESS FOR SUCCESS -- LOOK LIKE A MILLION -- MAKE A MILLION JOHN WEITZ, JOHN T. MOLLOY, EMILY CHO, WILLIAM THOURLBY, ROBERT L. GREEN 30710 CHICAGO 05/04/78 11/19/78 PART II: SUPER SALESMEN JOE GIRARD, LOIS BECKER, TOM WOLFF, BOB SHOOK 30710 CHICAGO 11/08/78 11/26/78 PART I: STARTLING STORIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH DR. MAURICE RAWLINGS, CHARLES MCKAIG, VIRGINIA FALCY, KENNETH RING, HELEN NELSON, DR. MICHAEL SABOM 30712 CHICAGO 11/08/78 11/26/78 PART II: ANGRY CITIZENS VS THE POST OFFICE JAMES FINCH, BOB GRANT, ROBERT MEYERS, JAMES LAPENTA, PAT BRENNAN 30712 CHICAGO 11/22/78 12/03/78 PART I: SURGEON/SALESMAN -- BILL MACKAY 30714 DC 11/22/78 12/03/78 PART II: LONELY, UNHAPPY & BROKE -- DISPLACED HOMEMAKERS FLORENCE GRIFFIN, JACQUELINE BACHMAN, LESLIE WALD WALDHORN, SANDRA JACOBS, JANE LEE LITTLETON 30714 CHICAGO, DC 12/02/78 12/10/78 PART I: IF BETTY FORD COULD DO IT...ALL ABOUT FACELIFTS RICHARD KIELING, LILLIAM FRASER, D. RALPH MILLARD, M.D., DORIS LILLY, MICHAEL HOGAN, M.D. 30716 CHICAGO 12/02/78 12/10/78 PART II: TO JOG OR NOT TO JOG DAVID BRODY, M.D., DAVID NOONAN, RICHARD A. SCHWARTZ, M.D., RICHARD RESTAK, M.D., PAUL FETSCHER 30716 CHICAGO 09/16/78 12/17/78 WE WANT A BABY -- NEW HOPE FOR INFERTILE COUPLES A. PATIENTS: SUSAN & LEE WELLING, CAROL & ERNEST D'ANGELO, CATHY & JOHN SCOTT B. EXPERTS: DR. WAYNE DECKER, DR. ALVIN GOLDFARB, DR. RICHARD SHERINS, BARBARA ECK MENNING, DR. LUIGI MASTROIANNI 30701 11/29/78 12/24/78 PART I: YOUR PAMPERED PET -- FROM SHRINK TO MINK DR. PETER BORCHELT, DR. DANIEL TORTORA, DR. ALBERT LAMPASSO, MORDECAI SEGAL, LOIS LANDAUER, KAREN THOMPSON, GEORGE JEWEL 30715 CHICAGO 11/29/78 12/24/78 PART II: MIND YOUR MANNERS -- THE NEW ETIQUETTE LETITIA BALDRIGE, JUDITH MARTIN, MARJABELLE YOUNG STEWART 30715 CHICAGO 10/07/78 01/14/79 06/24/79 PART I: THE DIET THAT CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE -- PRO & CON A. PATIENTS: BILL UTTAL, JULIE BREAKSTONE, FRED SILVER, DR. HARRY PARKER, JOE HUME B. EXPERTS: NATHAN PRITIKIN, DR. SAMI SASHIM, DR. ROBERT E. BAUER, DR. STEPHEN SCHEIDT 30704 CHICAGO 10/12/78 01/14/79 06/24/79 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH THE BRILLIANT PETER USTINOV 30704 CHICAGO 12/09/78 01/21/79 PART I: THE PRIEST WHO FIGHTS PIMPS FATHER BRUCE RITTER 30711 CHICAGO, DC 11/04/78 01/21/79 PART II: MAKING INFLATION WORK FOR YOU HARRY BROWNE, DAN DORFMAN 30711 CHICAGO, DC 12/09/78 01/28/79 PART I: LONG LINES, SHORT TEMPERS -- THE AIRPORT MESS KAY SLOMAN, HARRY KLETTER, ROB MANGOLD, FRED FORD, KAREN ZUPKO, STEVE BIRNBAUM 30717 CHICAGO, DC 12/09/78 01/28/79 PART II: ARE YOU REALLY IN LOVE? DR. DEBORA PHILLIPS, DR. CHARLIE SHEDD, DR. STANTON PEELE 30717 CHICAGO, DC 01/13/79 02/04/79 PART I: WE ARE BI-SEXUALS LARRY KANE, TONI TUCCI, DR. FRED KLEIN, "JULIA", "JOANNE" 30720 CHICAGO, DC 01/27/79 02/04/79 PART II: TREASURE HUNTERS MEL FISHER, EUGENE LYON, ART MCKEE 30720 CHICAGO, DC 01/06/79 02/11/79 INSIDE THE CULTS: THE TERRIFYING TRUTH FROM EX-MEMBERS PART 1 - EX-MEMBERS: SUSAN SMITH, CHRIS EDWARDS, MORRIS DEUTSCH, STEVE HASSAN, ANDREW STUBBS PART II - EXPERTS: FLO CONWAY, JIM SEIGELMAN, GALEN KELLY, DR. JOHN CLARK 30718 CHICAGO, DC 01/27/79 02/18/79 PART I: MEN WHO ARE KEPT BY WOMEN: TRUE CONFESSIONS REAL, MICHEL, MARK, PAUL, LOU 30721 CHICAGO, DC 01/27/79 02/18/79 PART II: THE TRUTH ABOUT ASPIRIN DR. LOUIS ALEDORT, DR. THOMAS KANTOR, DR. DAVID CODDON, PAUL E. SCHINDLER 30721 CHICAGO, DC 02/03/79 02/25/79 PART I: BEAUTIFUL WOMEN SHARE THEIR SECRETS (HOSTED BY JOYCE SUSSKIND) BEVERLY SASSOON, ADRIEN ARPEL, CRISTINA FERRARE 30722 CHICAGO, DC 02/03/79 02/25/79 PART II: WHEN YOUR PARENTS GROW OLD JOHN PERRY, RITA SIGLER, BARBARA FELDMAN, MARIE CARROLL, JERRY ORNSTEIN 30722 CHICAGO, DC 02/10/79 03/04/79 TRUMAN CAPOTE TELLS ALL TRUMAN CAPOTE 30723 CHICAGO (T), UCLA (2"), DC 11/18/78 03/11/79 PART I: WE CAN'T STOP DIETING -- VICTIMS OF ANOREXIA STEVEN LEVENKRON, KATIE, PATRICIA DE POL, ROBERTA, LISA WOLFF 30713 CHICAGO, DC 11/18/78 03/11/79 PART II: WHEN FEAR TAKES OVER -- AGORAPHOBIA JEAN ESTERBROOK, JOEL GREENBAUM, EILEEN WEBBER, MARIA WEBBER, DR. MANUEL ZANE 30713 CHICAGO, DC 02/28/79 03/18/79 PART I: WILD & CRAZY PAPARAZZI -- PHOTOGRAPHERS WHO SHOOT THE STARS RON GALELLA, ADAM SCULL, DICK CORKERY, GENE SPATZ 30725 CHICAGO, DC 02/28/79 03/18/79 PART II: IT'S NOT SO GREAT IN BRITAIN FRED HIFT, REX BERRY, ROBIN DUTHY, VALERIE WADE 30725 CHICAGO, DC 01/13/79 03/25/79 PART I: THINGS TO COME -- LIFE IN THE YEAR 2000 ISAAC ASIMOV, FRANK KENDIG, DR. JERRY POURNELLE 30719 DC 02/28/79 03/25/79 PART II: HAPPINESS IS A POSSIBLE DREAM DR. JONATHAN FREEDMAN, LYNN CAINE, JOAN, BOB DRESNER, BOB GOODRICH 30719 CHICAGO, DC 03/24/79 KHJ-TV, LA 04/01/79 THE TELEVISION CRISIS MICHAEL DANN, PAUL KLEIN, GRANT TINKER, NORMAN LEAR, DAVID GERBER 30726 CHICAGO, DC 02/10/79 04/08/79 HOT GOSSIP ABOUT THE BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE RUDY MAXA, CLAUDIA COHEN, NEAL TRAVIS 30724 CHICAGO 03/31/79 04/08/79 PITY THE HAPPY HOUSEWIFE JUDITH VIORST, MARY KUCZKIR, ANN TOLAND SERB, JOAN WESTER ANDERSON 30724 CHICAGO 04/15/78 04/15/79 MIRROR, MIRROR ON THE WALL -- THE BEAUTIFUL AND THE UGLY TELL ALL GUESTS -- MODELS AND SELF-PROCLAIMED UGLIES: MATT COLLINS, CATHY MORRIS, DANNY LEE MCCOY, JEAN SOKOL, SUZANNE FELZEN, SUSAN BRECHT EXPERTS: FRANCESCO SCAVULLO, MICHAEL HOGAN, M.D., ADRIEN ARPEL, SUSAN GREEN, PH.D 29232 CHICAGO, DC 04/14/79 04/22/79 IS CARTER A CATASTROPHE? ELIOT JANEWAY, WILLIE L. BROWN, JR., ROBERT H. MALOTT, WILLIAM W. WINPISINGER 30728 CHICAGO, DC 04/28/79 05/06/79 PART I: LEE MARVIN, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE? MARVIN MITCHELSON, MELVYN HABER, SUNNIE SOBEL, NORMAN M. SHERESKY, HERBERT A. GLIEBERMAN 30730 CHICAGO, DC 04/28/79 05/06/79 PART II: THE INCREDIBLE TRUTH ABOUT HOWARD HUGHES JAMES B. STEELE, DONALD L. BARTLETT 30730 DC 03/31/79 05/13/79 PART I: DEAR ANN LANDERS... ANN LANDERS 30727 CHICAGO, DC 03/31/79 05/13/79 PART II: THE CULTS ANSWER BACK GADDAHAR PANDIT DAS, RABINDRA SWAROOP DAS, DIANE KETTERING, ARTIE MAREN 30727 CHICAGO, DC 05/11/79 KCOP, LA 05/20/79 THE MAN WHO WOULD BE PRESIDENT: JERRY BROWN GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN, CALIFORNIA 30732 CHICAGO (T), UCLA, DC 05/19/79 06/03/79 PART I: WATCH OUT! HOWARD JARVIS IS COMING HOWARD JARVIS, JOHN L. LOEB, JR., JAMES FARMER, STEPHEN BERGER 30733 CHICAGO, DC 05/19/79 06/03/79 PART II: HOW TO SLASH YOUR FOOD BILLS IN HALF ARLENE STOLARSKI, PATTI UMLAND, MARY ANNE HAYES, SUSAN SAMTUR 30733 05/27/79 06/10/79 PART I: SHOULD YOU BUY A HOUSE NOW -- OR NEVER? DONALD I. HOVDE, BENNY KASS, WILLIAM WOLMAN, MICHAEL SUMICHRAST 30734 CHICAGO, DC 05/19/79 06/10/79 PART II: MALE SECRETARIES DONALD HARLEY, CHARLES W. BARKER, JOSEPH R. LICCARDO, ANTHONY ZATTI, KEITH M. WHITE 30734 DC 06/03/79 06/17/79 PART I: HOW TO LIVE WITH CONSTANT PAIN PATIENTS: HERBERT A. DIAMOND, BARBARA B. WOLF, ROSALIE TERRAVECCHIA DOCTORS: DR. GERALD ARONOFF, DR. DONALD M. DOOLEY, DR. NELSON H. HENDLER, DR. HAROLD CARRON 30736 CHICAGO, DC 06/03/79 06/17/79 PART II: THE MAN WHO GIVES ADVICE TO ANN LANDERS DR. EUGENE KENNEDY 30736 CHICAGO, DC 06/23/79 07/01/79 PART I: OUT OF GAS -- WHO'S TO BLAME? LESLIE J. GOLDMAN, JAMES F. FLUG, CHARLES KITTRELL, SENATOR HOWARD M. METZENBAUM 30738 CHICAGO, DC 06/23/79 07/01/79 PART II: "THE FLYING WHITE HOUSE" COLONEL RALPH ALBERTAZZIE 30738 CHICAGO, DC THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1979-80 05/26/79 04/14/79 10/07/79 04/19/81 DAVID SUSSKIND MEETS THE MARTIANS A. LYDIA STALNAKER, BRYCE BOND B. RUTH NORMAN, THOMAS MILLER 30729 CHICAGO, DC 09/22/79 10/14/79 PART I: ORGANIZED CRIME: THE BIGGEST BUSINESS IN AMERICA HANK H. MESSICK, RICHARD E. JAFFE, RALPH F. SALERNO, JACK KEY, THOMAS RENNER 32101 CHICAGO 09/22/79 10/14/79 PART II: BATTLE OVER BLACK ENGLISH MICHAEL MEYERS, DR. GENEVA SMITERMAN, DR. ELAINE LEWNAU, ETTA LADSOM 32101 CHICAGO 10/13/79 10/28/79 THE BLACK-JEWISH CRISIS DR. JOSEPH E. LOWERY, ARNOLD FORSTER, RANDALL ROBINSON, HOWARD M. SQUADRON 32105 CHICAGO 11/03/79 10/28/79 THE KENNEDY-CARTER SHOWDOWN ALLARD K. LOWENSTEIN, ARTHUR SCHLESINGER, JR., STUART EIZENSTAT, GERALD M. RAFSHOON 32109 CHICAGO, DC 10/27/79 11/11/79 09/07/80 03/28/82 PART I: SEX FOR SALE...4 "JOHNS' TELL ALL TOM, MARK, HUGH, GEORGE 32107 CHICAGO (T), DC 10/17/79 11/11/79 09/07/80 03/28/82 PART II: IS STRESS KILLING YOU? JOHN J. PARRINO, PH.D, KENNETH GREENSPAN, M.D. 32107 CHICAGO, DC 04/28/79 11/18/79 09/28/80 05/31/81 THE BARE FACTS: QUEENS OF BURLESQUE GEORGIA SOTHERN, ZORITA, SHERRY BRITTON, HOPE DIAMOND 30731 CHICAGO, DC 06/23/79 11/18/79 09/28/80 05/31/81 SUPER SALESWOMEN DOT COOK, ANDREA BERRITY, LINDA SCHMITT, SHIRLEY HUTTON 30731 CHICAGO 06/09/79 11/25/79 07/06/80 PART I: RICH & FEMALE - WOMEN WHO MAKE MILLIONS MURIEL SIEBERT, MARY ANN HALMI, EVA HORTON, DAISY TALLARICO, JOAN LEVINE 30737 CHICAGO, DC 06/09/79 11/25/79 07/06/80 PART II: GOTHIC WRITERS ROBERTA ANDERSON & MARY KUCZKIR (FERN MICHAELS), JANET DAILEY, PATRICIA MATTHEWS 30737 CHICAGO, DC 10/06/79 12/02/79 PART I: "BREAKING UP IS HARD TO TAKE" -- CHILDREN OF DIVORCE DON, CAREN, LIZ, GILLIAN, LISA 32102 CHICAGO 09/29/79 12/02/79 PART II: "THE WICKED TRUTH ABOUT STEP PARENTS" WILLIAM NOBLE, SUZY KALTER, MARCIA WYRTZEN, JEANETTE LOFAS, BOB MARTIN 32102 CHICAGO 10/27/79 12/09/79 PART I: LIARS BEWARE -- THE LATEST IN LIE DETECTION CHRIS GUGAS 32108 CHICAGO 10/06/79 12/09/79 PART II: THE RED BERETS -- TEENAGE VIGILANTES CURTIS SLIWA, DINO REYES, KATO, JEFF MONROE, JERRY MONROE, ET. AL. 32108 CHICAGO 11/10/79 12/16/79 07/13/80 PART I: HOW TO TEST YOUR DOG'S I.Q. AND PERSONALITY MATTHEW MARGOLIS 32115 CHICAGO 12/03/79 12/16/79 07/13/80 PART II: DAZZLING WOMEN FROM ABROAD LIVIA SLYVA WEINTRAUB, JACLINE MAZARD (JEAN MAHIE), REGINE, GEORGETTE KLINGER, PRINCESS SUMAIR 32115 CHICAGO 11/17/79 12/23/79 HOW TO PROSPER DURING THE COMING BAD YEARS HOWARD RUFF 32114 CHICAGO, DC 12/15/79 12/23/79 07/27/80 PART II: CHINA TODAY -- A CONVERSATION WITH HAN SUYIN HAN SUYIN 32114 32121 CHICAGO, DC 11/10/79 01/06/80 08/17/80 ARE YOUR TEENAGERS DRIVING YOU CRAZY? HELP IS HERE! DR. THOMAS J. COTTLE, ELIZABETH ROBERTS, DR. DAVID ELKIND, EDITH B. PHELPS, ELIOT DALEY 32110 CHICAGO 11/24/79 01/13/80 10/26/80 PART I: SHORT PEOPLE HAVE FEELINGS TOO! PAMELA BROWN, MIKE PARADINE, BILL GILE, NANCY HENKEL, IRWIN HASEN 32111 CHICAGO 10/17/79 01/13/80 10/26/80 PART II: LAUGHTER IS THE BEST MEDICINE NORMAN COUSINS 32111 CHICAGO 12/15/79 01/20/80 07/20/80 PART I: OWNERS OF GREAT RESTAURANTS TELL THEIR SECRETS SHELDON TANNEN "21"; WARNER LEROY, MAXWELL'S PLUM, TAVERN ON THE GREEN; EDMUND LILLYS, THE GLOUCESTER HOUSE; SIRIO MACCIONE, LE CIRQUE; VINCENT SARDI, JR., SARDI'S; PETER ASCHKENASY, U.S. STEAK-HOUSE, LUCHOW'S, CHARLEY O'S, AND THE AMERICAN CHARCUTERIE. 32117 CHICAGO 01/12/80 01/20/80 07/20/80 PART II: MAITRE D'S OF GREAT RESTAURANTS JOSEPH GARNI, LE CIRQUE; BRUNO MOLINARI, THE PALM; GIANNI GARAVELLI, NANNI AL VALLETTO; JEAN-CLAUDE COUTELLER, LE PERIGORD EAST 32117 CHICAGO 09/29/79 01/27/80 A MEDIUM WHO TALKS TO THE DEAD -- DORIS STOKES DORIS STOKES 32103 CHICAGO 11/17/79 02/03/80 10/05/80 PART I: PROSTITUTES TELL ALL "NINA", "CATHERINE", AND "MELINDA" 32112 CHICAGO, DC 01/12/80 02/03/80 10/05/80 PART II: WOMEN AGAINST PORNOGRAPHY DOLORES ALEXANDER, JANE MCHUGH, FRANCES PATAI, AND BARBARA MEHRHOF 32112 CHICAGO, DC 01/26/80 02/10/80 WHAT'S NEW WITH JACKIE, SINATRA, STREISAND, BEATTY, MINNELLI AND REYNOLDS, TOO LIZ SMITH, CHICAGO TRIBUNE-NEW YORK DAILY NEWS; TAKI THEODORACOPULOS, ESQUIRE; DAVID SHEEHAN, DIANA MCLELLAN, "THE EAR", IN THE WASHINGTON STAR 32119 11/24/79 02/17/80 09/21/80 12/13/81 PART I: LIFE AT THE TOP -- WIVES OF FAMOUS MEN JOYCE DAVIDSON SUSSKIND, NANCY MEHTA, MARILYN FUNT, NORRIS CHURCH 32113 CHICAGO, DC 11/17/79 02/17/80 09/21/80 12/13/81 PART II: ALL ABOUT THE CIA THOMAS POWERS, "THE MAN WHO KEPT THE SECRETS: RICHARD HELMS AND THE C.I.A." 32113 DC 01/12/80 02/24/80 09/14/80 MOVIE STARS CAME TO DINNER -- GROWING UP IN HOLLYWOOD JILL ROBINSON, "BED TIME STORY" AND "PERDIDO"; MICHAEL KORDA, "CHARMED LIVES"; WARNER LEROY, LINDA JANKLOW, BROOKE HAYWARD, "HAYWIRE". 32118 CHICAGO 02/02/80 02/24/80 09/14/80 PART II: GARBAGE OF THE STARS A. J. WEBERMAN, GARBOLOGIST 32118 CHICAGO 02/02/80 03/02/80 07/27/80 PART I: WE'RE HIGH ON BEING TALL GEORGE ANDREWS - 6'6", JUDY VOGEL - 6', CECILIA GARDNER - 6'1", KERRY KEANE - 6'6", TERRY LEE - 5'11", ALICE WHITE - 6' 32121 CHICAGO 02/02/80 03/02/80 PART II: SIZING UP THE NEWSCASTERS PHILIP MCHUGH 32121 12/03/79 03/09/80 08/24/80 PART I: 5 NEW YORK CABBIES TELL ALL MEL BENDOWITZ, EZRA CHITYAT, JAMES MORRIS, RICHARD CHEROL, LOIS DOYLE 32116 CHICAGO (T) 12/15/79 03/09/80 08/24/80 PART II: GOING BANANAS IN BEVERLY HILLS ELAINE YOUNG, JACK STARTZ, M.D., RONALD RICE, JUDY MAZEL 32116 CHICAGO 02/23/80 03/16/80 05/03/81 11/13/83 PART I: WE TAKE IT ALL OFF -- MALE STRIPPERS JACK THE STRIPPER, SEBASTIAN, CAREY GORDON, SUNSHINE, BERNARDO 32123 CHICAGO, DC 03/01/80 03/16/80 05/03/81 11/13/83 PART II: MUSCLES AND CURVES -- WOMEN BODY BUILDERS DORIS BARRILLEAUX, LYNDE JOHNSON, LYNN CONKWRIGHT, APRIL NICOTRA 32123 DC 03/01/80 03/23/80 08/03/80 PART I: THE DATING SERVICE FOR WINNER 'THE GODMOTHER' , ABBY HIRSCH CLIENTS: BARBARA WRENN, DOUGLAS RIPPETO, MITCHEL MITCHEL, BABTTE GLADSTEIN 32126 CHICAGO 02/23/80 03/23/80 08/03/80 PART II: THE GIRL WHO HAD EVERYTHING - DORIEN LEIGH DORIAN LEIGH 32126 CHICAGO 01/26/80 02/09/80 03/30/80 08/10/80 THE NEW REVOLUTION IN FOOD AND FUEL - A CONVERSATION WITH DWAYNE ANDREAS MR. DWAYNE ANDREAS, CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND COMPANY 32120 CHICAGO, DC 02/09/80 04/06/80 PART I: OUR HIDDEN SHAME: DYSLEXIA ARTHUR BIRSH, DELOS SMITH, EILEEN SIMPSON -- REVERSALS: A PERSONAL ACCOUNT OF VICTORY OVER DYSLEXIA, LYNNE HACKER, EMILY LANDAU, DANIEL GILDESGAME 32122 CHICAGO 02/23/80 04/06/80 PART II: THE NATIONAL LAMPOON P.J. O'ROURKE, GERALD SUSSMAN, TOD CARROLL, JOHN HUGHES 32122 CHICAGO 03/22/80 04/13/80 GORE VIDAL UNCENSORED 32130 CHICAGO, DC 03/08/80 04/20/80 PART I: APOCALYPSE SOON: A CONVERSATION WITH WILLIAM SIMON WILLIAM SIMON, FORMER TREASURY SECRETARY 32127 CHICAGO 03/22/80 04/20/80 PART II: BEWARE OF PICKPOCKETS CARL LEWIS, DETECTIVE ROBERT MAGONE 32127 CHICAGO 03/15/80 04/27/80 01/31/82 PART I: THE SHAME OF OUR HOSPITALS -- FIVE ANGRY NURSES 'CAROL', 'REBECCA', 'ELEANOR', 'RUTH' AND 'HELEN' 32129 CHICAGO, DC 03/29/80 04/27/80 01/31/82 PART II: DR. WILLIAM NOLEN WILLIAM A. NOLEN, M.D. 32129 CHICAGO 04/26/80 05/04/80 SEX IN AMERICA -- AN INTERVIEW WITH GAY TALESE GAY TALESE, AUTHOR: THY NEIGHBOR'S WIFE 32135 CHICAGO 03/29/80 05/11/80 PART I: SOFT, SWEET AND SOUTHERN -- 6 BELLES FROM DIXIE PHYLLIS MACBRYDE, REBECCA SINGLETON, NANCY BELLE BRASS, MARY MCMILLAN, ROSEMARY DANIELL; AUTHOR: FATAL FLOWERS; MARY VANN HUNTER; AUTHOR: SASSAFRAS 32132 CHICAGO 04/19/80 05/11/80 PART II: SOUTHERN JOURNALISTS TALK ABOUT JIMMY CARTER AND OTHER GOOD OLE BOYS LARRY KING, AUTHOR: OF OUTLAWS, CON MEN, WHORES, POLITICIANS AND OTHER ARTISTS; MARSHALL FRADY, AUTHOR: SOUTHERNERS; ROY BLOUNT, JR., AUTHOR: CRACKERS 32132 CHICAGO 05/10/80 05/18/80 HOW DID IT HAPPEN -- CARTER VS REAGAN TOM WICKER, THE NEW YORK TIMES; ALBERT R. HUNT, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL; WILLIAM A. RUSHER, NATIONAL REVIEW; HAYNES JOHNSON, THE WASHINGTON POST 32137 CHICAGO (T) 04/26/80 05/25/80 PART I: THE SPORTS EMPIRE OF SONNY WERBLIN SONNY WERBLIN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE MADISON SQUARE GARDEN CORPORATION 32134 CHICAGO, DC 05/03/80 05/25/80 PART II: THE LAST OF THE COWBOYS -- 5 TRUCKERS RUSSELL "CAPTAIN ZIG-ZAG" PATE, GEORGE "WILDMAN" RAWLS, ED "SKY PILOT" WINTERSTEEN, MIKE "DOUBLE R" CRAKER, JAMES "BUCKY" BUCKOWSKI 32134 CHICAGO, DC 03/08/80 06/01/80 PART I: BEAT INFLATION WITH DIAMONDS, ART, STAMPS AND COINS NICOLA BULGARI, RICHARD L. FEIGEN, RAYMOND WEIL AND HARVEY STACK 32128 CHICAGO 03/15/80 06/01/80 PART II: HOLLYWOOD PRODUCER -- JENNINGS LANG JENNINGS LANG 32128 CHICAGO 04/19/80 06/08/80 PART I: INFLATION IS KILLING US! 5 ANGRY VICTIMS NITA DENNIS, JOE CURLEY, JOSEPH MULHOLLAND, ANNE AND GEORGE ANDREWS 32133 CHICAGO 04/19/80 06/08/80 PART II: MIND OVER BODY -- A DEMONSTRATION OF THE MARTIAL ARTS LINDA LUTES AND NELSON HOWE 32133 CHICAGO 05/24/80 06/15/80 PART I: UPDATE ON MEDICAL BREAKTHROUGHS -- DR. ISADORE ROSENFELD ISADORE ROSENFELD, M.D. 32140 CHICAGO, DC 05/24/80 06/15/80 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH CORINNA MARSH CORINNA MARSH 32140 CHICAGO, DC 06/07/80 06/22/80 WHY ARE THE BULLS RUNNING ON WALL STREET JOSEPH GRANVILLE, BURTON MALKIEL, DAVID DREMAN, RAYMOND DEVOE, JOHN NEFF 32142 CHICAGO, DC 06/04/80 06/29/80 PART I: WORKAHOLICS ON THE JOYS OF WORKING FLORENCE HASELTINE, M.D., RICHARD ROYCE, LIZ FILLO, FRANK S. BERGER, LAWRENCE A. SUSSER, M.D. 32141 CHICAGO 05/24/80 06/29/80 PART II: THE TWO PAYCHECK MARRIAGE JUDY HUNT, CHARLES MITCHELL, MEG WHITCOMB, JEANNE CANTEEN, PRATT 32141 CHICAGO THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1980-81 10/06/80 10/12/80 A DESPERATE TIME -- WILLIAM SIMON ON THE STATE OF THE UNION FORMER TREASURE SECRETARY, WILLIAM E. SIMON 33605 CHICAGO, DC 10/18/80 10/19/80 A CONVERSATION WITH HAL GULLIVER HAROLD GULLIVER, EDITOR, ATLANTA CONSTITUTION 33606 CHICAGO 09/17/80 11/02/80 07/05/81 PART I: BIG, BEAUTIFUL WOMEN -- NO SIN TO BE A SIZE 18 MADALINE SPARKS, ILVIRA TORTORA, BARBARA BETZA, STELLA REICHMAN, LILLIAM NILSON 33602 CHICAGO, DC 10/06/80 11/02/80 07/05/81 PART II: IS THIN STILL "IN"? SUZIE BERTIN, JILL DIRKS, JOHNA JOHNSON, BARBARA PEARLMAN 33602 CHICAGO, DC 05/17/80 11/09/80 10/04/81 PART I: MEET AND MARRY THROUGH THE PERSONAL ADS JUDI MCMAHON, BILL JAMES, STEPHEN T., HEYMANN, STEPHANIE KAPILIAN, BOB EVANS 32139 CHICAGO, DC 05/17/80 11/09/80 10/04/81 PART II: NO KIDS FOR US PLEASE ANNE SEIFERT, WALTER CALLAHAN, BARBARA COFFEY, DOROTHY WILSON, IVAN MENDELSON 32139 CHICAGO, DC 09/17/80 11/16/80 07/12/81 PART I: LIFE AFTER DARK -- NIGHT PEOPLE TELL ALL RICHARD WEXLER, CINDY CAPALDO, BLEECKER BOB PLOTNIK, ABLE ABEL, SAVARIO COSTANZA 33601 CHICAGO, DC 10/18/80 11/16/80 07/12/81 PART II: SUPER FANS OF THE STARS BETTY BRINKENHOFF (FRANK SINATRA), DENIS FERRARA (ELIZABETH TAYLOR), DOLORES TRANDAHL (ELVIS PRESLEY), NEAL PETERS (ANN MARGRET) 33601 CHICAGO, DC 05/03/80 11/23/80 09/20/81 PART I: WOMEN RATE MEN: LOVERS AND LOSERS NAN ROBERTSON, SUSANNA HOFFMAN, CAROL BOTWIN 32136 CHICAGO, DC 06/04/80 11/23/80 09/20/81 PART II: MEN ANSWER BACK ANTHONY HADEN-GUEST, MARTIN SAGE, WILLIAMS HOOTKINS, HARRY STEIN 32136 CHICAGO, DC 09/27/80 11/30/80 PART I: THE JEANING OF AMERICA -- MODELS, MOGULS AND MAKERS JOSEPH NAKASH (JORDACHE), PAUL GUEZ (SASSON), WARREN HIRSH (GLORIA VANDERBILT) 33603 CHICAGO 11/19/80 11/30/80 PART II: NOT FOR WOMEN ONLY -- MEN'S COSMETICS TONY CARVETTE (GEORGETTE KLINGER), TOM DAY (CLINIQUE), JAN STUART (JAN STUART), CHIP TOLBERT (MEN'S FASHION ASSOCIATION), PAUL WILMOT (HALSTON) 33603 CHICAGO 11/24/80 12/07/80 08/02/81 PART I: A MAN FOR ALL REASONS: YALE PRESIDENT, A. BARTLETT GIAMATTI 33609 CHICAGO 11/24/80 12/07/80 08/02/81 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH MICHAEL THOMAS MICHAEL THOMAS, AUTHOR GREEN MONDAY 33609 CHICAGO 11/24/80 12/14/80 07/18/81 PART I: ARE LAWYERS RUINING OUR LIVES? PHILIP M. STERN, GEOFFREY C. HAZARD, FRANK R. ROSINY, ALAN B. MORRISON, JUDGE WILLIAM B. LAWLESS 33607 CHICAGO, DC 11/16/80 12/14/80 PART II: NORMAN DACEY, ROSEMARY FURMAN 33607 12/17/80 12/21/80 08/30/81 PART I: FEELING GOOD ALL UNDER -- THE ELEGANT NEW LINGERIE REBECCA ASPAN, BELL TICE, ORA FEDER, DAVID STIFFLER, SAMI 33613 CHICAGO 12/17/80 12/21/80 08/30/81 PART II: BEST FRIENDS AND BEST SELLERS CONSUELO BAEHR, SUSAN ISAACS, HILMA WOLITZER 33613 CHICAGO 12/14/80 12/28/80 THE REMARKABLE JONATHAN SCHWARTZ -- A SPECIAL PERFORMANCE JONATHAN SCHWARTZ 33612 CHICAGO, DC 12/03/80 01/04/81 PART I: A HOUSE IS NOT A HOME -- CONGRESSMEN WHO QUIT OTIS G. PIKE, JAMES P. JOHNSON, JOE WYATT, JR. 33610 CHICAGO (T) 12/17/80 01/04/80 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH STUDS TERKEL STUDS TERKEL 33610 CHICAGO (T) 01/07/81 01/11/81 09/13/81 PART I: THE INCREDIBLE WORLD OF MOTHER TERESA JOYCE DAVIDSON SUSSKIND 33608 CHICAGO, DC 11/19/80 01/11/81 09/13/81 PART II: HOW TO SUCCEED? GO TO BUSINESS SCHOOL SUSAN THOMAS, JED DALY, ROBERT FRIEDMAN, JAY ESSEY, ELIZABETH CLOSTERMAN 33608 CHICAGO, DC 01/12/81 01/18/81 04/15/84 PART I: WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE JOHN SIMON, RICHARD MITCHELL, EDWIN NEWMAN 33611 CHICAGO 12/03/80 01/18/81 PART II: WHERE THE BODIES ARE BURIED -- WASHINGTON LOWDOWN DONALD LAMBRO, CHARLES PETERS, MICHAEL J. MALBIN, FRANK SILBEY 33611 CHICAGO 01/21/81 01/25/81 PART I: JUNK FOOD JUNKIES RICHARD SMITH, DAVID NOONAN, MAGGIE MULHEARN, BUFFALO GEORGE TOOMER 33616 CHICAGO (T) 01/21/81 01/25/81 PART II: HOW TO IMPROVE YOUR EATING HABITS RICHARD S. RIVLIN, M.D., RICHARD PASSWATER, DR. ROBERT PALMER, JOSEPH RECHTSCHAFFEN, M.D. 33616 CHICAGO 01/24/81 02/01/81 THE BEST AND WORST MOVIES: FILM CRITICS JANET MASLIN, ANDREW SARRIS, JACK KROLL, GENE SISKEL 33617 CHICAGO (T) 01/07/81 02/08/81 08/23/81 PART I: TAKE THOSE INCHES OFF! SHAPE UP WITH EXERCISE MARJORIE CRAIG, LYDIA BACH, CHARLES GAINES, MARUSCHKA 33614 CHICAGO 01/24/81 02/08/81 08/23/81 PART II: THE ESTABLISHMENT LEONARD AND MARK SILK, STEPHEN BIRMINGHAM 33614 CHICAGO 02/11/81 02/15/81 CELEBRITY WATCHING WITH LIZ SMITH, TAKI, JAMES BRADY AND JODY JACOBS 33620 CHICAGO 02/18/81 02/22/81 HOW TO SURVIVE AND PROSPER IN THE 80s HOWARD RUFF, DOUGLAS CASEY, JEROME SMITH, THOMAS HOLT 33621 CHICAGO 02/11/81 03/01/81 08/09/81 PART I: PRETTY BABIES -- THE NEW TEEN-AGE MODELS BETTINA, LORI LOUGHLIN, CATHLEEN ESS, FELICE SCHACHTER, LENA REID 33619 CHICAGO 02/07/81 03/01/81 08/09/81 PART II: ARE YOUR CHILDREN BECOMING ADULTS TOO SOON? DR. AARON HASS, PATRICIA O'BRIEN, ARTHUR KORNHABER, M.D., ADELE HOFFMAN, M.D. 33619 CHICAGO 02/21/81 03/08/81 BIGOTRY RIDES AGAIN WILLIAM SLOANE COFFIN, ARNOLD FORSTER, WILLIAM A. FUSHER, CONGRESSMAN JOHN CONYERS, DR. M. MORAN WESTON 33622 CHICAGO 03/07/81 03/15/81 THE BATTLE FOR SURVIVAL -- THE AMERICAN AUTO INDUSTRY WENDELL H. MILLER, STEPHEN I. SCHOLSSBERG, TOM HANNA, JERRY FLINT, DAVID HEALY 33623 CHICAGO 01/12/81 03/22/81 07/26/81 PART I: POURING OUT YOUR TROUBLES: BARTENDERS TELL ALL PADDY QUINN, CHARLIE SCHOENEMAN, RAY FOLEY, JOHN "SHIRTS" HUGHES, KITTY FITZKE 33615 CHICAGO, DC 03/18/81 03/22/81 07/26/81 PART II: TWINS WHO MARRIED TWINS BARBI GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., BRUCE GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., CHERYL GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., BARRY GOLDENBERG, M.D. 33615 CHICAGO, DC 03/18/81 03/29/81 09/27/81 THE MORAL MAJORITY ON THE WARPATH DR. TIM LA HAYE, DR. DAN C. FORE, SENATOR FRANK CHURCH, DR. DANIEL C. MAGUIRE 33624 CHICAGO, DC 03/28/81 04/05/81 08/16/81 PART I: WOMEN AND SUCCESS -- MAKING IT TO THE TOP JUDY MELLO, ANNE P. HYDE, SUSAN HOROWITZ, PAULA D. HUGHES, JO FOXWORTH 33625 CHICAGO, DC 03/28/81 04/05/81 08/16/81 05/06/84 PART II: THE TRUTH ABOUT SENILITY ROBERT N. BUTLER, M.D., DENNETH L. DAVIS, M.D., DR. PETER DAVIES, DR. ROSE ROBROF 33625 CHICAGO, DC 04/04/81 04/12/81 PART I: BANKS ON THE BRINK MURIEL SIEBERT, LEE GUNDERSON, H. ERICH HEINEMANN, WILLIAM E. DONOGHUE, DR. SAUL B. KLAYMAN 33626 CHICAGO 04/04/81 04/12/81 05/20/84 PART II: DOCTORS' WIVES CARLA FINE, LINDA SHIPLEY, LINDA SEDA, LORI TAYLOR 33626 CHICAGO 4/25/81 04/26/81 THE AMERICAN MILITARY MACHINE: ARE WE READY FOR BATTLE? CONGRESSMAN JIM COURTER, BARRY R. POSEN, BRIGADIER GENERAL ALBION KNIGHT, JR., EDWARD LUTTWAK, GENERAL VOLNEY F. WARNER 33628 CHICAGO, DC 05/02/81 05/10/81 FROM HOLLYWOOD TO BROADWAY - PART I: DUDLEY MOORE 33631 CHICAGO (T), UCLA 05/04/81 05/10/81 FROM HOLLYWOOD TO BROADWAY - PART II: MC CANN AND NUGENT NELLE NUGENT , ELIZABETH MCCANN 33631 CHICAGO (T) 05/09/81 05/17/81 PART I: HOMELESS AND HELPLESS -- PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS ANN MARIE ROUSSEAU, WILLIAM KUEHNE, ANTON GALENOS, SELMA (MARIE) PRICE, SYD ROLFS, VERONICA (VIRGINIA) WILLIAMS, GENE PALMER 33632 CHICAGO, DC 05/04/81 05/17/81 PART II: SPORTS AMERICAN STYLE: BIG, BRUISING BUSINESS DICK SHAAP, PETER BONVENTRE, MIKE LUPICA, DAN JENKINS 33632 CHICAGO, DC 05/09/81 05/24/81 PART I: SURVIVALISTS: PREPARING FOR DOOMSDAY KURT SAXON, JOSEPH RUSTICK, M.D., ROBERT FIRTH, GENE AND PEARL TARMAN 33633 CHICAGO, DC 04/25/81 05/24/81 PART II: DELAYED MOTHERHOOD -- HAVING CHILDREN AT AGE THIRTY FIVE JULIE HOUSTON, LYNN POVICH, JACQUELINE PESUT, LUISA LA VIOLA, DR. PEGGY EWING 33633 CHICAGO, DC 05/18/81 06/07/81 12/09/84 PART I: WITHOUT TEARS -- CHILDREN COPING WITH CANCER CHILDREN: STEPHANIE ROBSON, JIM VOLPE, DOLLY MICONI, CRAIG HETZER, JENNIFER DALSEY MOTHERS: SHARON ROBSON, PEGGY VOLPE, BRITTA HETZER, MARTHA SMENTEK (JENNIFER DALSEY'S MOTHER) 33635 CHICAGO (T), DC 06/06/81 06/07/81 PART II: A VANISHING BREED -- THE PROFESSIONAL VOLUNTEER VIVIAN HARRIS, MARY LINDSAY, JEAN DELAFIELD, ISABELLE STEVENSON, GLORIA W. MILLIKEN 33635 CHICAGO, DC 06/14/81 PART I: THE MAGNIFICENT $20 MILLION YANKEE -- DAVE WINFIELD 33636 CHICAGO, DC 06/14/81 PART II: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE TONY AWARDS ALEXANDER H. COHEN, HILDY PARKS 33636 CHICAGO, DC 05/02/81 06/21/81 PART I: REPORT FROM THREE DOCTORS: THE LATEST IN MEDICINE ISADORE ROSENFELD, M.D., DR. JOHN H. LARAGH, DR. JOSEPH WILDER 33630 CHICAGO, DC 05/18/81 06/21/81 PART II: HOW TO SUE WITHOUT A LAWYER JOHN STRIKER, ANDREW SHAPIRO 33630 CHICAGO, DC 06/13/81 06/28/81 PART I: SHOW BUSINESS COUPLES RENEE TAYLOR, JOSEPH BOLOGNA MARGE REDMOND, JACK WESTON 33634 CHICAGO 05/18/81 06/28/81 PART II: WHO REMEMBERS CARTER -- JOSEPH CALIFANO DOES, THAT'S WHO 33634 CHICAGO THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1981-82 06/06/81 06/13/81 10/11/81 08/08/82 STARTING OVER AFTER DIVORCE: MIDDLE AGED SINGLES RICHARD SCHICKEL, ANNE PARK, MARTHA HUGHES, STEVEN BRALOVE, RITA MCDOWELL 33637 CHICAGO, DC 06/08/81 10/18/81 08/01/82 PART I: THE REAL CHORUS LINE: BROADWAY DANCERS DONNA DRAKE, BOB HEATH, MARYBETH KURDOCK, DAVID EVANS, RON SCHWINN, JOAN BELL, DEAN BADOLATE, MARYANN NILES 33638 CHICAGO, DC 06/13/81 10/18/81 08/01/82 PART II: FACES IN THE CROWD: MOVIE EXTRAS ROZ BRAVERMAN, ANDREW MURPHY, BARRY WISEMAN, SHANNON SORIN, VELA CERES 33638 CHICAGO, DC 09/30/81 10/25/81 PART I: MAKING MARRIAGE WORK: MARRIAGE COUNSELORS LAURA SINGER, DR. ROBERT RYDER, DR. MEL KRANTZLER, DR. FREDERICK HUMPHREY 35451 CHICAGO, DC 09/30/81 10/25/81 PART II: DIVORCE MEDIATORS DR. JOHN M. HAYNES, LAWRENCE GAUGHAN, SAMUEL MARGULIES, VIRGINIA STAFFORD 35451 CHICAGO, DC 10/24/81 11/01/81 WHAT PLASTIC SURGERY CAN DO FOR YOU DR. RALPH MILLARD, DR. CHRISTOPHER WEATHERLEY-WHITE, DR. BRUCE CONNELL, DR. MICHAEL HOGAN 35452 CHICAGO, DC 10/07/81 11/08/81 07/18/82 06/05/83 PART I: MODELS OVER 50 WHO LOOK GREAT KAYLAN PICKFORD, LILLIAN MARCUSON, CARMEN DELL 'OREFICE 35453 CHICAGO (T), DC 10/28/81 11/08/81 07/18/82 PART II: THE MYSTERY OF SLEEP DR. RICHARD BOOTZIN, DR. QUENTIN REGESTEIN, DR. ELLIOT WEITZMAN 35453 CHICAGO, DC 11/07/81 11/15/81 PART I: MOTHERS WITHOUT CUSTODY ELLEN KIMBALL, "JACKIE", "BARBARA" 35455 CHICAGO, DC 11/07/81 11/15/81 PART II: CAMPUS CONSERVATIVES KEENEY JONES, JOHN GOODWIN, BENNETT COOPER, TERRY QUIST 35455 CHICAGO, DC 11/18/81 11/22/81 PART I: A TALK WITH FATHER THEODORE HESBURGH 34556 CHICAGO 11/18/81 11/22/81 PART II: UPDATE ON THE RADICAL LEFT LEWIS COLE, JOANNE LANDY, JANE ALPERT 34556 CHICAGO 11/21/81 11/29/81 07/04/82 PART I: THE SWINGERS PARADISE OF CLUB MED ROD FRANKEL, DOREEN WOODRUM, SUSAN FRAYTUS, RICKY DETRES, BOB LEIGHTON, CLAUDE KEBBE 35454 CHICAGO, DC 10/28/81 11/29/81 07/04/82 PART II: RETURN TO THE NEST STEPHANIE GANGI, TOM RIPP, FRANK SCHIRALLI, SCOTT MARTONE, ANGELA DIVERGILIO 35454 CHICGO, DC 11/25/81 12/06/81 08/22/82 WOMBS FOR RENT JULIE GALLIMORE, DR. WILLIAM MARRA, NOEL KEANE, DR. PHILLIP PARKER 35458 DC 12/05/81 12/20/81 06/27/82 PART I: DON'T GO NEAR THE WATER! ELEGANT NEW SWIMMER LIZA BRUCE, ANNE COLE, STANLEY REGENBOGAN, FRANK FRIEND, MIRIAM RUZOW 35459 CHICAGO 12/05/81 12/20/81 06/27/82 01/08/84 07/22/84 02/16/86 PART II: ALL ABOUT HANGOVERS DAVID OUTERBRIDGE, NELSON DEMILLE, PETER WALSH, HERBERT GOULD, M.D. 35459 CHICAGO 12/19/81 01/03/82 PART I: AN INTERVIEW WITH GLADYCE BEGELMAN: CO-AUTHOR OF "NEW YORK ON $1,000.00 A DAY" 35457 CHICAGO, DC 12/19/81 01/03/82 08/29/82 04/01/84 PART II: CAN YOU ERASE THOSE WRINKLES? THE TRUTH ABOUT SILICONE AND COLLAGEN DR. LEWIS FEDER, DR. ROBERT AUERBACH, DR. JAMES LEYDEN 35457 CHICAGO, DC 12/05/81 01/20/82 07/25/82 PART I: TOUGHLOVE: PARENTS FIGHT BACK PHYLLIS AND DAVID YORK, LANE PEER, RICHARD SURVING, JEAN BAKER WUNDER 35459 CHICAGO, DC 12/19/81 01/10/82 07/25/82 PART II: ALL ABOUT CATS ANITRA FRAZIER, SIMON BOND, SAMANTHA SUSSKIND, JERRY BENISATTO, PATRICIA NELL WARREN, RICHARD GEBHARDT 35459 CHICAGO, DC 01/13/82 01/17/82 08/15/82 PART I: WEIGHT LOSS NORMA SKOPIN, STEVE SLIVA, GERALDINE O'CONNOR, ANNE MCCARTHY, IRENE CURTIN 35462 CHICAGO, DC 01/13/82 01/17/82 08/15/82 03/25/84 09/16/84 02/09/86 07/06/86 PART II: 'LISA H.' OPERATION LINTON WHITAKER, M.D., JAMES KATOWITZ, M.D., DEREK BRUCE, M.D., CH.B 35462 CHICAGO, DC 01/20/82 01/24/82 "NO, MR. PRESIDENT, WE'RE NOT BETTER OFF" PART I: VICTIMS OF THE BUDGET CUTS MATILDE COLON, ZELDA WEINER, MARY GARBUTT, MURIEL ZGARDOWSKI, MARY GALE 35463 CHICAGO 01/20/82 01/24/82 PART II: FACING PERMANENT LAYOFF DAN SULLIVAN, DOUG FORD, BOB LONGWORTH, BILL AHSCROFT, (RON CARVER-P.R.) 35463 CHICAGO 01/27/82 02/07/82 09/26/82 PART I: BACHELORS OF THE MONTH MICHAEL JEFFREY GRIFFITH, PETER KUHN, O. STEVEN FREDERICKSEN, JIM ZERBE, JOEL DIAMOND 35465 CHICAGO, DC 12/16/81 02/07/82 09/26/82 PART II: CHIROPRACTORS VS. M.D.'S DR. STEPHEN BARRETT, LOUIS SPORTELLI, D.C., CHESTER WILK, D.C., REUBEN HOPPENSTEIN, M.D. 35465 CHICAGO, DC 01/30/82 02/14/82 LOOKING FOR LOVE: A GUIDE FOR SINGLES DR. MARTIN GALLITAN, JOE O'CONNELL, MARCY BOUCHER, GAYLE BOARD, KEN NELSON, MITCHEL MITCHEL 35466 CHICAGO, DC 02/10/82 02/21/82 WHO'S HOT, WHO'S NOT -- WHO'S IN, WHO'S OUT -- THE LATEST GOSSIP MADELLEINE SCHAAP, MAXINE MESSINGER, LIZ SMITH JAMES BRADY, BOB COLACELLO 35467 CHICAGO, DC 02/28/82 PART I: ASTROLOGERS PREDICT WHATS IN THE STARS FOR 1982 MARIA ELISA CRUMMERE, MARTIN SCHULMAN, DARRELL MARTINI, MAE WILSON-LUDLAM 35464 CHICAGO 02/28/82 PART II: SABINA SHALOM 35464 CHICAGO 02/24/82 03/07/82 THE WILD WORLD OF SPORTS DICK SCHAAP, DAN JENKINS, MIKE LUPICA, DAVE ANDERSON, MIKE DOWNEY 35469 CHICAGO 02/27/82 03/07/82 TRAVELING SALESMEN JIM O'CONNOR, JOEL KATZ, JIM PRENDERGAST, DICK ORNSTEIN 35469 CHICAGO 02/13/82 03/14/82 07/11/82 CRIMINALS ARE GETTING AWAY WITH MURDER PHIL SEELIG, BILL CLARK, JUDGE EDWIN TORRES, SEYMOUR WISHMAN 35468 CHICAGO 03/10/82 03/21/82 09/12/82 PART I: ARE WOMEN THEIR OWN WORST ENEMIES? MARY VANN HUNTER, MONIQUE VAN VOOREN, KATHRYN LIVINGSTON, DORIS LILLY 35471 DC 03/13/82 03/21/82 09/12/82 PART II: NICE GIRLS DO DR. IRENE KASSORLA 35471 DC 02/27/82 04/04/82 TROUBLED SKIES: THE AIRLINE MESS WILLIAM HOWARD, DON BURR, MEL BRENNER, MICHAEL ARMELLINO, SECOR BROWNE 35470 CHICAGO, DC 03/24/82 04/04/82 08/29/82 SUPERMOMS COLETTE ROSSANT, KATHRYN DARROW, MEG WHITCOMB, PENNY HAWKEY 35470 CHICAGO, DC 03/13/82 04/11/82 PART I: LIFTING THE BAMBOO CURTAIN: THE URGENT NEED TO UNDERSTAND CHINA DR. JOHN KING FAIRBANK 35472 CHICAGO, DC 03/10/82 04/11/82 PART II: COLLEGE GRADS IN MENIAL JOBS CHAS HICKEY, JANE HANSTEIN, ED CRICHIO, MARK NUNBERG, CAREY HUNTER 35472 CHICAGO (T), DC 04/14/82 04/18/82 PUBLIC SERVICE OR PUBLIC RIP OFF? -- UTILITIES EDWARD LARKIN, EDWARD HYNES, THOMAS FITZPATRICK, KAREN BURSTEIN, CAROL BARGER, ALFRED NARDELLI 35473 CHICAGO 04/25/82 ON THE VERGE OF RUIN: AMERICA'S DESPERATE FARMERS NITA GIBSON, WAYNE CRYTS, JOHN STULP, PETER CURRA, VAREL BAILEY 35476 CHICAGO, DC 04/24/82 05/02/82 COUNTDOWN TO DOOMSDAY: THE NUCLEAR ARMS DEBATE ADMIRAL ELMO ZUMWALT, DR. DANIEL MAGUIRE, DR. SCOTT THOMPSON, JACK GEIGER, M.D. FRITZ ERMARTH, CONGRESSMAN THOMAS DOWNEY 35477 CHICAGO, DC 03/24/82 05/09/82 PART I: FAST AND FUNNY: COLLEGE DEBATERS DAVID BAILIN, HARRY WALTERS, LARRY EICHENFIELD, EDWARD O'TOOLE, DAVID KIDD, J.J. GERTLER, GRANT OLIPHANT, RICHARD SOMMER 35473 CHICAGO, DC 05/08/82 05/16/82 GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS ABOUT THE ECONOMY DR. WILLIAM NISKANEN, JR., LEONARD SILK, DR. OTTO ECKSTEIN, DR. ALAN GREENSPAN, DR. JOSEPH PECHMAN 35479 CHICAGO (T) 05/05/82 05/23/82 10/03/82 "I'M ON WELFARE AND I HATE IT" -- A WELFARE MOTHER SHARON HUNT 35478 CHICAGO, DC 05/19/82 05/30/82 PART I: NOT FOR MEN ONLY -- BLUE COLLAR WOMEN TINA NANNARONE, LAURA SCHWARTZ, JANE KELLEY, SHARON HOLMES, JUDY HUGHES 35480 CHICAGO, DC 05/19/82 05/30/82 PART II: OUT OF CASH? TRY BARTER ANNIE PROULX, JERRY WEINER, GENE HOLTZMAN, CONNIE STAPLETON 35480 CHICAGO, DC 05/22/82 06/06/82 09/19/82 AN INTERVIEW WITH THE REMARKABLE VIDAL SASSOON VIDAL SASSOON 35481 CHICAGO, DC 06/13/82 WHO CAN AFFORD COLLEGE ANYMORE? -- PART I: ADMINISTRATORS JAMES POWELL, STEPHEN TRACHTENBERG, WILLIAM MAXWELL, HARVEY GROTRAIN 35482 CHICAGO 06/13/82 WHO CAN AFFORD COLLEGE ANYMORE? -- PART 2: PARENTS JOSEPH ZULLO, JOHN KAUFMAN, FREDERIC KRAMER, GLORIA GATTI, ALEXANDRA GREELEY 35482 CHICAGO 06/20/82 NO MORE LAND OF PLENTY NORMAN BERG, KREKEL KARCH, NEIL SAMPSON 35484 CHICAGO 06/20/82 CAREER COUNSELORS JOHN CRYSTAL, STANLEY HYMAN, ROBERT SWAIN, IRENE ANSHER 35484 CHICAGO THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1982-83 10/06/82 10/10/82 THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW -- 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL - PART I 35486 CHICAGO, DC 10/09/82 10/17/82 THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW -- 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL - PART II MAUREEN STAPLETON, ANTHONY QUINN, NORMAN MAILER, TRUMAN CAPOTE 37027 CHICAGO (T), UCLA, DC 07/16/82 10/24/82 08/28/83 TOP TRIAL LAWYERS DEMONSTRATE THE ART OF JURY SELECTION PHILIP CORBOY, HAROLD PRICE FAHRINGER, AARON BRODER, BILL COLSON 35483 CHICAGO, DC 04/17/82 10/31/82 07/17/83 PART I: COCAINE: A 30 BILLION DOLLAR EPIDEMIC ROBERT MILLMAN, M.D., ANDY KOWL, TOM HENDERSON, "AMY", "A.J.", "LIZA" 35475 CHICAGO, DC 04/17/82 10/31/82 07/17/83 02/03/85 11/17/85 PART II: PARTY CRASHERS GARY WATSON, STEVE GOLDSTEIN, FRANK FUSARO, MIKE BURKE 35475 CHICAGO (T), DC 10/30/82 11/07/82 HERPES: THE VENEREAL DISEASE THAT CAN'T BE CURED PART 1: VICTIMS: OSCAR GILLESPIE, PHD., JANE RUBINSKY , RUSSELL WOOD, "SCOTT" PART II: DOCTORS: ANDRE NAHMIAS, M.D., HERBERT BLOUGH, M.D., JOHN GROSSMAN, M.D., DR. CARLOS LOPEZ 37028 CHICAGO (T), DC 11/03/82 11/14/82 08/21/83 PART I: WHY DON'T PEOPLE DATE ANYMORE? DOUG FOSTER, DOUG BERNSTEIN, SERENA BLISS, MICHAEL SELBY, LIZ CASTELLS, MAGGIE PETERS, SIGNE WARNER, BOB POLLAK 37029 CHICAGO (T) 11/03/82 11/14/82 08/21/83 PART II: AN INTERVIEW WITH HAMILTON JORDAN HAMILTON JORDAN 37029 CHICAGO 11/06/82 11/21/82 01/26/86 05/25/86 08/17/86 PART I: DOLLAR A DANCE -- TAXI DANCERS ARIEL LUCAS, PAUL PRICKETT, PENNY PRUCHA, ELLEN STOKES, CAROL SUNDQUIST 37030 CHICAGO 11/06/82 11/21/82 03/18/84 PART II: THE MYSTERY OF THE FULL MOON ARNOLD L. LEIBER, M.D., CHARLES S. MIRABILE, M.D., DR. RALPH W. MORRIS, DR. DONALD P. LASALLE 37030 CHICAGO (T) 11/20/82 11/28/82 CONGRESSMEN WHO WERE DEFEATED DON CLAUSEN, GENE ATKINSON, TOBY MOFFETT, JOHN LEBOUTILLIER 37031 CHICAGO (T) 11/20/82 12/05/82 02/17/85 PART I: HOW TO MARRY A RICH MAN JACQUELINE THOMPSON, RITA LACHMAN, DIANE ACKERMAN 37032 CHICAGO 06/19/82 12/05/82 PART II: LONG DISTANCE MARRIAGE BRYNA SANGER, HARRY KATZ, KAREN AKERS, CATHERINE AND JIM FOSTER 37032 CHICAGO (T) 11/27/82 12/12/82 07/10/83 PART I: GROWING UP IN THE DEPRESSION WITH RUSSELL BAKER, ANNE JACKSON, ELI WALLACH AND ED KOCH 37035 CHICAGO (T) 11/20/82 12/12/82 07/10/83 01/20/85 01/19/86 PART II: THE EFFECT OF COLOR ON OUR LIVES JOHN OTT, DR. JAMES D'ADAMO, IRENE AUSTIN 37035 CHICAGO (T) 12/08/82 12/19/82 06/26/83 PART I: CHOCOLATE TOM KRON, LAURA BRODY, MILTON ZELMAN, AL PECHENIK, RUDOLF SPRUNGLI 37036 CHICAGO (T) 12/08/82 12/19/82 06/26/83 PART II: ENTERTAINING CHARLOTTE TREE, SANDRA KASPER, MARY MCFADDEN, GEORGE LANG 37036 CHICAGO 11/27/82 12/26/82 07/24/83 PART I: TV ANCHORWOMEN ROBIN YOUNG, MONICA KAUFMAN, SUE SIMMONS, PAT HARPER 37034 CHICAGO (T) 12/11/82 12/26/82 07/24/83 PART II: AMBASSADOR MALCOLM TOON 37034 12/11/82 01/02/83 10/16/83 07/29/84 02/16/86 07/13/86 PAR I: SELF DEFENSE FOR WOMEN: HOW TO FIGHT BACK DR. MARY CONROY 37039 CHICAGO 12/11/82 01/02/83 PART II: THE CAREER WOMAN'S DILEMMA: JOB VS. BABIES CAROL MASIUS, ANDREA DUNHAM, NANCY EVANS, MARIA CAMPBELL, SERINE HASTINGS 37039 CHICAGO (T) 12/18/82 01/09/83 HOW TO LIVE WITH ARTHRITIS PART I: PATIENTS DR. ROBERT GOULD, BOB NIRKIND, ROBIN MAY, JOHN MURPHY, MARTHA SCHORTTMAN PART II: DOCTORS GERALD WEISSMAN, M.D. FREDERIC MCDUFFIE, M.D., GEORGE EHRLICH, M.D., THOMAS KANTOR, M.D. 37038 CHICAGO (T) 01/05/83 01/16/83 PART I: WOMEN OF THE YEAR: BROADWAY'S LEADING LADIES ELIZABETH ASHLEY, ELLEN BURSTYN, JUDITH IVEY, BETTY BUCKLEY 37040 CHICAGO (T) 01/05/83 01/16/83 PART II: BANKS ON THE BRINK: THE FOREIGN LOAN MESS C.W. CARSON, JR., RICHARD ERB, JOHN G. HEIMAN, PETER KENEN, REP. CHARLES E. SCHUMER 37040 CHICAGO 01/15/83 01/23/83 PART I: WAITRESSES DEBORAH GRISORIO, KATHLEEN MCLANE, PAULA MURRAY, NANCY YOUNGBLUT 37041 CHICAGO (T) 01/15/83 01/23/83 PAR II: NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IN ROME, NY EDWARD BURTON, ED CALLAHAN, COL. JOHN ENGELMANN, EMLYN GRIFFITH, IRWIN REDLENER 37041 CHICAGO 01/27/83 01/30/83 PART I: IS THIS BULL MARKET FOR REAL? STEVEN EINHORN, ELIOT FRIED, JOHN HINDELONG, THOMAS STILES, JOHN TEMPLETON 37044 CHICAGO 01/19/83 01/30/83 12/11/83 PART II: COOKIES ARE BIG BUSINESS DAVID LIEDERMAN, BARBARA KAFKA, MARNI MILLER, JAN VERDONKSCHOT 37044 CHICAGO 01/22/83 02/06/83 THE RICH AND FAMOUS -- THE LATEST GOSSIP LIZ SMITH, DIANA MCLELLEN, TAKE AND MAXINE MESINGER 37043 CHICAGO 02/02/83 02/13/83 AMERICAN WOMEN WHO MARRY FOREIGN MEN JANA JAFFEE, KATHRYN JASON, SHARON COSTA DE BEAUREGARD, COUNTESS DE ROMANONES, MARTHA BURKE-HENNESSY 37045 CHICAGO 02/02/83 02/13/83 DOWNWARD MOBILITY -- THE END OF THE AMERICAN DREAM BOB SACCO, DAN RASUMSSEN, RHONA DROSSMAN, LLOYD SAVEL, HOPE POKRESS 37045 CHICAGO (T) 02/16/83 02/20/83 WHAT'S IN THE STARS FOR 1983 ASTROLOGERS POPE HILL, PATRIC WALKER, MARIA CRUMMERE, DEBBI KEMPTON-SMITH, JOELLE MAHONEY 37046 CHICAGO 02/16/83 02/27/83 12/02/84 05/04/86 PART I: STOPPING THE CLOCK? GEROVITAL EMILY WILKINS, BILL TICE, DORIS WHITEHEAD, JOHN COFFMAN, BARRY REISBERG, M.D. 37042 CHICAGO (T) 01/19/83 02/27/83 THE MYSTERY OF THE COMMON COLD STEVEN MOSTOW, M.D., R. GORDON DOUGLAS, M.D., SANFORD CHODOSH, M.D., HYLAN BICKERMAN, M.D., JOHN ABELES, M.D. 37042 CHICAGO 02/23/83 03/06/83 PART I: ANGRY CRIME VICTIMS DIANI MONTENEGRO, SHIRLEY BERNSTEIN, GUILIA PAGANO, ROBERT GRAYSON, DR. MICHAEL ROBINSON 37047 CHICAGO (T) 02/23/83 03/06/83 PART II: CRIME FIGHTERS SGT. JOSEPH DUNNE, DET. BILL CLARK, DET./LT. ROBERT GALLAGHER 37047 CHICAGO 03/05/83 03/13/83 FILM CRITICS PREDICT THE OSCARS DAVID DENBY, JANET MASLIN, REX REED, HOWARD KISSEL, STEWART KLEIN 37048 CHICAGO (T) 03/09/83 03/20/83 06/10/84 PART I: PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES JAMES IRVIN GLOVER, GRADY O'CUMMINGS III, LESTER BYERLEY, GERARD HIMMELMAN 37049 CHICAGO 03/09/83 03/20/83 06/10/84 PART II: IS PSYCHIATRY IN TROUBLE? STEPHEN SONNENBERG, M.D., LAYTON MCCURDY, M.D., ALLEN FRANCES, M.D., STUART YUDOFSKY, M.D. 37049 CHICAGO (T) 03/19/83 03/27/83 06/24/84 PART I: SEMINARY AND CONVENT DROP-OUTS CATHERINE BRUNO, PAUL HENDRICKSON, THOMAS SMITH, MARY GILLIGAN WONG, CHARLES DEVLIN 37050 CHICAGO (T) 03/19/83 03/27/83 PART II: MID-LIFE VOCATIONS SARAH B. TAYLOR, THOMAS H. GAINER, JR., REV. FRANK KILCOYNE, REV. JAMES F. HINCHEY, REV. FRANCIS J. FAJELLA, MSS.A 37050 CHICAGO 03/23/83 04/03/83 10/02/83 A CONVERSATION WITH ROBERT S. STRAUSS 37051 CHICAGO (T) 04/06/83 04/10/83 09/18/83 DEAR ANN LANDERS... ANN LANDERS 37052 CHICAGO 04/06/83 04/10/83 09/18/83 PART II: THE NEW YOUNG IMMIGRANTS CHRISTINA WACHTMEISTER, WILLIAM LEWIISHAM, ASHA PUTHLI, GIANNINA FACIO, FELIPTE PARAUD 37052 CHICAGO 04/13/83 04/17/83 09/25/83 S.R.O. HOTELS NAYNA VALDEZ, JOSEPH HOFFLER, LLOYD SMITH, ISMAEL RIVERA, ROBERT HAMBURGER, ALFRED GUNTHER, "ALICE" 37053 CHICAGO (T) 04/14/83 04/24/83 11/20/83 PART I: ANTHONY BURGESS 37054 CHICAGO (T) 04/23/83 04/24/83 06/08/86 PART II: BARBARA CARTLAND 37054 CHICAGO (T) 04/23/83 05/01/83 PART I: MEN WHO WANT TO MARRY RICH JEAN MORBELLI, DARIUS DE LA ROUCHEFOUCAULD, PATRICK KELLY, ROWEN NEGRIN 37055 CHICAGO (T) 04/23/83 05/01/83 03/11/84 08/05/84 04/13/86 06/22/86 08/24/86 PART II: BEST PLACES TO LIVE DAVID SAVAGEAU, RICHARD BOYER, DR. RONALD MINGE, DR. THOMAS BOWMAN 37055 CHICAGO 04/27/83 05/08/83 05/13/84 10/14/84 WE USED TO BE GAY - FORMER HOMOSEXUALS WILLIAM ATHERTON, DAVID TWOMEY, REV. WAYNE PLUMSTEAD, BRUCE BLAUSTEIN, JOSEPH MEGLINO 37056 CHICAGO (T) 04/27/83 05/08/83 BURN OUT - HOW TO RECOGNIZE AND DEAL WITH IT MICHAEL CRAWFORD, DR. HERBERT FREUDENBERGER, GAIL NORTH, CONNIE DE NAVE, SYLVESTER KARAGIS 37056 CHICAGO 04/30/83 05/15/83 10/09/83 BASEBALL WIVES DANIELLE TORRES, NANCY MARSHALL, BOBBIE BOUTON, KAROLYN ROSE, DIANE PEPITONE 37057 CHICAGO 05/07/83 05/22/83 08/07/83 PART I: LONLINESS JANE ADAMS, JOAN GOULD, JOHN HOLLANDER, MURRAY KELLMAN, MAURA SWANSON 37058 CHICAGO 05/07/83 05/22/83 08/07/83 PART II: PEOPLE MAD AT THE BANKS ALISON ROSENFELD, RON BANYAY, PAGE MELLISH, CALVET HAHN, GAYLE ESSAREY 37058 CHICAGO 05/25/83 05/29/83 07/31/83 01/27/85 BALLET - THE WORLD'S TOUGHEST SPORT CHRISTINE SPIZZO, MERRILL ASHLEY, CHRISTOPHER D'AMBOISE, KEVIN MCKENSIE 37060 CHICAGO (T) 05/25/83 05/29/83 07/31/83 02/12/84 12/22/85 06/15/86 THE LATEST WORD ON FOOTCARE JAMES PARKES, M.D., A. LOUIS SHURE, D.P.M., JOHN WALLER, M.D., MURRAY WEISENFELD, D.P.M. 37060 CHICAGO (T) 05/21/83 06/05/83 DAVID SUSSKIND AND FRIENDS JEAN KENNEDY, DAN BERKOWITZ, SAMANTHA SUSSKIND 37059 CHICAGO (T) 06/08/83 06/11/83 08/14/83 DR. CHARLES CLEMENTS, AN AMERICAN DOCTOR IN EL SALVADOR 37061 CHICAGO (T) 06/11/83 06/19/83 09/11/83 MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS DEANE W. LORD, MARY CAMERON LORD, LOIS WYSE, KATHERINE GOLDMAN 37062 CHICAGO (T) 06/11/83 06/19/83 09/11/83 PEOPLE WHO HAVE MOVED TO NEW YORK RAYNE BEAUDOIN, BONNIE KOLOC, KEVIN METHENY, MARY SUE MORRIS, KIM STEELE 37062 THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1983-1984 06/22/83 10/16/83 PART I: WHY CAN'T MEN SHOW AFFECTION?: MALE FRIENDSHIP RICHARD SCHICKEL, HERBERT GOULD, LARRY LEEDS, DAVID MICHEALIS 37063 CHICAGO (T) 10/17/83 10/23/83 07/15/84 A CONVERSATION WITH ANTHONY QUINN 37066 CHICAGO (T) 10/25/83 10/30/83 A MODERN MARK TWAIN: MAYOR ALFRED E. VELLUCCI OF CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 37068 CHICAGO (T) 10/15/83 11/06/83 FRIENDSHIP AMONG WOMEN JOANNA SIMON, CATHY CASH SPELLMAN, DEANE LORD, ALICE WHITE 37065 CHICAGO (T) 10/17/83 11/20/83 PART I: ANTHONY QUINN CONTINUED 37067 CHICAGO 11/23/83 11/27/83 PART I: HELEN GALLAGHER 37072 CHICAGO (T) 11/19/83 11/27/83 PART II: THE MAKING OF CARMEN PETER BROOK, ALEXANDER COHEN, HILDY PARKS 37072 CHICAGO 11/19/83 12/04/83 09/30/84 A PROBING LOOK AT THE RUSSIANS HEDRICK SMITH, DAVID SHIPLER 37071 CHICAGO (T) 11/23/83 12/11/83 07/29/84 PART I: BROADWAY AND HOLLYWOOD LAID BARE MILTON GOLDMAN, ANNA SOSENKO, RADIE HARRIS 37073 CHICAGO 12/10/83 12/18/83 09/09/84 PART I: RESTAURANTEURS SHELDON TANNEN, LELLO ARPAIA, SIRIO MACCIONI, ROBERT MEYZEN, GIANNI GARAVELLI 37069 CHICAGO (T) 10/29/83 12/18/83 09/09/84 PART II: PHOTOGRAPHER NORMAN PARKINSON 37069 CHICAGO (T) 12/17/83 12/25/83 PART I: CARD SHARK FRANK GARCIA 37077 CHICAGO (T) 12/17/83 12/25/83 PART II: SPECTACULAR EVENING GOWNS BY JANA JANA JAFFE DE ROSSELL 37077 CHICAGO (T) 11/30/83 01/01/84 PART I: BETTER THAN EVER: SHOW BUSINESS GREATS JOYCE BRYANT, SHERRY BRITTON 37075 CHICAGO 10/29/83 01/01/84 PART II: NOUVEAU IS BETTER THAN NO RICHE AT ALL MARYLIN BENDER, MONSIEUR MARC 37069 12/10/83 01/08/84 07/22/84 PART I: THE LATEST BREAKTHROUGHS IN THE TREATMENT OF HEART DISEASE MICHAEL DE BAKEY, M.D., ISADORE ROSENFELD, M.D. 37074 CHICAGO (T) 12/14/83 01/15/84 DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL OURSELVES? VALERIA, DEREK HUMPHRY, DR. WILLIAM MARRA, PROFESSOR MARVIN KOHL, PROFESSOR DAVID BLEICH, DORIS PORTWOOD 37076 CHICAGO 01/11/84 01/22/84 08/19/84 WARNING: MEDICAL CARE MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR WEALTH SENATOR LOWELL WEICKER, MARTIN CHERKASKY, M.D., JOHN LARAGH, M.D. 40029 CHICAGO (T) 01/21/84 01/29/84 NEW YORK: A WONDERFUL TOWN MAYOR EDWARD KOCH, LEWIS RUDIN, ANTHONY BLISS 40030 (NY TV MUSEUM) 01/25/84 01/29/84 PART II: "NO NICE GIRL SWEARS" - ALICE-LEONE MOATS 40030 CHICAGO(T) 02/04/84 02/12/84 PART I: FORGET THE FEAR OF FLYING CAPTAIN T.W. CUMMINGS, ANNA GILHULEY, BETSY BYRNE, CAROL LAWSON, FRANK SINK 40033 CHICAGO (T) 02/08/84 02/19/84 WHO'S IN, WHO'S OUT - WHO'S HOT, WHO'S NOT: THE LATEST GOSSIP LIZ SMITH, MAXINE MESINGER, TAKI, SHIRLEY EDER 40034 CHICAGO (T) 02/22/84 03/04/84 FORMER CONGRESSMEN GIVE THE LOWDOWN ON POLITICS 40035 01/25/84 03/11/84 08/05/84 PART I: THE MAN WHO SAVED NEW YORK: FELIX ROHATYN 40032 CHICAGO (T) 01/21/84 03/18/84 PART I: FORECASTING THE FUTURE WITH "RUNES" RALPH BLUM, BRONWYN JONES, DR. ROBERT LORENZ 40031 CHICAGO (T) 03/03/84 03/25/84 09/16/84 PART I: CANCER PATIENT VOLUNTEERS KATHRYN STEIN, GERRY GEORGE, ALAN MATCOVSKY 40036 CHICAGO (T) 03/03/84 04/01/84 PART I: CLASS: WHAT IS IT? WHO HAS IT? BENITA EISLER, PAUL FUSSELL, TERRY NOEL TOWE 40038 CHICAGO 03/21/84 04/08/84 08/12/84 PART I: BIG TIME SPORTS ARE NOT FOR MEN ONLY DONNA DEVARONA, KATHERINE SWITZER, GINNY SEIPT, PATRICIA HALL 40037 CHICAGO (T) 03/24/84 04/08/84 08/12/84 PART II: "THE ULTIMATE SEDUCTION": AN INTERVIEW WITH CHARLOTTE CHANDLER 40037 CHICAGO 03/31/84 04/15/84 TOUGH JUDGES TALK ABOUT CRIME AND PUNISHMENT JUDGE BURTON ROBERTS, JUDGE HERBERT STERN 40039 CHICAGO (T) 04/16/84 04/22/84 PART I: EVERYTHING'S UP TO DATE IN KANSAS CITY MAYOR RICHARD L. BERKLEY, SANDRA DAY BERKLEY, ELLIS G. BRADLEY, BEVERLY BRADLEY, J.C. NICHOLS, JR., MARY NICHOLS 40043 CHICAGO (T) 04/16/84 04/22/84 PART II: AN INTERVIEW WITH SIR JAMES MURRAY 40043 04/09/84 04/29/84 09/16/84 AN INTERVIEW WITH A. BARTLETT GIAMATTI, PRESIDENT OF YALE UNIVERSITY 40042 CHICAGO (T) 03/31/84 05/06/84 PART I: YES, MR. MEESE, THERE ARE HUNGRY PEOPLE TOBEY BERMUDEZ, MAGDA MARTIS, AUDREY MINNS, ERNESTINE ROYSTER, FRANK MONTGOMERY, CHARLES TAVENNER, NICK, MORRIS HACKNEY 40040 CHICAGO (T) 03/24/84 05/13/84 10/14/84 PART I: REAL LIFE TOOTSIES: MEN WHO DRESS AS WOMEN ARIADNE KANE, NAOMI, EILEEN, CHERYL 40041 CHICAGO (T) 04/28/84 05/20/84 PART I: SEX IS THEIR BUSINESS DR. IRENE KASSORLA, SHIRLEY LORD, DR. LONNIE BARBACHN 40045 CHICAGO 05/09/84 05/27/84 10/07/84 BRILLIANT MINDS, BRILLIANT CONVERSATION ARTHUR SCHLESINGER, JOHN SIMON, BERNARD LEVIN 40047 CHICAGO (T) 04/25/84 06/03/84 08/26/84 VIETNAM: THE NIGHTMARE NEVER ENDS JOHN CATTERSON, THOMAS LECKINGER, THOMAS BRINSON, LAWRENCE SMITH 40044 CHICAGO 05/23/84 06/17/84 10/28/84 PART I: WOMEN BEHIND BARS - FEMALE EX-CONS FRAN O'LEARY, CONNIE FLYNN, BARBARA JORDAN, ANN MARIE DELONE 40050 CHICAGO (T) 06/12/84 06/17/84 10/28/84 PART II: ALL ABOUT ICE CREAM JOHN R. LESAUVAGE, REUBEN MATTUS, NANCY ARUM, CAROL T. ROBBINS 40050 CHICAGO (T) 06/12/84 06/24/84 A CONVERSATION WITH ROSALYNN CARTER 40052 CHICAGO (T) 06/04/84 07/01/84 PART I: BIG BUSINESSMEN TALK ABOUT EAST-WEST TRADE AND THE CORPORATE IMAGE DWAYNE ANDREAS, DONALD KENDALL 40051 CHICAGO (T) 05/23/84 07/01/84 06/01/86 PART II: OLDER WOMEN FIGHT AGE DISCRIMINATION JEAN PHILLIPS, BETTY ROSEN, DR. JANE PORCINO, SHIRLEY KARNES 40049 CHICAGO (T) 11/16/83 07/08/84 THE POPE OF MODERN ADVERTISING - DAVID OGILVY 37070 CHICAGO (T) THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1984-1985 10/20/84 11/04/84 STRICTLY PERSONAL: MEETING AND MATING THROUGH THE PERSONAL ADS ANNE ROSEN, HY FINKELMAN, RICHARD KATZ, RITA HALLEY, LOU SPIER, JOAN LERNER, DON FEAREY, URSULA GARRISS 40054 CHICAGO 05/16/84 11/11/84 TOP DIVORCE LAWYERS A. ROBERT ZEFF, WILLIAM G. MULLIGAN, JULIA PERLES, MARVIN MITCHELSON, ROY COHN 40048 CHICAGO (T) 04/28/84 11/18/84 PART I: GLAMOROUS MODELS FROM THE 50s DORIAN LEIGH, NANCY BERG, DOVIMA, CARMEN 40046 CHICAGO (T) 10/13/84 11/18/84 PART II: RISING STARS OF THE 80s CINDY WAITE, VICTORIA PROUTY, CAROL ALT, SAMANTHA PHILLIPS, CARRIE MILLER 40046 CHICAGO 10/27/84 11/25/84 IS THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION OVER? THE RETURN TO CHASTITY SUE ATCHESON, BOB POLLAK, ROBERT MASELLO, SARA NELSON, PAT SKIPPER 40055 CHICAGO (T) 10/27/84 11/25/84 PART II: EXPERTS DR. JUDITH KURIANSKY, DR. CAROL FLAX, ARTHUR KORNHABER, M.D. 40055 10/31/84 12/02/84 PART I: THE MALE MID-LIFE CRISIS: AN INTERVIEW WITH WILLIAM A. NOLEN, M.D. 41000 CHICAGO (T) 11/10/84 01/05/86 04/06/86 AN INTERVIEW WITH HAROLD GENEEN - AUTHOR OF "MANAGING" 41001 CHICAGO 11/10/84 12/09/84 10/27/85 PART I: CHILDREN OF WAR RONNY AL-ROY, DANNY KUTTAB, MAO PANHA, ANNA MARIA LOPEZ, ARN CHORN 41002 CHICAGO (T) 11/28/84 12/16/84 PART I: BOXERS' WIVES TELL ALL VIKKI LA MOTTA, REBA SMITH, JANE COSTELLO, EDNA MAE ROBINSON 41004 CHICAGO (T) 11/28/84 12/16/84 01/12/86 04/27/86 PART II: HOW TO MEASURE LOVE - AN INTERVIEW WITH DR. ROBERT STERNBERG 41004 CHICAGO (T) 10/31/84 12/23/84 PART I: "TAKE MY WIFE, PLEASE": AN INTERVIEW WITH HENNY YOUNGMAN 40053 CHICAGO (T) 10/13/84 12/23/84 PART II: AN INTERVIEW WITH ARTIE SHAW 40053 CHICAGO (T) 11/13/84 01/06/85 02/02/86 PART I: THE EXERCISE MYTH HENRY SOLOMON, M.D., RALPH ORISCELLO, M.D., GEORGE SHEEHAN, M.D., RICHARD STEIN, M.D. 41003 CHICAGO (T) 11/13/84 01/06/85 11/10/85 02/02/86 08/03/86 PART II: THE NEW OFFICE ETIQUETTE MARJABELLE YOUNG STEWART, LETITIA BALDRIGE, GEORGE MAZZEI 40113 CHICAGO 12/01/84 01/13/85 THE TRAGEDY OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE PART I: CHILDREN AND SPOUSES BERNARD NATHANSON, MILLIE SEIDEN, MARION ROACH, LONNIE WOLLIN, MARILYN HERMAN PART II: DOCTORS MIRIAM K. ARONSON, M.D., ROBERT N. BUTLER, M.D., KENNETH L. DAVIS, M.D., JOHN P. BLASS, M.D., PHD. 41005 CHICAGO 01/12/85 01/20/85 TOP ASTROLOGERS PREDICT WHAT'S IN STORE FOR 1985 POPE HILL, JOELLE K.D. MAHONEY, NAN HALL LINKE, MARY ORSER, HENRY WEINGARTEN 41009 CHICAGO (T) 12/19/84 03/02/86 07/20/86 BIG-TIME DRUG SMUGGLERS "RICHARD DICKMAN", TOM KIMBALL, WAYNE GREENHAW 41006 CHICAGO (T) 12/19/84 01/27/85 05/18/86 07/27/86 GET RID OF YOUR FAT - SUCTION LIPECTOMY NORMAN HUGO, M.D., DICRAN GOULIAN, JR., M.D., EUGENE CURTIS 41007 CHICAGO (T) 12/22/84 02/03/85 11/17/85 PART I: SEX FOR SALE - MALE PROSTITUTES JOE, ANTHONY, BILL, PATRICK, ANTONIO 41008 CHICAGO (T) 01/12/85 02/17/85 PART I: YOLANA - A PSYCHIC DEMONSTRATION 41010 CHICAGO (T) 01/15/85 02/24/85 SOME PEOPLE STAY MARRIED LARRY AND NORMAN STORCH, JOEY AND CINDY ADAMS, DAN AND JUNE JENKINS 41011 CHICAGO THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1985-1986 09/24/85 10/20/85 06/29/86 THE MARILYN MONROE STORY - AN INTERVIEW WITH AUTHOR ANTHONY SUMMERS 41034 CHICAGO (T) 05/11/85 10/27/85 PART I: HOW TO GET YOUR TEENAGERS OFF DRUGS JOHN WHITE, LOIS WHITE, BRIAN MAZZIA, JOHN MAZZIA, ANN, ROBERT 41028 CHICAGO (T) 10/22/85 11/03/85 EVERYTHING YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT PORNO MOVIES SAMANTHA FOX, CANDIDA ROYALLE, JACK WRANGLER, MARC STEVENS, GLORIA LEONARD 41036 CHICAGO (T) 10/17/85 11/10/85 08/03/86 PART I: OUR CHILDREN ARE HOMOSEXUALS AMY ASHWORTH, BOB BENOV, "ARTHUR", "GLORIA", "JOE" 41035 CHICAGO (T) 11/06/85 11/24/85 THE FIRST AMENDMENT COMEDY TROUPE BARBARA CONTARDI, PAT BAILY, JANE BRUCKER, NANCY LOMBARDO, BILL MCLAUGHLIN, JOE PERCE, MICHAEL SHAFFER, ELLEN MANDEL, STEPHEN PATTERSON 41038 CHICAGO (T) 10/29/85 12/01/85 04/20/86 09/07/86 HOW YOU CAN PREVENT ALMOST EVERY DISEASE ISADORE ROSENFELD, M.D. 41037 CHICAGO 12/03/85 12/08/85 PART I: THE LAST TABOO - OLDER WOMEN AND YOUNGER MEN BOB MERRILL, JUDY CARNE, CHRISTOPHER KADISON, ROSEMARY ROGERS, JACK WRANGLER, MARGARET WHITING 41040 CHICAGO (T) 12/10/85 12/15/85 PART I: HAVE YOU EVER LIVED BEFORE - REINCARNATION JUNE WHITAKER, CAREY WILLIAMS, ALAN VAUGHAN, SHALA MATTINGLY, PROF. HANS HOLZER 41041 CHICAGO (T) 04/17/85 12/15/85 PART II: DETAILS ON AVENUE MAGAZINE - UPTOWN AND DOWNTOWN JUDITH PRICE, MICHAEL SHNAYERSON, ANNIE FLANDERS, STEPHEN SABAN, BEAUREGARD HOUSTON-MONTGOMERY 41041 12/19/85 12/22/85 PART I: CREATORS OF THE HOTTEST NEW DIETS BARBARA EDELSTEIN, M.D., STUART M. BERGER, M.D., SYBIL FERGUSON, LAURA STEIN 41044 CHICAGO (T) 10/20/85 01/05/86 PART I: TAIWAN - THE OTHER CHINA JOSEPHINE WANG, DOUGLAS TONG HSU, LIN YU-HSIANG, DR. WEI YUNG, DR. WU JING-JYI 41045 CHICAGO (T) 12/14/85 01/12/86 PART I: MARRIED WOMEN - EXTRAMARITAL LIASONS "MARILYN", "JEAN" 41042 CHICAGO (T) 01/11/86 01/19/86 PART I: ASTROLOGY - WHAT THE STARS SAY ABOUT 1986 POPE HILL, MARY ORSER, JOELLE K.D. MAHONEY, DEMO DI MARTILE, DIANE WEBB 41046 CHICAGO 12/14/85 01/26/86 08/17/86 PART I: STRAIGHT PEOPLE ARE AFRAID OF AIDS, TOO SYDNEY ANDERSON, ELAYNE KAHN, TOM DOE-BARE, URSULS GARRISS, GARY NULL 41043 CHICAGO (T) 01/25/86 02/09/86 07/06/86 PART I: MY SON COMMITTED SUICIDE SUSAN WHITE-BOWDEN 41049 CHICAGO (T) 01/16/86 02/16/86 PART I: THE BATTLE AGAINST SMOKING BOB GREENE, EVA BRENT, JOHN BANZHAF, FRAN LEE 41048 CHICAGO (T) 02/04/86 02/23/86 07/13/86 PART I: THE WAR AGAINST THE MAFIA EDWARD MCDONALD, NICHOLAS PILEGGI, BOB LUCCI, RONALD GOLDSTOCK, TOM SHEER 41991 CHICAGO (T) 02/04/86 03/02/86 07/20/86 PART II: THE WAR AGAINST THE MAFIA EDWARD MCDONALD, NICHOLAS PILEGGI, BOB LUCCI, RONALD GOLDSTOCK, TOM SHEER 41992 CHICAGO 02/06/86 03/09/86 SHOULD YOU HAVE A FACE LIFT? LET THE COMPUTER TELL YOU ROO BROWN, DORIS WHITEHEAD, FRANK OLIVE, CHICKEE JAMES, ELLIOT JACOBS, M.D. 41993 CHICAGO (T) 05/01/85 03/09/86 PART II: TRENDY RESTAURANTS ELAINE KAUFMAN, HOWARD STEIN, JIM MCMULLEN, BRIAN MCNULTY 41993 02/09/85 03/16/86 08/10/86 PART I: THE JOY OF ITALIAN FOOD LAURA MAIOGLIO, GIANNI GARAVELLI, NICOLA CIVETTA, ADI GIOVANETTI, SIRIO MACCIONI, GAEL GREENE 41014 CHICAGO 03/13/85 03/16/86 08/10/86 THE ART OF FINE DINING JAMES VILLAS, DAVID SCHOENBRUN, JOHN MARIANI 41014 CHICAGO 03/13/86 03/23/86 GAY RIGHTS: PRO AND CON MATT FOREMAN, PASTOR JESSE LEE, RABBI YEHUDA LEVIN, DR. WILLIAM A. MARRA, DAVID P. ROTHENBERG, THOMAS B. STODDARD 41994 CHICAGO (T) 01/16/86 03/30/86 PART I: FOREIGN WOMEN RATE AMERICAN MEN LILIANE MONTEVECCHI, HELGA WAGNER, JOANNA KIMBERLEY, ASHA PUTHLI 41047 CHICAGO 05/01/85 03/30/86 PART II: TITLED EUROPEANS PRINCE MICHAEL OF GREECE, COUNTESS DONINA CICOGNA MOZZONI, PRINCE DIMITRI OF YUGOSLAVIA, BARON FRANCOIS DE SAMBUCY, PRINCESS KATALIN ZU WINDISCH-GRAETZ 41047 CHICAGO 03/19/86 04/06/86 PART I: HOW TO BECOME A MILLIONAIRE TOM FATJO, JR., VICTOR KIAM, LANE NEMETH, THOMAS MONAGHAN, RICHARD THALHEIMER 41995 CHICAGO (T) 02/04/86 04/13/86 PART I: DIVORCED BUT FRIENDLY MARTI SCHULZ, BRYCE BOND, EDWARD BOTWIN, CAROL BOTWIN 41050 CHICAGO (T) 03/25/86 04/27/86 DOCTORS REVEAL THE LATEST IN SEX THERAPIES HELEN SINGER KAPLAN, M.D., HAROLD LIEF, M.D., CLIFFORD SAGER, M.D., MAJ-BRITT ROSENBAUM, M.D. 41996 CHICAGO (T) 03/31/86 05/04/86 THE MALE POOL - OLDER WOMEN SHARE THEIR RESOURCES LYNN TENDLER GILBERT, FRAN MANDELL, DEANNA WALLACH, DORIS BASS, GLORIA NEUWIRTH 41997 CHICAGO 04/22/86 05/11/86 CATCH A RISING STAR: NEW COMEDIANS MICHAEL HAMPTON-CAIN, BARRY STEIGER, TAYLOR MASON, RICHARD MORRIS, RANDY KLEIN 41999 CHICAGO (T) 05/01/86 05/18/86 07/27/86 THE WORLDS GREATEST SPAS RICHARD SCHMITZ, DR. SIGRUN LANG, DEBORAH SZEKELY, TONI BECK 42001 CHICAGO 03/13/85 05/25/86 ARE WOMEN FOOLS FOR LOVE? DIANE ACKERMAN, CAROL BOTWIN, ALEXANDRA PENNEY, DR. MELVYN KINDER, DR. CONNELL COWAN 41017 CHICAGO (T) 04/29/86 06/01/86 AN INTERVIEW WITH JOSEPH A CALIFANO, JR.: WHO LIVES, WHO DIES, WHO PAYS 42000 04/26/86 06/08/86 BADINAGE WITH BILL COSBY AND GIANNI GARAVELLI 42002 CHICAGO (T) 04/10/86 06/15/86 I DO, I DO, I DO - MANY TIMES MARRIED BARBARA TOBER, DIANA HUFF, SY KABACK, FRANKLIN B. ZIMMERMAN, RUTH BATCHELOR, "CARMEN" 41998 CHICAGO (T) 06/05/86 06/22/86 08/24/86 GROWING UP IN BROOKLINE MIKE WALLACE, JOHN D. SPOONER, RCHARD N. GOODWIN 42003 CHICAGO (T)
PRESIDENT CLINTON ON TOBACCO / N/C PT. 2 (1995)
PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON ANNOUNCES A BROAD EXECUTIVE ORDER TO REDUCE CIGARETTE MARKETING AND PROMOTION TO YOUNG PEOPLE. GENERAL NEWS CONFERENCE FOLLOWS.
NOTES: COL PRINT LOCATION: LONDON, UK TITLE: VIETS LONDON SERVICED DATE: 10/17/78 NO: LNC97559 DATE SHOT: 10/17/78 LENGTH: 66 FT SECONDS: 1.46 SOUND: ENGLISH COMMENTARY DATE OF ARRIVAL:
NOTES: COL PRINT LOCATION: LONDON, UK TITLE: VIETS LONDON SERVICED DATE: 10/17/78 NO: LNC97559 DATE SHOT: 10/17/78 LENGTH: 66 FT SECONDS: 1.46 SOUND: ENGLISH COMMENTARY DATE OF ARRIVAL: FILM SHOWS: SCENES OF THE VIETNAMESE REFUGEES RESCUED BY A BRITISH SHIP IN THE FAR EAST SETTLING INTO THEIR NEW QUARTERS IN LONDON LEAD IN: THE 346 VIETNAMESE REFUGEES WHO WERE PICKED UP BY A BRITISH SHIP IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA ON SECOND OCTOBER WERE BUSY SETTLING INTO THEIR NEW QUARTERS AT AN ARMY BARRACKS IN CENTRAL LONDON. ON TUESDAY (17 OCT). THE REFUGEES ARRIVED IN BRITAIN THE PREVIOUS EVENING AND ARE BEING PROVISIONALLY HOUSED IN KENSINGTON ARMY BARRACKS WHERE THEY WILL BE INTRODUCED TO THE BRITISH WAY OF LIFE. THE VIETNAMESE WERE PICKED UP BY A CARGO VESSEL IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA SUFFERING FROM STARVATION AND LACK OF WATER. THEIR FRAGILE CRAFT WAS ALSO IN DANGER OF SINKING. THE GROUP WAS JUST ONE OF MANY WHO HAVE ATTEMPTED FLIGHT FROM VIETNAM BY SEA SINCE THE COMMUNIST TAKE-OVER. UPITN HAS A REPORT ON THE REFUGEES' FIRST DAY IN LONDON. FEET R/SECS 7 0.11 MS PEOPLE EATING AT TABLE (3 SHOTS) 12 0.19 MS FORMER MILLIONAIRE DRINKING 24 0.38 MS KIDS ON BED (3 SHOTS) 35 0.56 MS ENGINEER TALKS 39 1.02 MS LADY TREATED FOR DEHYDRATION 43 1.09 MS CHILDREN BEING TAKEN IN AMBULANCE 50 1.20 MS VIETS WAITING FOR WARM CLOTHES (2 SHOTS) 53 1.25 MS PEOPLE WITH NEW CLOTHES 66 1.46 MS CHILDREN PLAY & WALK WITH POLICEMAN COMMENTARY: DINNER TONIGHT WAS VIETNAMESE-STYLE PORK AND RICE -- A REMINDER OF HOME FOR THE REFUGEES WHO MAY NEVER SEE VIETNAM AGAIN. SOME ARE BOUND TO FIND THINGS DIFFICULT AT FIRST. THIS MAN WAS ONCE A MILLIONAIRE. NOW, AT 74, HE'S HOPING HIS SON IN AMERICA WILL LOOK AFTER HIM. HIS FAMILY HAS A ROOM TO THEMSELVES. LOK WAS A WAREHOUSE MANAGER BEFORE THE COMMUNISTS TOOK OVER. HE BROUGHT HIS WIFE, SIX CHILDREN AND A BABY COUSIN WITH HIM. THIS FAMILY WAS STARVING AFTER THEIR FATHER, AN ENGINEER, LOST HIS JOB. HE DESCRIBED THE BOAT JOURNEY...... REFUGEE: EVERYONE WAS SEASICK. WE COULD JUST SIT THERE, WE HAD NO SPACE FOR SLEEPING, WE JUST SAT THERE. IT'S A VERY BAD AND PAINFUL MEMORY. SEVERAL PEOPLE WERE SICK IN THE RED CROSS INFIRMARY. THIS 84-YEAR-OLD WOMAN IS SUFFERING FROM DEHYDRATION. AND FIVE CHILDREN WITH MEASLES HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO HOSPITAL. THEIR MOTHERS WERE ALLOWED TO GO WITH THEM. THE COLD WEATHER HAS CAUSED QUEUING FOR CLOTHES. VOLUNTEERS WERE KITTING OUT ALL SIZES. HUNDREDS OF CLOTHES HAVE BEEN SENT BY WELL-WISHES. BUT THEY DON'T ALL QUITE FIT. BUT EVEN FREEZING RAIN COULDN'T DAMPEN MOST REFUGEES' SPIRITS. SOME CHILDREN HAVE ALREADY FOUND BICYCLES. WHILE OTHERS GOT IN A BIT OF PRACTICE AT THEIR NEW NATIONAL SPORT. AND THEN THE PICTURE THAT SAYS IT ALL.
China Communists
AP-APTN-1830: China Communists Monday, 18 October 2010 STORY:China Communists- REPLAY Latest from Chinese Communist party meeting, new position in hierarchy LENGTH: 00:47 FIRST RUN: 1230 RESTRICTIONS: Pt No Access China TYPE: Commentary SOURCE: CCTV/AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 661821 DATELINE: Beijing - 18 Oct 2010/FILE LENGTH: 00:47 CCTV - NO ACCESS CHINA AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY SHOTLIST: CCTV - No Access China Recent, exact date unknown 1. Wide of top communist party leaders at the meeting 2. Mid of Chinese President Hu Jintao raising hand 3. Cutaway of other delegates clapping 4. Mid of Hu talking 5. Mid pan of officials in meeting 6. Mid of Xi Jinping, Vice President of China at the meeting CCTV - No Access China FILE: October 1, 2009 7. Wide of Xi at gala celebrating 60th anniversary of the founding of People's Republic of China 8. Pan shot from a top communist party leader to Xi dancing with performers at the celebration AP Television - AP Clients Only FILE - October 22, 2007 9. Wide of Xi standing with other newly appointed members of Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China 10. Mid of Xi standing out waving to the media STORYLINE: Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping was promoted to vice chairman of a key Communist Party military committee on Monday in the clearest sign yet he remains on track to take over as the country's future leader within three years. Members of the ruling party's governing Central Committee also pledged to make "vigorous yet steady" efforts to promote political restructuring, the official Xinhua News Agency and state broadcaster CCTV said, citing a document issued at Monday's close of the committee's annual four-day meeting. No specifics were given, although party leaders routinely call for administrative refinements to shore up one-party rule. "Work in improving the CPC (Central Military Commission) ruling capacity and maintaining the Party's advanced nature should be strengthened to promote the Party's competence in leading the country's economic and social development," Xinhua said, citing the party document. Xinhua gave few details about Xi's long-expected appointment to the Central Military Commission that oversees the 2.3 (m) million-member People's Liberation Army. Xi, 57, is the party's sixth-ranking leader and has been viewed as the anointed successor to President Hu Jintao, who is expected to step down as party chief in 2012 and as president the next year. Xi's appointment to the party's military commission, and an identical one on the government side, has been viewed as a necessary step in preparing Xi for the top office. The 11-member commission already has two vice chairmen and is chaired by Hu, who had also been its only civilian member for the past five years, allowing him to consolidate his influence over the military at the expense of other political rivals. The reports indicated the commission was being expanded to 12 members rather than Xi replacing one of the current vice chairmen. Without a transparent electoral process, the party utilises such appointments to show that the succession is going ahead smoothly and predictably. Although the precedent is thin, Hu had been made a vice chairman of the military commission three years before taking over and Xi's failure to receive the position last year had sparked speculation that the succession process had stalled. In addition to affirming Xi's path to the top, his appointment bolsters the party's absolute control over the military in a repudiation of calls for the PLA to become a national army under government, not party, leadership. It also stands as a show of unity among party leaders amid speculation about possible divisions over the scope and pace of political reform. Premier Wen Jiabao has made a number of statements calling for unspecified changes to the one-party system, but other leaders have harshly denounced any moves to adopt Western-style democratic institutions. Xi is the son of a party veteran, placing him firmly in the camp of the "princelings," politicians whose political connections and degrees from top universities have won them entry into the country's elite. Princelings often vie for position with the followers of former leader Jiang Zemin, who is believed to still wield considerable influence behind the scenes. Xi built his career working in the wealthy eastern provinces of Fujian and Zhejiang, and served briefly as party chief of Shanghai before being elevated to the all-powerful nine-man Politburo Standing Committee in 2007. Along with promoting Xi, the 200-plus Central Committee members and more than 150 alternates discussed and approved parts of an economic blueprint for the next five years that aims to narrow the yawning gap between rich and poor and begin the delicate preparations for a new generation of leaders. The plan, covering the 2011-2015 period, includes a greater focus on public services, promoting employment, strengthening the social security system, and better access to public health care, state media said. China's economy has boomed over the past three decades, but unevenly so. Hundreds of millionaires have emerged while the urban poor struggle and development in the vast countryside lags. Besides the wealth gap, leaders of the 78 (m) million-member party also have to deal with a public dissatisfied with rising inflation, high housing prices, employment woes among college graduates, endemic corruption, while Tibetan and Muslim regions of western China are held in check by a smothering security presence. Abroad, China is facing criticism from the US for its currency and trade practices and its support for North Korea and ties with Iran. All AP Television video will be delivered in 16:9 from 10th November 2010. For more information, please email: widescreenap.org Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 10-18-10 1451EDT
TV TALK SHOWS
The following is a list of David Susskind Shows possibly housed in a number off-site facilities--if they can be located at all. These listed programs HAVE NOT BEEN INSPECTED thus we cannot guarantee the existence, quality, duration or timely delivery of any of the material listed here. We offer access to these tapes on the following basis ONLY: All tapes are on their original 2" video format. The only way to verify the contents is to screen them, thus we will need to pull them from the inventory, ship and transfer them before we are able to verify content and quality. A $500 fee PER TAPE is required when ordering screening material from this collection. This fee is NON-REFUNDABLE. This fee will cover the cost of 2" tape handling, 2" Fed-Ex shipping (2-way) and 2" transfer. PLEASE NOTE THAT MANY SHOWS ARE ON TWO SEPARATE TAPES, THUS IT COULD COST DOUBLE ($1000) TO SCREEN SOME COMPLETE SHOWS. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT EVEN IF YOU ORDER A SHOW BASED ON THE CATALOG NUMBER AND TITLE FROM THIS DATABASE WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT YOU WILL GET THE TAPE YOU ORDER. THIS IS BECAUSE THROUGH THE YEARS TAPES MAY HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE INCORRECT CASES AND THE WRITTEN INFORMATION ON THE CASES IS ALL WE HAVE TO ID A TAPE BEFORE IT IS TRANSFERRED. WHILE WE WILL USE ALL EFFORTS TO EXPEDITE YOUR REQUEST, BUT WE CANNOT RUSH THE PROCESS, AND YOU ORDER THESE AT YOUR OWN RISK. IF WE DO NOT LOCATE THE TAPE THERE IS NO CHARGE, BUT IF WE DO AND IT IS REMOVED FROM THE FACILITY FOR TRANSFER, YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE NON-REFUNDABLE FEES. THE DAVID SUSSKIND SHOW 1969 - 1984 12/29/69 SAMANTHA SUSSKIND AND JULIET FUNT: BABES IN TOYLAND SAMANTHA SUSSKIND, JULIET FUNT, MRS. DAVID SUSSKIND, MRS. ALLEN FUNT, STEPHEN MILLER 18449 10/04/70 WOMEN'S LIB - MEN WHO LOVE IT! WOMEN WHO HATE IT! PART I - THE WOMEN:JEANNIE SAKOL, MONA ROMAN, VALERIE PASCAL DELACORTE, LUCI ANNE GOLDBERG, SUZANNE JAMES, CAROL GREGER PART II - THE MEN: TIMOTHY COONEY, DR. SHEPARD ARONSON, MARC FASTEAU, CARTER BALES, GERALD GARDNER 19437 11/22/70 GROUP ENCOUNTERS MEAN TOUCHING, FEELING, SCREAMING, STRIPPING HANNAH WEINER, HARRY SLOAN, BOB KRIEGEL, DAVIS SCHIFFMAN, MARTIN SHEPARD M.D, STEVE GELMAN 19444 12/27/70 OVERWEIGHT? UNHAPPY? EXPERTS ON DIETING DR. ROBERT ATKINS, ALYCE FINELL, DR. MORTON GLEN, JEREMY STEVENS, NANCY GOULD, DR. IRWIN STILLMAN 19445 12/27/70 WHERE THE BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE SWING DEREK HALL - CAINE, ELAINE KAUFMAN, PIERRE GROLEAU, OLEG CASSINI, WARNER LEROY 19445 01/24/71 THE PRO AND CON OF THE JEWISH DEFENSE LEAGUE PRO: RABBI MEIR KAHANE, NBERTRAM ZWEIBON, DOV SPERLING, JOSHUA JOFFEE CON: RABBI MARC TANENBAUM, MORRIS ABRAM, RABBI ARTHUR SCHNEIER, ARNOLD FORSTER 19457 01/31/71 LANDLORDS AND TENANTS AT WAR LANDLORDS: ROBERT KOENIG, WILLIAM MOSES, ABRAHAM KATZ, ROBERT MALOOF TENANTS: RUDY TOLBERT, VERTELLE X REEDER, REVEREND WILFREDO VELEZ, BERNARD LEONARD 19456 02/07/71 BEAUTIFUL ACTRESSES TURNED AUTHORS - VIVA, DIANE CILENTO, JOANNA BARNES 19831, 19458 02/14/71 ARE YOU HUNG UP AND NEUROTIC? 6 PSYCHIATRISTS! DR. NATHANIEL ROSS, DR. ROBERT JAY LIFTON, DR. ABRAHAM WEINBERG, DR. CHARLES SOCARIDES, DR. ANDREW FERBER, DR. CYRIL FRANKS 19459 02/21/71 ROCK MUSIC THAT SOUNDS GOOD: SEALS AND CROFTS! JIMMY SEALS AND DASH CROFTS 19460 02/28/71 HOW TO CONQUER THE FEAR OF DEATH DR. MORTON M. KLIGERMAN, MRS. MARY BRITTEN, DR. MICHAEL BRESCIA, SISTER MAUREEN PATRICIA FLANNERY, DR. MELVIN J. KRANT, REVEREND CARL NIGHSWONGER 19447 03/14/71 THE EXPLOSION IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH! KENNETH L. WOODWARD, WILLIAM VAN ETTEN CASEY, SJ, THOMAS DAVIS, FRANCINE GRAY, KENNETH BAKER, SJ, DR. EVER CURTIS 19462 03/21/71 ANGRY TAXPAYERS BATTLE MILITANT WELFARE MOTHERS! MARVIN DANSINGER, EMMA MCPHERSON, BOGDAN WASIUTYNSKI, GEORGEANN SALISBURY, JACKI MCKINNEY, EUGENE BARFOOT, DAVID HIMMELSTEIN, HELEN REICHENBECHER 19463 03/28/71 WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE OUT OF WORK - 5 EXECUTIVES HIT BY THE RECESSION VERNON MACKIE, JANE MILLER, EDWARD BOTWIN, FRED THOME, SAL CAVALLARO 19464 04/11/71 6 WHO'VE QUIT THE RAT RACE ANDRE GROS DAILLON, HELENGROS DAILLON, REV. HAROLD SKIDMORE, MARY ORPIN, SIDNEY DICKLER, FRANK VAN DYK 19458 04/11/71 THE OUTRAGEOUS WITH OF GORE VIDAL 19458 04/18/71 WHAT HAPPENS AT THE MASTERS AND JOHNSON SEX CLINIC JOAN AND HAROLD K 19466 04/18/71 UNWED MOTHERS CLAIM HUSBANDS ARE OBSOLETE MARY JANE GEIGER, JANE HARRIMAN, ODE BITTON, BARBARA CROSBY 19466 04/25/71 THE HELL OF VIETNAM AS YOU'VE NEVER HEARD IT BEFORE! 6 VETERANS BRADFORD BRITT, ROBERT O. MULLER, STEPHEN MCDONOUGH, CHARLES KNIGHT, JERRY CONER, STEVEN UZZI 19468 05/02/71 THE MATING GAME - THE SWINGING SINGLES SCENE ALICE WAYNE, MARTY O'HARA, JOE MAURO, SANDY SCHNALL, IRVING GRUBER, ANETTA LABOURENE, SAUL RITCHFIELD, GLORIA BENTLEY, AL STILLMAN, BARBARA KASENETZ 19469 05/09/71 WHITE PARENTS WHO ADOPT BLACK CHILDREN JOHN AND STEPHANIE HARAKAL, GEORGE AND MARJORIE RUBIN, TONY AND PEGGY MANGOGNA 19471 05/09/71 THE MAN WHO RUNS AGAINST NIXON - REPRESENTATIVE PAUL N. MCCLOSKEY 19471 05/16/71 A TOUGH JUDGE SAYS: DON'T CODDLE CRIMINALS - THEY'RE PUNKS, VERMIN AND ANIMALS JUDGE SAMUEL S. LEIBOWITZ 19467 05/30/71 HOW TO DRIVE YOUR CHILDREN SANE - DR. HAIM GINOTT DR. HAIM GINOTT ALONE AND THEN IN A SEMINAR WITH 8 MOTHERS 19470 06/06/71 6 EX - CONVICTS TELL THE BRUTALITY AND HORROR OF OUR PRISONS MEL RIVERS, DANIEL KEANE, PRENTICE WILLIAMS, STANLEY TELEGA, GEORGE FREEMAN, CHUCK BERGANSKY 19474 06/13/71 WHEN BLACKS AND RADICALS GO BERSERK IN THE COURTROOM - CAN THE SYSTEM SURVIVE? WILLIAM M. KUNSTLER, GERALRD LEFCOURT, THEODORE KOSKOFF, MELVIN BELLI, TERENCE F. MACCARTHY 19475 09/26/71 NOT WITH MY CHILDREN YOU DON'T - BATTLE OVER BUSING SID GOULD, IRENE MCCABE, LOIS FAISON, DOLORES ROBINSON, CAROL SWEENEY, JERRY GIORGIO, ELLIOT SOLOMON, JEAN RICHARDSON 20602 10/03/71 PART 1: THE JESUS FREAKS ARE HERE ARTHUR BLESSITT, SCOTT ROSS, JACKIE BODNER, BARBARA TAI - SING, RICHIE ALVAREZ, DAVID SHANNON, IKE MCKINNON, PETER KAKOS, CHARLES RIZZO, STEVE ENGLAND 20603 10/03/71 PART II: WATCH YOUR STEP - DOGS ARE EVERYWHERE FRAN LEE, DR. MICHAEL MILTS, CLARK WHELTON, LISA HOFFMAN, ROBERT SELYA, LARRY VIDE 20603 10/17/71 YOU'RE BEING ROBBED, MUGGED AND STABBED BY GI JUNKIES FRANK NATALE, LESLIE SPRACE, AL JOHNSON, JERRY SULLIVAN, BILL BERNSTEIN, STEVE LICARI, GENE BELFERDER, PHILIP BURLEY, BERNARD BRISCOE 20601 10/24/71 PART I: WE'RE LUCK TO BE ALIVE - 7 VICTIMS OF CRIME BARBARA BALLENGER, GERTRUDE FOX, LLOYD BARNETT, CHARLES PELTO, TOM CORNELIA, LACY HEDRICK, DAVID COOPER 20606 PART II: WAS COLLEGE REALLY NECESSARY - THE UNEMPLOYED CLASS OF '71 LEWIS COX II, DAVID FREEDMAN, JOEL GREENBERG, CAROL PARKER, CHRISTINE POLLUTRO 20605 11/07/71 WHAT GOES ON BETWEEN A PSYCHIATRIS AND HIS PATIENTS: AN ACTUAL GROUP ENCOUNTER DR. MARTIN SHEPARD AND GROUP FROM ANTHOS 20607 11/14/71 WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR US LATELY? FURIOUS FEMINISTS GERMAINE GREER, DR. EDGAR BERMAN, ANATOLE BROYARD, BRENDS FEIGEN FASTEAU, JOHN SIMON, SUSAN BROWNMILLER 20609 11/21/71 PART II: IS DISCIPLINE A DIRTY WORD? - BRINGING UP CHILDREN DONALD BARR, PHILIP E. MCCURDY 20608 11/28/71 PART II: LEMON OWNERS SQUEEZE AUTO DEALERS SUSAN D-ALLURA, ROBERT E. DILLON, JOE ROGERS, EDWARD SOUKUP, LOWELL DODGE, ANDREW SULNER 20612 12/05/71 PART I: LOVE FOR SALE - 3 PROSTITUTES CHRIS, PAT, RACHAEL 20611 12/12/71 PART I: 2 VICTIMS OF RAPE DOROTHY, MARIE 20613 12/12/71 PART II: SHOW BIZ GOES RADICAL: JANE FONDA AND HER ANTI WAR TROUPE JANE FONDA, DONALD SUTHERLAND, HOLLY NEAR, MICHAEL ALAIMO, RITA MARTINSON, PAMELA DONEGAN, PAUL MOONEY, LEN CHANDLER JR., YALE ZIMMERMAN, FRANCINE PARKER 20613 01/02/72 HAS ANYONE HERE SEEN GOD? FATHER FRANCIS X. MURPHY, CSSR, AVERY CORMAN, FATHER RICHARD MCBRIEN, RABBI DANIEL WOLK, REVEREND JAMES MCGRAW, REVEREND RICHARD NEUHAUS 20617 01/09/72 THE BLACK - WHITE WAR IS RAGING IN OUR SCHOOLS: PARENTS, TEACHERS, STUDENTS AND MAYOR KENNETH GIBSON STEVE ADUBATO, EDWARD GOODALL, FRAN ALSTON, ROBERT GIACOBBE, MARGARET MEEHAN, STEVE MUSTACCHIO, PETE SHAW, KATHY PERRY, MAYOR KENNETH GIBSON 20615 01/30/71 UNWED MOTHERS WHO WANT THEIR BABIES BACK - THE ADOPTION BATTLE FLORENCE LADDEN FISHER, JUDY KROLL, BARBARA DONALDSON, ROBERT LANNA, MRS. VICKI ROMAN, MRS. JANE EDWARDS, ANN DOYLE 20619 02/06/72 PART I: THE GROUP SEX SCENE - 4 MARRIED COUPLES WHO SWING DICK AND JULIE, BILL AND PAT, RICHARD AND LIZ, JOAN AND MARK 20624 02/06/72 PART II: PSYCHIATRISTS WHO SAY SWINGING IS SICK DR. CHARLES SOCARIDES, DR. MELVIN HELLER 20624 02/27/72 CRIMINALS ARE GETTING AWAY WITH MURDER - HAS JUSTICE BECOME A JOKE? JUDGE JOEL TYLER, WILLIAM ARONWALD, SAM DAWSON, JOHN KING, ROBERT SULLIVAN, WALLY ROEBUCK 20629 03/05/72 PART II: MEN AND WOMEN WHO'VE HAD PLASTIC SURGERY LOUISE HAY, LENORE HERSHEY, AURORA MORALES, BEN HOFFMAN, WAY BANDY 20622 03/12/72 UP & UP IT GOES - THE BULL MARKET OF '72 SALOM LEWIS, ALAN ABELSON, LEON LEVY, JOHN NEFF, DR. PIERRE RINFRET 20627 03/19/72 WE WENT THROUGH HELL - 5 WHO SURVIVED OUR MENTAL HOSPITALS JUDY HOBERMAN, JAMES O'CALLAGHAN, TED CHABASINSKI, DAVID KANE, JUDY CHAMBERLIN, RICHARD WHIPPLE 20630 03/26/72 WHERE WERE YOU DURING THE VIETNAM WAR? I WAS IN CANADA - ANGRY DEBATE BETWEEN DESERTERS, DODGERS AND VIETNAM VETS JOHN COLHOUN, CHARLES COE, DAVID SELLS, MARTIN KELLEY, MICHAEL CHEDA, GLENN SIEGAL, JEFF EGNER 20633 04/02/72 LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE POORHOUSE - 8 STRUGGLING COMEDIANS BERNIE TRAVIS, SHELLY ROBINS, DICK BROOKS, RUSTY BLITZ, BUCKY WILLIAMS, NEIL LEVINSON, "BABY" FRANK LEE WILDE, DAVIS KENT 20628 04/09/72 YOU COULD HAVE A HEART ATTACK - HOW TO AVOID IT - HOW TO SURVIVE IT DR. MICHAEL DEBAKEY, DR. ISADORE ROSENFELD, DR. EDWARD H. AHRENS JR., JACK CHRONIN, JOSEPH MCKERNAN, THOMAS J. PORTELA 20632 04/16/72 ANGRY CANADIANS SAY "YANKEES GO HOME" ELDON WOOLLIAMS, ROBIN MATHEWS, FLORA MACDONALD, EDWIN GOODMAN, ROBERT LEMIEUX 20634 04/23/73 PART I: STREET GANGS ARE RAISING HELL IN OUR CITIES BLUE EYES, GURU, CHARLIE SUAREZ, BLACK BENJIE BUXTON, EDDIE CUEVES, SNOOPY, CHINO MARTINEZ, BENJIE MELENDEZ, BLACK PEARL, BLACKIE, SLY 20635 04/23/72 PART II: MORE GORE VIDAL 20635 04/30/72 NICE WHITE PEOPLE SCREAM "BLACKS STAY OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS" CHICAGO: MARY CVACK, JOHN BARBER; CLEVELAND, GENEVIEVE BURES, FRANKLIN ANDERSON; FORSET HILLS, MARTIN WUNDERMAN, BLANCH BRODY 20636 06/18/72 PART I: TIRED OF GETTING MUGGED? LEARN JUDO AND KARATE AARON BANKS, NANCY MCCORMICK LEA, JAY BUTTERMAN, ROBERT NISONOFF, MRS. NANNETTE WILDSTEIN 20642 08/20/72 PART I: ALL YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT GAMBLING FROM 5 COMPULSIVE GAMBLERS 20640 08/20/72 PART II: DR. LEE SALK, PEDIATRIC PSYCHOLOGIST 20640 09/24/72 PART I: SONS AND DAUGHTERS - IN - LAW STRIKE BACK RACHELLE, MARSHA, LOUISE, JACK, MELL, JIM 20645 09/24/72 PART II: THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY - IS ALIVE AND WELL? SCOTT STANLEY, GARY ALLEN, CHARLES SMITH, ALAN STANG 20645 10/01/72 IS A WOMAN'S BODY HER OWN BUSINESS? - THE ABORTION BATTLE DR. ADA RYAN, ANDREW CARLAN, MRS. VIRGINIA MCLAIN, BILL BAIRD, DR. BARBARA ROBERTS, MRS. ELAINE AMENDOLA 20641 10/08/72 5 WHO TRIED SUICIDE MRS. CLAIRE JOHNSON, JIM GRIFFITH, KAREN BAKER, SANDRA WALKER, PETER FISHER, ANN HARPER 20644 10/15/72 ARABS AND ISRAELIS CONFRONT EACH OTHER OMAR CHAMMA, JOEL MOKYR, SANA HASSAN, MICHAEL HANDEL, NADIM HABRA, SHMUEL HARLAP, GEORGE KHYRALLAH, PNINA LAHAV 21996 10/22/72 PART I: CAN ACUPUNCTURE CURE YOU? ARTHUR SLAVIN, DR. ARTHUR TAUB, DR. SUNG LIAO, DR. FRANK Z. WARREN, MRS. RUTH BROIDO 21973 10/22/72 PART II: FAT CATS WHO CARE - MULTI MILLIONAIRES W. CLEMENT STONE AND STEWART MOTT W. CLEMENT STONE, STEWART MOTT 21973 10/29/72 PART I: DROP OUT WIVES WHO RAN AWAY JUDITH ROSSNER, JOYCE, NORMA, PAT 21998 10/29/72 PART II: CONFESSIONS OF AN EX - SWINDLER - ANTHONY DE ANGELIS 21998 11/26/72 YOU COLD HAVE HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE - WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS HIDDEN KILLER DR. ISADORE ROSENFELD, DR. JOHN LARAGH, DR. FRANK FINNERTY, DR. MORTON MAXWELL, MIKE GORMAN 22006 12/03/72 PART I: THE NEW PROSTITUTES - MASSAGE PARLOR GIRLS MARIE, LINDA, JOE SANTINO 22002 12/02/72 PART II: COPS WHO CRACK DOWN ON PROSTITUTION SERGEANT SIDNEY PATRICK, DEPUTY INSPECTOR JAMES DICKS, LIEUTENANT DON MCWENNEY, PATROLMAN TIMOTHY SULLIVAN, DEPUTY INSPECTOR CHARLES PETERSON, SERGEANT NILS HANSON 22002 12/10/72 BLACKS AND WHITES WHO MARRIES - 3 INTERRACIAL COUPLES CEOLA & PETER LOAN, BILL AND PAT HAMLET, HARLON AND MARLENE DALTON 22005 12/10/72 FED UP CITIZENS SAY NOTHING WORKS AND NOBODY CARES BURTON R. SIMS, LOIS GRIPPO, CORNELIUS DONOVAN, AMON DIGGS, JANE D'AGOSTINE, ARLENE BLICKSILVER 22005 12/17/72 WE WERE SKYJACKED! - PASSENGERS, PILOTS AND STEWARDESSES TELL OF THEIR ORDEAL MADELINE WILLETT, PAUL J.C. FRIEDLANDER, SAM KINCH JR., CAPTAIN DALE BESSANT, DR. DAVID HUBBARD M.D., ALEX HALBERSTADT 22011 12/24/72 SHOULD ARIES MARRY VIRGO? - ARE LIBRAS LOSERS? - 6 ASTROLOGERS REVEAL YOUR HOROSCOPE KEITH CLAYTON, CLEO ABUIN, DORIS KAYE, MARIA ELISE CRUMMERE, ALAN OKEN, CHARLES JAYNE 22009 12/32/72 PART I: THE MAD, MAD WORLD OF FREAK ROCK SYLVESTER (THE HOT BAND), RONN GOEDERT (WHITE WITCH), WAYNE COUNTY (QUEEN ELIZABETH), BILLY JOE WHITE (TEENAGE LUST AND THE LUSTETTS) 22012 12/31/72 PART II: ALL ABOUT WINE SAM AARON, PETER SICHEL, TERRY ROBARDS, GERALD ASHER, ALEXIS BESPALOFF 22012 01/07/73 PART I: DIVORCED, LONELY AND LOOKING FOR A MAN - WOMEN IN THEIR 40'S BUNNY BERKE, NATALIE DEUTZ, LOUISE HAY, KATHERINE DOUGLAS, ELIZABETH RUANE 22010 01/07/73 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH ANTHONY BURGESS 22010 01/14/73 HOW HIGH IS UP? - THE BIG BOOM ON WALL STREET MONTE GORDON (DREYFUS CORPORATION) MARSHALL COGAN (HAYDEN STONE) ROBERT H. STOVALL (REYNOLDS SECURITIES INC.) 22014 01/14/73 YOGA SALLY KIRKLAND, SACHINDRA MAJUMDAR 22014 01/28/73 CHINA TODAY: 5 AMERICANS WHO'VE BEEN THERE DAVID J. MAHONEY, MRS. SALLY RESTON, ROY ANDRES, DR. VITOR SIDEL, MICHEL OKSENBERG 22015 01/28/73 DR. MORTIMER FEINBERG 22015 02/04/73 I WAS A PROSTITUTE MUGGER AND JUNKIE: THE NIGHTMARE OF BARBARA QUINN 22016 02/04/73 GHETTO PRIESTS FATHER LOUIS GIGANTE (BRONX) FATHER WALTER WALDRON (BOSTON) FATHER DONALD MCLLVANE (PITTSBURGH) FATHER JOHN POWIS (BROOKLYN) 22016 02/11/73 HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE - MALE AND FEMALE COUPLES BARBARA GLICKMAN AND SANDY CHERNICK, NANCY JOHNSON AND DINAH ROBERTSON, MICHAEL MCCONNELL AND JACK BAKER, ERIC AND LOUISE 22018 02/18/73 HOW TO STAY YOUNG AND BEAUTIFUL FOREVER DR. MICHAEL M. GURDIN, DR. MICHAEL HOGAN, DR. NORMAN ORENTREICH, DR. DICRAN GOULIAN JR., DR. DANIEL L. WEINER 22022 02/18/73 PART II: THE MAKING OF A PSYCHIATRIST - DR. DAVID VISCOTT 22022 02/25/73 PART I: DIVORCED MEN OVER 40 HAVE ALL THE WOMEN THE WANT CORNELIUS DONOVAN, ED GRAHAM, ALFRED GUSSIN, ALDEN SHUMAN 22019 02/25/73 PART II: VOCTOR GOLD, FORMER PRESS SECRETARY TO VICE PRESIDENT SPIRO AGNEW 22019 03/04/73 PART II: ARE YOU A COMPULSIVE EATER? TRY OVEREATERS ANONYMOUS JOANNEE, PAT, BARBARA, STANLEY, JULIE, JACK 22020 03/11/73 WOULD YOU WANT YOUR DAUGHTER BRIDGET TO MARRY BERNIE? - THE BATTLE OVER BRIDGET LOVES BERNIE RABBI BALFOUR BRICKNER, STEPHAN LESHER, RABBI ROY A. ROSENBERF, RABBI JACOB HECHT, RABBI EDWIN FRIEDMAN, PROFESSOR LEONARD FEIN 22024 03/18/73 THE NEW LOOK IN DOCTORS - 6 INTERNS DR. AUGUST VALENTI, DR. ROBERT KLAW, DR. HENRY MURRAY, DR. HENRY BORKOWSKI, DR. CHARLES KENNY, DR. EVLIN KINNEY 22023 03/25/73 PART II: THE BRILLIANT WIT OF ANTHONY BURGESS 22025 04/08/73 FUNNY THING SHAPPENED IN THE GOLDEN AGE OF TELEVISION - 7 WRITERS WHO HAD A BALL PADDY CHAYEFSKY, ROBERT ALAN AURTHUR, LARRY GELBART, SUMNER LOCKE ELLIOTT, N. RICHARD NASH, JP MILLER, TAD MOSEL 22026 04/15/73 PART I: WHY NOT LIVE FOREVER - FREEZE YOURSELF! GILLIAM CUMMINGS, CURTIS HENDERSON, CLAIRE HALPERT, STANFIELD HILL 22030 04/15/73 PART II: HOW TO BEAT THE HIGH COST OF EATING HEDY ROSNER, VALERIE SIMONIAN, MARILYN JESSUM, BRIAN O'KANE, SUSAN HEISLER 22030 04/22/73 MARRIAGE ENCOUNTER - A CANDID CONVERSATION WITH 4 COUPLES TERRY & ED NOE, TERRY & KING DYKEMAN, VICKI & ALAN GOLDENBERG, BRUCE & DOLORES HERRICK 22031 04/29/73 PART I: CONFESSIONS OF 3 DRUG PUSHERS PREACHER, PANCHO, JOHNNY 22028 04/29/73 PART II: HERBERT "THE TERRIBLE" DENENBERG 22028 05/06/73 PART II: YOU COULD HAVE AN ULCER - 20,000,000 AMERICANS DO DR. HOWARD M. SPIRO, DR. LEO MADOW, DR. HENRY D. JANOWITZ, DR. JAMES L.A. ROTH 22029 05/13/73 PART I: 36"-24"-36" THE LOW DOWN ON THE MISS UNIVERSE CONTEST AMANDA JONES (MISS ILLINOIS), LINDA EAST (MISS MICHIGAN), VIVIAN ANITA CRAIG (MISS NORTH CAROLINA), SGT. STORM HENSLEY (MISS LOUISIANA), REBECCA LYNN BUNKERS (MISS SOUTH DAKOTA), BETTY JO GROVE (MISS MARYLAND), CINDY ARNETT (MISS WASHINGTON), JUDITH ANN GREGORY (MISS MASSACHUSETTS), SHERRY NIX (MISS ARIZONA) 22035 05/13/73 PART II: BELLY DANCING FOR PHYSICAL FITNESS SERENA, WILSON, JOANNE KLEIDON, DOROTHY KELLY 22035 05/20/73 MIND READERS, FAITH HEALERS & PSYCHICS WHO TELL THE FUTURE AND TALK TO THE DEAD DAVID HOY, EVELYN MONOHAN, BRYCE BOND, ETHEL DE LOACH, VINCENT RAGONE 22033 05/27/73 PART I: CONFESSIONS OF 5 WORKING STIFFS: WE HATE OUR JOBS PATRICK FENTON, RICKY EISENBERG, DEWEY BURTON, BILL SOLARSKI, MICKEY STELMARK 22034 05/27/73 PART II: WHAT'S THE STORY JERRY? JERRY ROSENBERG, DICK BALCH, RICK EBENSTEIN, ERNIE BOCH 22034 06/03/73 PART II: LADY DRUNKS - 5 WOMEN FIGHT THE BOTTLE DR. STANLEY E. GITLOW, DR. LECLAIR BISSELL 22032 06/10/73 PART I: WHY DO WOMEN LOOK SO TERRIBLE? - THE FASHION DISASTER MOLLIE PARNIS, BILL BLASS, ANNE KLEIN, GRACE MIRABELLA, JERRY SILVERMAN, CAROL HORN 22037 06/10/73 PART II: THE LATEST IN BUGGING EQUIPMENT CLYDE WALLACE (THE SPY SHOP) 22037 06/17/73 PART II: THE GRAY PANTHERS MARGARET KUHN, HOPE BAGGER, LYDIA BRAGGER, SHUBERT FRYE 22038 09/23/73 PART I: UNDERGROUND TV IS WILD, WACKY AND HILARIOUS SUSAN BLONDE, BERT PENCE, TAYLOR MEADE, CANDY DARLING, TINKERBELLE, ALEX BENNETT, NAOMI PAGE, ANTON PERICH 22036 09/30/73 WILL CHAPPAQUIOIK SINK TED'S WHITE HOUSE HOPES? - 6 KENNEDY WATCHERS TOM WICKER, FRANK MANKIEWICZ, MATHEW TROY, ALLARD LOWENSTEIN, FRED DUTTON, JACK NEWFIELD 23204 10/07/73 PART I: ALL ABOUT DOGS - EXPERTS SHOW AND TELL DR. FREDERICK TIERNEY, MATTHEW MARGOLIS, DR. JACOB ANTELYES 23205 10/14/73 PART II: NEVER ON THURSDAY - MAIDS STRIKE BACK CHERRY FOSTER, CAROLYN REED, ARNETTA CORINGTON, GERALDINE MILLER 23208 11/04/73 PART I: IS HE IRRITABLE, TIRED AND IMPOTENT? - MAYBE IT'S MALE MENOPAUSE DR. HAROLD LEAR, DR. DAVID REED, DR. DAVID MCWHIRTER, DR. HERBERT S. KUPPERMAN, DR. ISADORE ROSSMAN 23210 11/04/73 PART II: GORE VIDAL ON THE NIXON MESS 23210 11/11/73 MARILYN MONROE: THE LIFE AND DEATH OF A SEX GODDESS - 5 OF HER CLOSEST FRIENDS INCLUDING ELI WALLACH AND JOSHUA LOGAN ELI WALLACH, JOSHUA LOGAN, NORMAN ROSTEN, AMY AND MILTON GREENE 23207 11/25/73 PART I: WORLD'S GREATEST JEWEL THIEF ALBIE BAKER 23211 11/25/73 PART II: ARE BLACKS INFERIOR TO WHITE'S? - DR. WILLIAM SHOCKLEY & DR. ALVIN POUSAINT 23211 12/02/73 WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO SPIRO AGNEW? FRANK VAN DER LINDEN, ROY COHN, PETE HAMILL, JAMES NAUGHTON, JULES WITCOVER, WILLIAM RUSHER 23215 12/09/73 PART I: CONFESSIONS OF A CROOKED COP WILLIAM PHILLIPS 23216 12/09/73 PART II: ANGRY AIRLINE HOSTESSES KAREM EITELBERG, LIZ RICH, CYNTHIA GLACKEN, LYNN SMYDEN, SANDY OSIP 23216 12/16/73 PART I: THE BIG STEAL: SHOPLIFTING BILL LANDRES, JACK BOGASKY, SANDI SUTTON, GEORGE GORRA, ROY MCPOLAND, PETER TRIER 23217 12/16/73 PART II: CLIVE BARNES - DRAMA CRITIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES 23217 12/23/73 PART I: SINGLES SING THE BLUES BUNNY BERKE, IRVING GRUBER, GLORIA BENTLEY, SOL RICHFIELD, BARBARA LEWIS, SCOTT WARNER 23213 12/23/73 PART II: "THE SINGLES BUSINESS" NIC CHRISTOFF, KENNETH ENOCHS, HY STEIRMAN 23213 12/30/73 PART II: TOP STUDENTS FROM LEADING LAW SCHOOLS 23212 01/06/74 WOULD YOU SLEEP BETTER WITH A FORD IN THE WHITE HOUSE? CONGRESSMAN LAWRENCE J. HOGAN, CONGRESSMAN ELFORD A. CEDERBERG, CONGRESSMAN JOHN CONYERS JR., JOSEPH L. RAUH JR., KIERAN O'DOHERTY 23221 01/06/74 PART II: JESSICA MITFORD 23221 01/20/74 PART II: THE VITAMIN CRAZE GARY NULL, DR. EMANUAL CHERASKIN, DR. VICTOR HERBERT, MARCELLA KATZ 23220 01/27/74 THE BEAUTY BUSINESS - BILLION DOLLAR RIP OFF? DR. EARLE BRAUER, LINDA SCHOEN, SHIRLEY LORD, BRENDS JOHNSON, DR. JAMES LEYDEN 23214 02/03/74 PART I: WOULD YOU WANT YOUR DAUGHTER TO BE APRIEST? - ANGRY WOMEN VERSUS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FATHER WILLIAM B. SMITH, DR. WILLIAM MARRA, THERESE ICKINGER, CLARA HENNING, WALDA HESS, DR. ROSEMART RUETHER 23219 02/17/74 PART II: THE HUMOR OF ART BUCHWALD 23226 02/24/74 HOW COULD IT HAPPEN TO US? - 5 HEART ATTACK VICTIMS STEPHAN LESHER, CHARLES LUFTIG, LOUIS NARDONE, HAROLD SCAKS, LEE MELE, DR. ISADORE ROSENFELD 23228 03/03/74 HOMOSEXUALS WHO HAVE COME OUT OF HIDING - GUESTS INCLUDE DOCTORS AND TEACHERS DR. EDWARD BROWN, ELAINE NOBLE, PROFESSOR JOSEPH NORTON, DAVID ROTHENBERG, CAROLYN INNES, DR. ADRIENNE SMITH 23227 03/10/74 PART I: KINGPINS OF THE NUMBERS WORLD JAMES LAWSON, BUBBA ROBINSON, SAM, FRANKIE, JOHNNY 23229 03/17/74 PART II: EMPLOYERS OF EX-CONS CHARLES DOUGLAS AIDES, DAVID LEIBOWITZ, LEONARD RATHE 23230 03/24/74 FAITH HEALERS DEMONSTRATE THEIR PSYCHIC POWERS ANNA MAE DENTON, ETHEL DE LOACH, CLEM TAMBURRINO, DR. OLGA WORRALL, REV. ALEX HOLMES 23233 03/31/74 PART I: HOW TO MAKE A LOT OF MONEY AND KEEP IT HARRY BROWNE 23231 03/31/74 PART II: THE LADY IS A COP SHARON KOEHLER, MARYLOU NICHOLS (MIAMI), NONA NELSON, SGT. MARY ELLEN ABRECHT (WASHINGTON DC), LT. JOYCE LELAND (WASHINGTON DC), ANNMARIE BUTLER, HELEN KNEDHANS (NY) 23231 04/07/74 PART I: SEXUAL FANTASIES OF THE AMERICAN MALE - GUESTS INCLUDE A CALL GIRL AND 2 THERAPISTS JULIE, DR. DAVID REED, DR. WILLIAM SIMON 23232 04/07/74 PART II: THE REMARKABLE GEORGE FRAZIER 23232 05/12/74 PART I: DIVORCED AND ABANDONED - POW'S WHO CAME HOME TO NOTHING CHARLES PLUMB, COL. ROBERT STIRM, DON AND ANDREA RANDER, CHARLOTTE CHRISTIAN, LIEUTENANT COMMANDER JAMES BELL 23237 05/26/74 PART II: THE MAD, MAD WORLD OF THE FIRESIGN THEATRE PHIL PROCTOR, PHIL AUSTIN, PETER BERGMAN, DAVID OSSMAN 23246 06/02/74 PART II: CONFESSIONS OF A HEROINE SMUGGLER RICHARD BERDIN, ROBERT GREENE 23242 06/09/74 THE PRESIDENT'S PRIEST - FATHER JOHN MCLAUGHLIN FATHER JOHN MCLAUGHLIN 23247 09/22/74 ARE WE HEADED FOR ANOTHER CRASH? DR. PIERRE RINFRET, ELIOT JANEWAY, JOHN BUNTING, DR. CAROLYN BELL, MARSHALL LOEB, ROBERT LEKACHMAN 25502 09/29/74 PART I: WOMEN ALONE - DIVORCES AND WIDOWS PAT LOUD, RENE CARPENTER, LYNN CAINE, MERLE SHAIN 25501 09/29/74 PART II: THE MAD ADVENTURES OF RABBI KORFF RABBI BARUCH KORFF 25501 10/06/74 CAN OUR CITIES BE SAVED? MAYORS KEVIN WHITE, JOSEPH ALIOTO, MOON LANDRIEU, RICHARD HATCHER, ABE BEAME 25503 10/13/74 A CONVERSATION WITH BILL MOYERS BILL MOYERS 25504 11/17/74 FACING DEATH: A YOUNG MAN WHO HAS SIX MONTHS TO LIVE LARRY & MARION BOHNE, ROBERT NEALE, SAMUEL KLAGSBURN 25513 12/22/74 PART I: THE IRREPRESSIBLE REX REED REX REED 25514 12/22/74 PART II: THE SECRET WORLD OF PLANTS RANDALL FONTES, RICHARD CHAMPION, RALPH SNODSMITH, PROFESSOR ARTHUR GALSTON, PETER TOMPKINS 25514 12/29/74 PART I: THE LAST OF THE MOVIE MOGULS: JOSEPG E. LEVINE JOSEPH E. LEVINE 25515 12/29 74 PART II: THE MEANEST CRITIC IN AMERICA: JOHN SIMON JOHN SIMON 25515 01/05/75 PART I: TO SLEEP, PER CHANCE TO DREAM - ALL ABOUT INSOMNIA DR. RICHARD BOOTZIN, JUNE FREBERGE, ABRAHAM WEINBERG, RICHARD KAGAN, DR. PETER HAURI 25516 01/05/75 PART II: GROWING OLD IN AMERICA MAE LAUFER, MOLLY POLLAK, JULIA AVERY, MARY KEALTY, SARA RICKARD, CHRISTINE TARATETA 25516 01/12/74 SIX JUDGES DEBATE CRIME AND PUNISHMENT ALPHONSO SEPE, BRUCE WRIGHT, NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS, ALFRED BURKA, CHARLES HALLECK, BURTON ROBERTS 25518 01/26/75 PART II: EXPERTS LOUIS LEVINE, JAMES FUCHS 25520 02/02/75 PART I: TEEN-AGE CRIMINALS TELL ALL 25517 02/02/75 PART II: EXPERTS DISCUSS TEENAGE CRIMINALS DR. ESTHER ROTHMAN, ASSEMBLYMAN ALFRED DELLIBOVI, DETECTIVE IRWIN SILVERMAN, CHARLES KING 25517 02/23/75 PART I: THE MYSTERY OF THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE JOHN WALLACE SPENCER, CLAES ROOTH, DON HENRY, DAMIAN HOUSMAN, CHARLES BERLITZ 25519 03/02/75 IS PSYCHIATRY DEAD - 6 PSYCHIATRISTS IN HEATED DEBATE DR. NATHAN S. KLINE, DR. SAUL TUTTMAN, DR. E.FULLER TORREY, DR. THEODORE LIDZ, DR. RICHARD M.RESTAK, DR. RAYMOND VEEDER 25526 03/23/75 PART II: JOSEPH BURTON - FORMER SPY FOR THE FBI 25531 03/30/75 PART I: GOD AND THE REVEREND COFFIN AT YALE WILLIAM SLOANE COFFIN JR. 25529 03/30/75 PART II: DAVID KLEIN - A CONSUMER WHO FIGHTS BACK PROFESSOR DAVID KLEIN 25529 04/27/75 HOW TO FIND A "GOOD" NURSING HOME - PART I: ELDERLY PEOPLE HAPPY IN THEIR HOMES ANNETTE RUEFF, LORETTA GERARD, DR. RICHARD BLACK, TILLIE LEVY, LENA ROUDA, ANNA WEISS 25533 10/05/75 DIVORCED MEN WHO WON CUSTODY OF THEIR CHILDREN JERRY RENKE, RICHARD DAVAMOS, BILL BELICKIS, THOMAS SCHENDORF, DR. PAUL HANSON, ALFRED PASCARELLA 25541 10/12/75 ARE EUROPEAN WOMEN DIFFERENT MRS. OSCAR DE LA RENTA, DIANE VON FURSTENBERG, ADELA HOLZER, MAXIME DE LA FALAISE MCKENDRY 25542 11/09/75 TRAMPS & THIEVES? GYPSIES STRIKE BACK PART 1: MICHAEL JOSEPH, BARBARA GILK, MANUEL GILK, DINAH GILK, GEORGE GILK, MARY YOFON, DAVID GILK, PAT YOFON 26710 11/09/75 TRAMPS & THIEVES? GYPSIES STRIKE BACK PART II: STEVE, JOHN COSTELLO, GEORGE, NICK 26710 11/23/75 PART II: ADDICTED DOCTORS - THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN MEDICINE 26705 01/04/76 PART I: THE BRILLIANT ANTHONY BURGESS 26714 01/04/76 PART II: OLDER WOMEN WITH YOUNGER MEN NICK & BEA UNGARD, RANDY MUDGETT, MYRTIS COLLINS 26714 01/11/76 "OH, YOUR ACHING BACK": HOW TO PREVENT AND CURE BACK PAIN ROBERT HIGGINS, YVONNE LAPPAS, DR. MERVIN RHOADES, DR. LYMAN SMITH, DR. LEON ROOT, DR. HANS KRAUS, DR. ALBERT KINKELSTYNE, DR. KEITH MACELROY 26715 02/15/76 PART I: LOAN SHARKS REVEAL THEIR DIRTY BUSINESS JACK, SAL 26717 03/14/76 PART I: WHY THE RICH GET A KICK FROM COCAINE JOHN CUSACK, DR. ROBERT DUPONT, RICHARD ASHLEY, RICHARD WOODLEY 26724 03/14/76 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH JONATHAN KOZOL 26724 03/21/76 THE EST WAY TO HAPPINESS AND SUCCESS EST GRADUATES 26728 04/04/76 ADOPTEES WHO FOUND THEIR MOTHERS ELEANOR KAY, CRYSTAL HOLJES, ELLEN TURNER, FRAN BLANKENSTEIN, HOLLY CABOT, YODY WORCESTER, KATRINA MAXTONE-GRAHAM, CHARLES LEVENSHON, MRS. ZORAH BUCHTMAN, LINDA TRAUM 26730 04/11/76 INFIT DOCTORS, UNNECESSARY SURGERY - THE MEDICAL CRISIS DR. WILLIAM NOLEN, DR. MAX PARROTT, DR. WILLIAM STAHL, DR. MARVIN BELSKY, DR. MICHAEL HALBERSTAM 26727 04/18/76 RAPE, ROBBERY AND ASSAULT IN OUR SCHOOLS IRVING WITKIN, LINDA SADUR, WILLIAM BELL, GAIL RAE HORN, JOSEPH SHERMAN, BRUCE CARR 26733 04/18/76 PART II: POLISH-AMERICANS STANLEY KOKOSKA, TED MALISZEWSKI, EUGENE KUSIELEWICZ, MAGDA RATASKI 26733 04/25/76 WIFE BEATING - 6 BATTERED WOMEN PAM, DIANE, RUTH, CAREY, CINDY, SALLY, KATY 26731 05/02/76 PART II: ADLAI STEVENSON REMEMBERED - JOHN BARTLOW MARTIN 26734 05/16/76 PART I: "STRAIGHT LIB" STRIKES BACK RICHARD, PETER, RITA, JOAN, BOB 26734 05/16/76 PART II: CAMPUS QUEENS KAREN DAVIS, JANE WERTZ, ANDREA FOXE, NANCY WHITE 26735 06/06/76 NEW BREAKTHROUGHS IN THE WAR AGAINST CANCER DR. JAMES HOLLAND, DR.JORDAN GUTTERMAN, DR. NORMAN JAFFE, DR. DONALD MORTON, DR. VINCENT DEVITA JR. 26740 09/26/76 PART II: WHITHER THE WEATHER: THE ALARMING CHANGES IN OUR CLIMATE LOWELL PONTE, DR.STEPHEN SCHNEIDER, DR.REID BRYSON 27802 10/10/76 ARE WE WINNING THE WAR AGAINST HEART ATTACKS? DR.MICHAEL DEBAKEY, DR.ISADORE ROSENFELD 27804 10/17/76 FAMILIES IN TROUBLE: CONFRONTATIONS BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILDREN JOE GOULD, EDWARD LEGG 27806 10/24/76 THE MAFIA-CIA CONNECTION WITH NORMAN MAILER, ROBERT SAM ANSON, NICHOLAS GAGE, HARRY ROSITZKE 27807 10/31/76 SUPER SLEUTHS: PRIVATE EYES REVEAL THEIR SECRETS FRED OTASH, JERRY MCAWARD, MIKE PASCAL, FRED RAYNE, DAVID FREENBERG, IRWIN BLYE 27809 11/14/76 PART I: HELL NO! WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR PRESIDENT HOWARD SINGER, MARY PRITZ, WILLARD ESPY, LARRY SHERMAN, ANN WEBSTER, MARVEL, WILLIAM SLATTERY 27808 11/14/76 PART II: CONVERSATION WITH A 100 YEAR OLD MAN MR. AND MRS RODNEY JONES 27808 12/05/76 PART I: PEPSI COLA AND SOYA BEANS - DOING BUSINESS WITH THE RUSSIANS DWAYNE ANDREAS, DONALD KENDALL 27812 12/05/76 PART II: AMERICANS WHO'VE LIVED IN RUSSIA LEONA & JERROLD SCHECTER, ALAN ZEITHAMER, WILLIAM DYESS 27812 12/12/76 PART I: THIS SHOW COULD SAVE YOUR LIFE - HOW TO RESCUE A HEART ATTACK VICTIM DR.JOSPEH ORNATO, FRED HEWITT, GERARD CASE, EDWARD FRIEDMAN 27805 12/12/76 PART II: ARE WE CHANGING OUR DRINKING HABITS? JAMES VILLAS, MARK KELLER, PATRICK CAMPBELL, MARVIN SHANKEN, CHARLES BURCK, KIRKE WALSH 27805 01/30/77 "IS IT TRUE WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT DIXIE?" TOM WICKER, SHELDON HACKNEY, A.J.COOPER, WILLIAM EMERSON, BRANDT AYERS, BETTY TALMADGE, BARRY BINGHAM 27820 02/06/77 THE TRUTH ABOUT SPORTS - FUNNY, GLAMOROUS AND SEEDY RED SMITH, DAN JENKINS, DICK SCHAPP, MORRIE SIEGEL, DAVE ANDERSON, PETE AXTHELM 27821 02/13/77 NEVER AGAIN - TEH BITTER LEGACY OF VIETNAM WILLIAM COLBY, DAVID HALBERSTAM, GLORIA EMERSON 27823 02/20/77 PART I: THE BARE FACTS ABOUT BALDNESS JERRY DELLA FEMINA, KENNETH BATTELLE, ROBERT TEMLIAK, ELLIOT NONAS, DENIS LAMARSH, DR.JAY BARNETT 27824 02/20/77 PART II: GET THE COCKROACHES OUT OF YOUR HOME ALICE GRAY, NORMAN COOPER, RICHARD ELDREDGE, NORMAN GOLDENBERG 27824 03/06/77 PART I: SINGLES IN THE SUBURBS LINDA NARD, JEFF BEAL, SARA HUDSON, KELLY EMMONS, ED ZEIDNER, JACQUE DEJOHN, GENE MIKOLS, KITTY GREENSETIN 27827 03/06/77 PART II: REGGAE MUSIC TIMOTHY WHITE, MICHAEL COOPER, STEPHEN COORE, PERRY HENZELL, BARBARA GLOUDEN, MAX ROMEO, BRETT ALEXANDER 27827 03/13/77 PART I: CONVERSATION WITH A PIMP TOM 27829 03/20/77 HOW TO GET RID OF YOUR HEADACHES A.PATIENTS - JOELLA CRAMBLIT, BEN SMITH, JAMES ANDERSON, SHERRY HUBER B.EXPERTS - DR.DAVID CODDON, DR.SEYMOUR DIAMOND, DR.CHARLES DEMIRJIAN, DR.WALTER CASKEY 27825 03/27/77 GORE VIDAL UNCENSORED 27832 04/03/77 TEENAGE MUGGERS CONFESS A.MUGGERS: JOHN,BILL,MIKE,PETER SAVAGE,MICHELLE,TOM,GENE B.BLACK KIDS WHO'VE MADE IT: CARLOS GRIFFITH, VERNICE MILLER, GEORGE O'NEAL LYONS, VIETTA JOHNSON, ROBERT HARPER 27830 05/01/77 PART I: HOW CHILDREN FEEL ABOUT THEMSELVES AND THE WORLD AROUND THEM KARA ZAITZ, JEREMIAH & JOSHUA COHEN, CLAUDE BROOKS, AISSIA RICHARDSON, MATTHEW NEWTON, ORIANA ZILL, POLLY ERICKSEN, PETER BURRIS, ADAM MICHAELS 27835 05/01/77 PART II: EXPERTS ON CHILD BEHAVIOR DR.LEE SALK, DR.NICHOLAS ZILL, PEGGY CHARREN 27835 05/08/77 PART I: WE'VE COME A LONG WAY: WOMEN MOVIE MAKERS NANCY DOWD, BARBARA KOPPLE, ELEANOR PERRY, JOAN MICKLIN, SILVER 27836 05/15/77 PART I: WHERE THE BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE EAT PEARL WONG, ARMANDO ORSINI, PAUL KOVI, SHELDON TANNEN, WALLY GANZI, WARNER LEROY 27838 05/15/77 PART II: ARE WE A NATION OF JUNK FOOD JUNKIES? JOHN HESS, MIMI SHERATON, MARVIN HEAPS, DAVID SISK, WEXLER, CALVIN TRILLIN 27838 05/22/77 YOU CAN SURVIVE A PLANE CRASH - HERE'S HOW A.SURVIVORS: ALAN BRESLAU, JANET MACAA, DICK SMITH, SARAH UZZELL B.EXPERTS: JAMES O.ROBINSON, HARRY ROBERTSON, CAPT.RAY GERBER, CAPT.J.D.SMITH, RICHARD WITKIN, CHARLES O. MILLER, NORMAN COUSINS 27837 05/29/77 THE BIG BOOM ON BROADWAY ALEXANDER COHEN, DAVID MAMET, ZELDA FICHANDLER, HAROLD PRONCE, ANTHONY PERKINS, CLIVE BARNES 27840 06/05/77 WE STILL LIKE NIXON: THREE DIEHARDS BRUCE HERSCHENSOHN, HENRY CASHEN, ARAM BAKSHIAN 27841 07/10/77 PART I: THE CATS MEOW - SEVEN FELINES AND THEIR OWNERS JOAN BREARLEY, DR.ALFRED GROSSMAN, BILL WIELER, JUDY FIREMAN, LINDA WORTHINGTON 27815 07/10/77 PART II: DR.HERBERT BENSON AND "THE RELAXATION RESPONSE" 27815 08/28/77 PART I: MISTRESSES ANONYMOUS BARBARA CONDOS, MELISSA SANDS 27842 08/28/77 PART II: HITLERMANIA: OUR FASCINATION WITH THE NAZIS DR.ROBERT JAU LIFTON, ROBERT G.L.WAITE, DR.LOUIS SNYDER, JOHN TOLAND, DR.WILLIAM SHERIDAN ALLEN, DR.HENRY TURNER, TIM MASON 27842 03/16/77 RELIGOUS CONVERTS 27831 09/18/77 PART I: SHAPE UP AMERICA - THE PHYSOCAL FITNESS EXPLOSION DR.HERMAN HELLERSTEIN, DR.NORBERT SANDER, KATHERINE SWITZER, DR.PAUL MILVY 27843 09/18/77 PART II: CONFESSIONS OF THREE WHITE COLLAR CRIMINALS JOE BRISBOIS, JACKIE BUTNER, BILL SCHONOWSKI 27843 09/25/77 WE'RE MAD AS HELL - SECRETARIES STRIKE BACK PAT FITZGERALD, JUDITH RINK, RENEE LORD, TESSA GEORGE, MARGIE ALBERT, JUDI FREEMAN 27839 09/25/77 FORMER SECRETARIES CHARLOTTE JONES, PAULA HUGHES 27839 10/02/77 WHO WAS LEE HARVEY OSWALD? JACK ANDERSON, ROBERT SAM ANSON, DAVID PHILLIPS, ROBERT GEMBERLING, JONES HARRIS, PETER DALE SCOTT 29201 10/16/77 PART II: TODAY'S WORLD OF ROCK DAVE MARSH, JOHN ROCKWELL, DEE ANTHONY, JOHNNY WINTER, GEORGE FRAYNE 29202 10/23/77 PART I: HYPNOSIS CURES: DOCTORS AND PATIENTS DEMONSTRATE DR.ERNEST ROCKEY, DR.BARBARA DEBETZ, DR.HERBERT SPIEGEL, DR.DAVID SPIEGEL, DR.JEFFREY TARTE D.D.S., CHARLES SNYDER, MARJORIE STRIDER, ELYCE ENGLAND, HERBERT KLIEGERMAN, SANDRA BEHRMAN 29204 11/13/77 PART II: BETTING ON SPORTS - TOUTS AND TIPSTERS RICHARD BOMZE, GREG PELLINI, JULIUS GAFFNEY SCHANZER, JIM FEIST 29206 11/20/77 PART I: ALL ABOUT SEX THERAPY DR.HELEN SINGER KAPLAN M.D., DR.JOSEPH LOPICCOLO PH.D., DR.MAJ-BRITT ROSENBAUM M.D., DR. BENJAMIN SADOCK M.D., DR.VIRGINIA SADOCK M.D., ROBERT KOLODNY M.D. 29205 11/20/77 PART II: CHILDREN OF THE HOLOCAUST JUDY CUKIER, , JACOB FRUCHTMAN, ABRAHAM KRIEGER, CHAIM ZLOTOGORSKY, DIANA WYSHOGROD ZLOTOGORSKY 29205 12/04/77 PART I: IS THERE TOO MUCH SEX AND VIOLENCE ON TELEVISION? ALFRED R. SCHNEIDER, DR.FOY VALENTINE, JIM KARAYN, VAN GORDON SAUTER, DR.EVERETT C.PARKER 29208 12/04/77 PART II: THE NEW BREED OF IMMIGRANT - RICH AND GLAMOROUS JACLINE MAZAED, JOHN RICHARDSON, COUNTESS MARINA DE BRANTES, BARNEY GOODMAN, MARIAN SCHIANO 29208 12/11/77 PART I: "WHITES NEED NOT APPLY" - THE FIGHT OVER REVERSE DOSCRIMINATION ARNOLD FORSTER, PAUL J.ASCIOLLA, CONG.JOHN CONYERS, JOSEPH L. RAUH 29209 12/18/77 "DOES THE BIRTH CONTROL PILL KILL?" DR. NATALEE GREENFIELD, JAMES LUGGEN, HEIDI EVANS, ILA COOPER, BARBARA SEAMAN, HOWARD SHAPIRO M.D., EDWIN ORITZ M.D., BEN-ZION TABER M.D., MELVIN TAYMOR M.D. 29213 12/25/77 OUR HOUSES ARE HAUNTED - SPIRITS, PHANTOMS AND TRUE GHOST STORIES JAY ANSON, ARNOLD COOPER, FRED MOORE, BETTY MOORE, DR. JOHN FRANK, SUSAN C. GIGLIO, EDWARD WARREN, LORRAINE WARREN, FATHER ALPHONSUS TRABOLD, DR. ALEX THOMAS 29217 01/08/78 PART II: HOW TO SAVE YOUR TEETH FRANK BOWYER D.D.S., JERRY LYNN D.D.S., DAVID SCOTT D.D.S., STANLEY BEHRMAN D.S.S. 29214 01/15/78 PART I: RUSSIAN SPIES ARE EVERYWHERE - THE TRUTH ABOUT THE KGB JOHN BARRON, JACK FISHMAN, LEW NAVROZOV, HARRY ROSITZKE 29215 01/15/78 PART II: WEST POINT GOES CO ED JOAN ZECH, DIANE HAASE, KATHY ANN WILDEY 29215 01/22/78 PART I: FEELING DEPRESSED? - HOW TO OVERCOME IT MYRNA WEISSMAN, PH.D., HELEN DEROISS, M.D., RONALD FIEVE, M.D., AARON BECK, M.D., PATIENTS: HILDA ROBBINS, RAYMOND GUMBRECHT, NANCY SMITH, MICHAEL BAVAR 29221 01/22/78 PART II: SECOND LADY AT THE WHITE HOUSE - PREDIDENTIAL ASSISTANT MIDGE COSTANZA MIDGE COSTANZA 29221 01/29/78 HOUSE HUSBANDS, LONG DISTANCE MARRIAGE, AND OTHER LOVING COUPLES BURT WOLF, LINDA HOWARD, TUCKER CLARK, JAMES AND LINDA FOX, LANA SKIRBALL, ANTHONY COLLIS 29219 01/29/78 PART II: DR. ROBERT LIBBY, DR. ROBERT RYDER, NENA O'NEILL 29219 02/05/78 THE FUNNIEST WOMEN AROUND - ANNE MEARA, JANE CURTIN, MARILYN SOKOL AND OTHERS COMEDIANS: ANNE MEARA, JANE CURTIN, ZORA RASMUSSEN, REBECCA REYNOLDS, NANCY PARKER, MARILYN SOKOL 29216 02/12/78 PART I: HOMOSEXUALS VS. COPS: A CONFRONTATION GAYS: DAVID ROTHENBERG, GREGORY NORRIS, ALAN BELL, JEREMY WEISS, NICK BOLLMAN COPS: JOHN TOBACCO, IGNATIUS SCLAFANI, FRANK ODESSA, STEVEN BERVINE, JOHN CODIGLIA 29222 02/12/78 PART II: THE HORROR OF MEXICAN PRISONS PRISONERS: DWIGHT WORKER, DAVID SEIGLINGER, DAVID ALSOP, CONGRESSMAN FORTNEY STARK, ROBERT HENNEMEYER 29222 02/19/78 PART I: YOUR SMOKE GETS IN MY EYES - THE BATTLE OVER SMOKING JACOB J. MEYER, CHARLES MORGAN JR. RHODA NICHTER, WILLIAM DWYER, PETER GEORGIADES, ETHEL GOLDBERG 29218 02/19/78 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH LEO ROSTEN 29218 02/26/78 PART I: OUR WIVES BEAT US UP - CONFESSIONS OF THREE BATTERED HUSBANDS VICTIMS: MICHAEL FRENCH, JOHN, BOB EXPERTS: ROGER LANGLEY, PAULETTE OWENS, JAMES WALSH 29224 02/26/78 PART II: BOBBY HALPERN - A REAL LIFE ROCKY BOBBY HALPERN, CHARLIE CASERTA 29224 03/19/78 MORRIS UDALL - THE MAN WHO SHOULD BE PRESIDENT CONGRESSMAN MORRIS UDALL 29225 03/26/78 PART I: SHOW BIZ KIDS AND STAGE MOTHERS CHILDREN: SUZANNE FIERO, DAWN WALKER, DAVID REED, MONICA WOLFF, TINA FOX, WAYNE HARDING, GLYNIS BIG, JUSTIN FRIEMAN, MISSY HOPE PARENTS: ANINA REED, LOIS FREIMAN, BETTE FOX, CAROL FIERO, KAY BIG 29228 03/26/78 PART II: CHARLES TEMPLETON CHARLES TEMPLETON 29228 08/06/78 YOU CAN'T LOCK US UP - MENTAL PATIENTS ARE ROAMING THE STREETS 29229 08/20/78 YOUR COMPLETE MEDICAL EXAM - DR. ISADORE ROSENFELD 29239 08/27/78 PART I: WE WON'T PAY - TAXPAYERS IN REVOLT 29227 08/27/78 - PART II: TERRORISTS BEWARE: PROFESSIONAL PROTECTORS 29227 09/24/78 PART I: BABIES FOR SALE - THE BLACK MARKET IN CHILDREN DAVID LEAVITT, BEATTY LIPMAN, LINDA, CONGRESSMAN HENRY HYDE, NANCY BAKER, ROBERT BURNS, JUNE MATZ 29243 10/01/78 JOHN J. O'CONNOR 30703 10/01/78 PART II: TURNING OFF THE TUBE - LIFE WITHOUT TELEVISION A. CHILDREN: FRED IFRAH, DAWN KAYNO, DEREK LIPPNER, CHRISSY MAGLIOCCO, LEAH PIKE, DAVID STEINGLASS B. PARENTS AND TEACHERS: JOYCE SUSSKIND, NANCY PIKE, BARBARA GOLDFARB, PAT MAGLIOCCO, JUDITY ROHN, TANYA KAUFMAN 30703 10/08/78 PART I: FED UP WITH THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION - SIX ASEXUALS GAIL RACHLIN, BILL PRIEST, DANIELLA GIOSEFFI, RICHARD MILNER, MARIAN TESSA, GARY NULL 29240 10/08/78 PART II: HOW TO COPE WITH LONELINESS ERICA ABEEL, DR. JAMES LYNCH, BRUCE JAY FRIEDMAN, TERRI SCHULTZ, MARK KLINGMAN 29240 10/22/78 PART I: WE'RE MAD AS HELL - THE RADIO CALL IN RAGE JERRY WILLIAMS, ED SCHWATRZ, IRV HOMER, HERB JEPKO, BERNARD MELTZER 30702 10/22/78 PART II: THINK RICH - BE RICH JERRY GILLIS, H. STANLEY JUDD, IAN ANDERSON 30702 10/29/78 PART I: CAN CARTER CUT IT IN 1980 HENRY GRUNWALD, NICHOLAS VON HOFFMAN, JERALD TER HORST, WILLIAM RUSHER 30706 10/29/78 PART II: PSYCHICS WHO SOLVE CRIME DOROTHY ALLISON, BEVERLY JAEGERS, DAVID HOY, MIKE CASALE, SAL LUBERTAZZI 30706 11/05/78 PART II: "THE DOOMSDAY TAPES" BARDYL TIRANA, HERBERT SCOVILLE, LEONARD REIFEL, LEON GOURE 30709 11/12/78 THEY'RE STILL THE FUNNIEST MEN AROUND - VETERAN COMICS MAC ROBBINS, JIMMY JOYCE, LARRY BEST, MICKEY FREEMAN, JOEY FAYE, LOU MENCHELL 29241 11/19/78 PART I: DRESS FOR SUCCESS - LOOK LIKE A MILLION, MAKE A MILLION JOHN WEITZ, JOHN T.MOLLOY, EMILY CHO, WILLIAM THOURLBY, ROBERT L. GREEN 30710 11/19/78 PART II: SUPER SALESMEN JOE GIRARD, LOIS BECKER, TOM WOLF, BOB SHOOK 30710 11/26/78 PART I: STARTLING STORIES OF LIFE AFTER DEATH DR. MAURICE RAWLINGS, CHARLES MCKAIG, VIRGINIA FALCY, KENNETH RING, HELEN NELSON, DR. MICHAEL SABOM 30712 11/26/78 PART II: ANGRY CITIZENS VS. THE POST OFFICE JAMES FINCH, BOB GRANT, ROBERT MEYERS, JAMES LAPENTA, PAT BRENNAN 30712 12/03/78 PART I: SURGEON / SALESMAN BILL MACKAY 30714 12/03/78 PART II: LONELY, UNHAPPY & BROKE - DISPLACED HOMEMAKERS FLORENCE GRIFFIN, JACQUELINE BACHMAN, LESLIE WALD WALDHORN, SANDRA JACOBS, JANE LEE LITTLETON 30714 12/10/78 PART I: IF BETTY FORD COULD DO IT - ALL ABOUT FACE LIFTS RICHARD KIELING, LILLIAM FRASER, D. RALPH MILLARD, M.D., DIRIS LILLY, MICHAEL HOGAN, M.D. 30716 12/10/78 PART II: TO JOG OR NOT TO JOG DAVID BRODY, M.D., DAVID NOONAN, RICHARD A.SCHWARTZ, M.D., RICHARD RESTAK, M.D., PAUL FETSCHER 30716 12/17/78 WE WANT A BABY - NEW HOPE FOR INFERTILE COUPLES A. PATIENTS: SUSAN AND LEE WELLING, CAROL AND ERNST D'ANGELO, CATHY AND JOHN SCOTT B. EXPERTS: DR. WAYNE DECKER, DR. ALVIN GOLDFARB, DR. RICHARD SHERINS, BARBARA ECK MENNING, DR. LUIGI MASTROIANNI 30701 12/24/78 PART I: THE PAMPERED PET - FROM SHRINK TO MINK DR. PETER BORCHELT, DR. DANIEL TORTORA, DR. ALBERT LAMPASSO, MORDECAI SEGAL, LOIS LANDAUER, KAREN THOMPSON, GEORGE JEWEL 30715 12/24/78 PART II: MIND YOUR MANNERS - THE NEW ETIQUETTE LETITIA BALDRIGE, JUDITH MARTIN, MARJABELLE YOUNG STEWART 30715 01/24/79 PART I: THE DIET THAT CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE - PRO & CON A. PATIENTS: BILL UTALL, JULIE BREAKSTONE, FRED SILVER, DR. HARRY PARKER, JOE HUME B. EXPERTS: NATHAN PRITIKIN, DR. SAMI SASHIM, DR. ROBERT E. BAUER, DR. STEPHEN SCHEIDT 30704 01/14/79 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH THE BRILLIANT PETER USTINOZ 30704 01/21/79 PART I: THE PRIEST WHO FIGHTS PIMPS FATHER BRUCE RITTER 30711 01/21/79 PART II: MAKING INFLATION WORK FOR YOU HARRY BROWNE, DAN DORFMAN 30711 01/28/79 PART II: ARE YOU REALLY IN LOVE? DR. DEBORA PHILLIPS, DR. CHARLIE SHEDD, DR. STANTON PEELE 30717 02/04/79 PART I: WE ARE BI-SEXUALS LARRY KANE, TONI TUCCI, DR. FRED KLEIN, "JULIA" "JOANNE" 30720 02/04/79 PART II: TREASURE HUNTERS MEL FISHER, EUGENE LYON, ART MCKEE 30720 02/11/79 INSIDE THE CULTS: THE TERRIFYING TRUTH FROM EX-MEMBERS PART I: EX-MEMBERS: SUSAN SMITH, CHRIS EDWARDS, MORRIS DEUTSCH, STEVE HASSAN, ANDREW STUBBS PART II - EXPERTS: FLO CONWAY, JIM SEIGELMAN, GALEN KELLY, DR. JON CLARK 30718 02/18/79 PART 1: MEN WHO ARE KEPT BY WOMEN: TRUE CONFESSIONS REAL, MICHEL, PAUL, LOU 30721 02/18/79 PART II: THE TRUTH ABOUT ASPIRIN DR. LOUIS ALEDORT, DR. THOMAS KANTOR, DR. DAVID CODON, PAUL E. SCHINDLER 30721 02/25/79 PART I: BEAUTIFUL WOMEN SHARE THEIR SECRETS (HOSTED BY JOYCE SUSSKIND) BEVERLY SASSOON, ADRIEN ARPEL, CRISTINA FERRARE 30722 02/25/79 PART II: WHEN YOUR PARENTS GROW OLD JOHN PERRY, RITA SIGLER, BARBARA FELDMAN, MARIE CARROL, JERRY ORNSTEIN 30722 03/11/79 PART I: WE CAN'T STOP DIETING - VICTIMS OF ANOREXIA STEVEN LEVENKRON, KAYIE, PATRICIA DE POL, ROBERTA, LISA WOLFF 30713 03/11/79 PART II: WHEN FEAR TAKES OVER - AGORAPHOBIA JEAN ESTERBROOK, JOEL GREEMBAUM, EILEEN WEBBER, MARIA WEBBER, DR. MANUEL ZANE 30713 03/18/79 PART II: IT'S NOT SO GREAT IN BRITAIN FRED HIFT, REX BERRY, ROBIN DUTHY, VALERIE WADE 30725 03/25/79 PART I: THINGS TO COME - LIFE IN THE YEAR 2000 ISAAC ASIMOV, FRANK KENDIG, DR. JERRY POURNELLE 30719 04/01/79 THE TELEVISION CRISIS MICHAEL DANN, PAUL KLEIN, GRANT TINKER, NORMAN LEAR, DAVID GERBER 30726 04/08/79 HOT GOSSIP ABOUT THE BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE RUDY MAXA, CLAUDIA COHEN, NEAL TRAVIS 30724 04/08/79 PITY THE HAPPY HOUSEWIFE JUDITH VIORST, MARY KUCZKIR, ANN TOLAND SERB, JOAN WESTER ANDERSON 30724 04/22/79 IS CARTER A CATASTROPHE? ELIOT JANEWAY, WILLIE L. BROWN, JR., ROBERT H. MALOTT, WILLLIAM W. WINPISINGER 30728 05/13/79 PART I: DEAR ANN LANDERS... ANN LANDERS 30727 05/13/79 PART II: THE CULTS ANSWER BACK GADDAHAR PANDIT DAS, RABINDRA SWAROOP DAS, DIANE KETTERING, ARTIE MAREN 30727 06/03/79 PART I: WATCH OUT! HOWARD JARVIS IS COMING HOWARD JARVIS, JOHN L. LOEB JR., JAMES FARMER, STEPHEN BERGER 30733 06/03/79 PART II: HOW TO SLASH YOUR FOOD BILLS IN HALF ARLENE STOLARSKI, PATTI UMLAND, MARY ANNE HAYES, SUSAN SAMTUR 30733 06/10/79 PART I: SHOULD YOU BUY A HOUSE NOW OR NEVER? DONALD I. HOVDE, BENNY KASS, WILLIAM WOLMAN, MICHAEL SUMICHRAST 30734 06/10/79 PART II: MALE SECRETARIES DONALD HARLEY, CHARLES W. BARKER, JOSEPH R. LICCARDO, ANTHONY ZATTI, KEITH M. WHITE 30734 06/17/79 PART I: HOW TO LIVE WITH CONSTANT PAIN PATIENTS: HERBERT A. DIAMOND, BARBARA B. WOLF, ROSALIE TERRAVECCHIA DOCTORS: DR. GERALD ARNOFF, DR. DONALD M. DOOLEY, DR. NELSON H. HENDLER, DR. HAROLD CARRON 30736 06/17/79 PART II: THE MAN WHO GIVES ADVICE TO ANN LANDERS DR. EUGENE KENNEDY 30736 07/01/79 PART I: OUT OF GAS - WHO'S TO BLAME? LESLIE J. GOLDMAN, JAMES F. FLUG, CHARLES KITTRELL, SENATOR HOWARD M. METZENBAUM 30738 07/01/79 PART II: THE FLYING WHITE HOUSE COLONEL RALPH ALBERTAZZIE 30738 10/07/79 DAVID SUSSKIND MEETS THE MARTIANS A. LYDIA STALNAKER, BRYCE BOND B. RUTH NORMAN, THOMAS MILLER 30729 10/14/79 PART I: ORGANIZED CRIME: THE BIGGEST BUSINESS IN AMERICA HANK M. MESSICK, RICHARD E. JAFFE, RALPH F. SALERNO, JACK KEY, THOMAS RENNER 32101 10/14/79 PART II: BATTLE OVER BLACK ENGLISH MICHAEL MEYERS, DR. GENEVA SMITERMAN, DR. ELAINE LEWNAU, ETTA LADSOM 32101 10/28/79 THE KENNEDY - CARTER SHOWDOWN ALLARD K. LOWENSTEIN, ARTHUR SCHLESINGER JR., STUART EIZENSTST, GERALD M. RAFSHOON 32109 11/11/79 PART II: IS STRESS KILLING YOU? JOHN J. PARRINO PH.D, KENNETH GREENSPAN, M.D. 32107 11/18/79 SUPER SALESWOMEN DOT COOK, ANDREA BERRITY, LINDA SCHMITT, SHIRLEY HUTTON 30731 11/25/79 PART I: RICH AND FEMALE - WOMEN WHO MAKE MILLIONS MURIEL SIEBERT, MARY ANN HALMI, EVA HORTON, DAISY TALLARICO, JOAN LEVINE 30737 11/25/79 PART II: GOTHIC WRITERS ROBERTA ANDERSON & MARY KUCZKIR (FERN MICHAELS), JANET DAILY, PATRICIA MATTHEWS 30737 12/02/79 PART I: BREAKING UP IS HARD TO TAKE - CHILDREN OF DIVORCE DON, CAREN, LIZ, GILLIAN,LISA 32102 12/02/79 PART II: THE WICKED TRUTH ABOUT STEP PARENTS WILLIAM NOBLE, SUZY KALTER, MARCIA WYRTZEN, JEANETTE LOFAS, BOB MARTIN 32102 12/09/79 PART I: LIARS BEWARE - THE LATEST IN LIE DETECTION CHRIS GUGAS 32108 12/09/79 PART II: THE RED BERETS - TEENAGE VIGILANTES CURTIS SLIWA, DINO REYES, KATO, JEFF MONROE, JERRY MONROE ET. AL 32108 12/16/79 PART I: HOW TO TEST YOUR DOG'S IG AND PERSONALITY MATTHEW MARGOLIS 32115 12/16/79 PART II: DAZZLING WOMEN FROM ABROAD LIVIA SLYVA WEINTRAUB, JACLINE MAZARD (JEAN MAHIE) REGINE, GEORGETTE KLINGER, PRINCESS SUMAIR 32115 12/23/79 HOW TO PROSPER DURING THE COMING BAD YEARS HOWARD RUFF 32114 12/23/79 PART II: CHINA TODAY - A CONVERSATION WITH HAN SUYIN HAN SUYIN 32114, 23121 01/06/80 ARE YOUR TEENAGERS DRIVING YOU CRAZY? HELP IS HERE! DR.THOMAS J. COTTLE, ELIZABETH ROBERTS, DR. DAVID ELKIND, EDITH B. PHELPS, ELIOT DALEY 32110 01/13/80 PART I: SHORT PEOPLE HAVE FEELINGS TOO! PAMELA BROWN, MIKE PARADINE, BILL GILE, NANCY HENKEL, IRWIN HASEN 32111 01/13/80 PART II: LAUGHTER IS THE BEST MEDICINE NORMAN COUSINS 32111 01/27/80 A MEDIUM WHO TALKS TO THE DEAD - DORIS STOKES DORIS STOKES 32103 02/10/80 WHAT'S NEW WITH JACKIE, SINATRA, STREISAND, BEATTY, MINNELLI AND REYNOLDS, TOO LIZ SMITH, CHICAGO TRIBUNE - NEW YORK DAILY NEWS: TAKI THEODORACOPULOS, ESQUIRE: DAVID SHEEHAN, DIANA MCLELLAN, "THE EAR", IN THE WASHINGTON STAR 32119 02/17/80 09/21/80 12/13/81 PART I: LIFE AT 5THE TOP - WIVES OF FAMOUS MEN JOYCE DAVIDSON SUSSKIND, NANCY MEHTA, MARILYN FUNT, NORRIS CHURCH 32113 02/24/80 09/14/80 PART II: GARBAGE OF THE STARS A.J. WEBERMAN, GARBOLOGIST 32118 03/02/80 07/27/80 PART I: WE'RE HIGH ON BEING TALL GEORGE ANDREWS - 6'6", JUDY VOGEL - 6', CECILIA GARDNER - 6'1", KERRY KEANE - 6'6", TERRY LEE - 5'11", ALICE WHITE - 6' 32121 03/02/80 PART II: SIZING UP THE NEWSCASTERS PHILIP MCHUGH 32121 03/23/80 08/03/80 PART I: THE DATING SERVICE FOR WINNER THE GODMOTHER: ABBY HIRSCH CLIENTS: BARBARA WRENN, DOUGLAS RIPPETO, MITCHEL MITCHEL, BABETTE GLADSTEIN 32126 03/23/80 08/03/80 PART II: THE GIRL WHO HAD EVERYTHING - DORIAN LEIGH DORIAN LEIGH 32126 04/06/80 PART II: THE NATIONAL LAMPOON P.J. O'ROURKE, GERALD SUSSMAN, TOD CARROLL, JOHN HUGHES 32122 04/20/80 PART I: APOCALYPSE SOON: A CONVERSATION WITH WILLIAM SIMON WILLIAM SIMON, FORMER TREASURY SECRETARY 32127 04/20/80 PART II: BEWARE OF PICKPOCKETS CARL LEWIS, DETECTIVE ROBERT MAGONE 32127 04/27/80 01/31/82 PART I: THE SHAME OF OUR HOSPITALS - FIVE ANGRY NURSES CAROL, REBECCA, ELEANOR, RUTH AND HELEN 32129 04/27/80 01/31/82 PART II: DR. WILLIAM NOLEN WILLIAM A. NOLEN, M.D. 32129 05/11/80 PART II: SOUTHERN JOURNALISTS TALK ABOUT JIMMY CARTER AND OTHER GOOL OLE BOYS LARRY KING AUTHOR: OF OUTLAWS, CON MEN, WHORES, POLITICIANS AND OTHER ARTIST'S. MARSHALL FRADY, AUTHOR: SOUTHERNERS. ROT BLLUNT JR., AUTHOR: CRACKERS 32132 05/25/80 PART II: THE LAST OF THE COWBOYS - 5 TRUCKERS RUSSELL "CAPTAIN ZIG ZAG" PATE, GEORGE "WILDMAN" RALES, ED "SKY PILOT" WINTERSTEEN, MIKE "DOUBLE R" CRAKER, JAMES "BUCKY" BUCKOWSKI 32134 06/01/80 PART I: BEAT INFLATION WITH DIAMONDS, ART, STAMPS AND COINS NICOLA BULGARI, RICHARD L. FEIGEN, RAYMOND WEIL AND HARVEY STACK 32128 06/01/80 PART II: HOLLYWOOD PRODUCER - JENNINGS LANG JENNINGS LANG 32128 06/08/80 PART I: INFLATION IS KILLING US! 5 ANGRY VICTIMS NITA DENNIS, JOE CURLEY, JOSPEH MULHOLLAND, ANNE AND GEORGE ANDREWS 32133 06/08/80 PART II: MIND OVER BODY - A DEMONSTRATION OF THE MARTIAL ARTS LINDA LUTES AND NELSON HOWE 32133 06/15/80 PART I: UPDATE ON MEDICAL BREAKTHROUGHS - DR. ISADORE ROSENFELD ISADORE ROSENFELD M.D. 32140 06/15/80 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH CORINNA MARSH CORINNA MARSH 32140 06/22/80 WHY ARE THE BULLS RUNNING ON WALL STREET JOSEPH GRANVILLE, BURTON MALKIEL, DAVID DREMAN, RAYMOND DEVOE, JOHN NEFF 32142 06/29/80 PART II: THE TWO PAYCHECK MARRIAGE JUDY HUNT, CHARLES MITCHELL, MEG WHITCOMB, JEANNE CANTEEN, PRATT 32141 10/12/80 A DESPERATE TIME - WILLIAM SIMON ON THE STATE OF THE UNION FORMER TREASURE SECRETARY, WILLIAM E. SIMON 33605 10/19/80 A CONVERSATION WITH HAL GULLIVER HAROLD GULLIVER, EDITOR, ATLANTA CONSTITUTION 33606 11/02/80 - 07/05/81 PART I: BIG, BEAUTIFUL WOMEN - NO SIN TO BE A SIZE 18 MADALINE SPARKS, ILVIRA TORTORA, BARBARA BETZA, STELL REICHMAN, LILLIAM NILSON 33602 11/02/80 - 07/05/81 PART II: IS THIN STILL IN? SUZIE BERTIN, JILL DIRKS, JOHNA JOHNSON, BARBARA PEARLMAN 33602 11/09/80 - 10/04/81 PART I: MEET AND MARRY THROUGH THE PERSONAL ADS JUDI MCMAHON, BILL JAMES, STEPHEN T. HEYMANN, STEPHANIE KAPILIAN, BOB EVANS 32139 11/09/80 - 10/04/81 PART II: NO KIDS FOR US PLEASE SNNE SEIFERT, WALTER CALLAHAN, BARBARA COFFEY, DOROTHY WILSON, IVAN MENDELSON 32139 11/16/80 - 07/12/81 PART I: LIFE AFTER DARK - NIGHT PEOPLE TELL ALL RICHARD WEXLER, CINDY CAPALDO, BLEECKER BOB PLOTNIK, ABLE ABEL, SAVARIO COSTANZA 33601 11/23/80 - 09/20/81 PART I: WOMEN RATE MEN: LOVERS AND LOSERS NAN ROBERTSON, SUSANNA HOFFMAN, CAROL BOTWIN 32136 11/30/80 PART I: THE JEANING OF AMERICA: MODELS, MOGULS AND MAKERS JOSEPH NAKASH (JORDACHE), PAUL GUEZ (SASSOON), WARREN HIRSH (GLORIA VANDERBILT) 33603 11/30/80 PART II: NOT FOR WOMEN ONLY - MEN'S COSMETICS TONY CARVETTE (GEORGETTE KLINGER), TOM DAY (CLINIQUE), JAN STUART (JAN STUART), CHIP TOLBERT (MENS FASHION ASSOCIATION), PAUL WILMOT (HALSTON) 33603 12/07/80 - 08/02/81 PART II: A CONVERSATION WITH MICHAEL THOMAS MICHAEL THOMAS, AUTHOR GREEN MONDAY 33609 12/14/80 - 07/18/81 PART I: ARE LAWYERS RUINING OUR LIVES? PHILIP M. STERN, GEOFFREY C. HAZARD, FRANK R. ROSINY, ALAN B. MORISON, JUDGE WILLIAM B. LAWLESS 33607 12/14/80 PART II: NORMAN DACEY, ROSEMARY FURMAN 33607 12/21/80 - 08/30/81 PART I: FEELING GOOD ALL UNDER - THE ELEGANT NEW LINGERIE REBECCA ASPAN, BELL TICE, ORA FEDER, DAVID STIFFLER, SAMI 33613 12/21/80 - 08/30/81 PART II: BEST FRIENDS AND BEST SELLERS CONSUELO BAEHR, SUSAN ISAACS, HILMA WOLITZER 33613 12/28/80 THE REMARKABLE JONATHAN SCHWARTZ - A SPECAL PERFORMANCE JONATHAN SCHWATRZ 33612 01/11/81 - 09/13/81 PART I: THE INCREDIBLE WORLD OF MOTHER TERESA JOYCE DAVIDSON SUSSKIND 33608 01/11/81 - 09/13/81 PART II: HOW TO SUCCEED? GO TO BUSINESS SCHOOL SUSAN THOMAS, JED DALY, ROBERT FRIEDMAN, JAY ESSEY. ELIZABETH CLOSTERMAN 33608 01/18/81 - 04/15/84 PART I: WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE JOHN SIMON, RICHARD MITCHELL, EDWIN NEWMAN 33611 01/18/81 PART II: WHERE THE BODIES ARE BURIED - WASHINGTON LOWDOWN DONALD LAMBRO, CHARLES PETERS, MICHAEL J. MALBIN, FRANK SILBEY 33611 01/25/81 PART II: HOW TO IMPROVE YOUR EATING HABITS RICHARD S. RIVLIN M.D., RICHARD PASSWATER, DR. ROBERT PALMER, JOSEPH RECHTSCHAFFEN M.D. 33616 02/08/81 - 08/23/81 PART I: TAKE THOSE INCHES OFF! SHAPE UP WITH EXCERCISE MARJORIE CRAIG, LYDIA BACH, CHARLES GAINES, MARUSCHKA 33614 02/08/81 - 08/23 81 PART II: THE ESTABLISHMENT LEONARD AND MARK SILK, STEPHEN BIRMINGHAM 33614 02/15/81 CELEBRITY WATCHING WITH LIZ SMITH, TAKI, JAMES BRADY AND JODY JACOBS 33620 02/22/81 HOW TO SURVIVE AND PROSPER IN THE 80'S HOWARD RUFF, DOUGLAS CASEY, JEROME SMITH, THOMAS HOLT 33621 03/01/81 - 08/09/81 PART 1: PRETTY BABIES - THE NEW TEEN AGE MODELS BETTINA, LORI LOUGHLIN, CATHLEEN ESS, FELICE SCHACHTER, LENA REID 33619 03/01/81 - 08/09/81 PART II: ARE YOUR CHILDREN BECOMING ADULTS TOO SOON? DR. AARON HASS, PATRICIA O'BRIEN, ARTHUR KORNHABER M.D., ADELE HOFFMAN, M.D. 33619 03/08/81 BIGOTRY RIDES AGAIN WILLIAM SLOANE COFFIN, ARNOLD FORSTER, WILLIAM A. FUSHER, CONGRESSMAN JOHN CONYERS, DR. M. MORAN WESTON 33622 03/15/81 THE BATTLE FOR SURVIVAL - THE AMERICAN AUTO INDUSTRY WENDELL H. MILLER, STEPHEN L. SCHLOSSBERG, TOM HANNA, JERRY FLINT, DAVID HEALY 33623 03/22/82 - 07/26/81 PART I: POURING OUT YOUR TROUBLES - BARTENDERS TELL ALL PADDY QUINN, CHARLIE SCHOENEMAN, RAY FOLEY, JOHN "SHIRTS" HUGHES, KITTY FITZKE 33615 03/22/81 - 07/26/81 PART II: TWINS WHO MARRIED TWINS BARBI GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., BRUCE GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., CHERYL GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., BARRY GOLDENBERG, D.D.S., 33615 03/29/81 - 09/27/81 THE MORAL MAJORITY ON THE WAR PATH DR. TIM LA HAYE, DR. DAN C. FORE, SENATOR FRANK CHURCH. DR. DANIEL C. MAQUIRE 33624 04/05/81 - 08/16/81 PART I: WOMEN AND SUCCESS - MAKING IT TO THE TOP JUDY MELLO, ANNE P. HYDE, SUSAN HOROWITZ, PAULA D. HUGHES, JO FOXWORTH 33625 04/05/81 - 08/16/81 - 05/06 84 PART II: THE TRUTH ABOUT SENILITY ROBERT N. BUTLER, M.D., DENNETH L. DAVIS, M.D., DR. PETER DAVIES, DR. ROSE ROBROF 33625 04/12/81 PART I: BANKS ON THE BRINK MURIEL SIEBERT, LEE GUNDERSON, H. ERICH HEINEMANN, WILLIAM E. DONOGHUE, DR. SAUL B. KLAYMAN 33626 04/12/81 - 05/20/84 PART II: DOCTORS WIVES CARLA FINE, LINDA SHIPLEY, LINDA SEDA, LORI TAYLOR 33626 04/26/81 THE AMERICAN MILITARY MACHINE: ARE WE READY FOR BATTLE? CONGRESSMAN JIM COURTER, BARRY R. POSEN, BRIGADIER GENERAL ALBION KNIGHT JR., EDWARD LUTTWALK, GENERAL VOLNEY F. WARNER 33628 05/10/81 FROM HOLLYWOOD TO BROADWAY - PART II: MCCANN AND NUGENT NELLE NUGENT AND ELIZABETH MCCANN 33631 05/18/81 PART I: HOMELESS AND HELPLESS - PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS ANN MARIE ROUSSEAU, WILLIAM KUEHNE, ANTON GALENOS, SELMA (MARIE) PRICE, SYD ROLFS, VERONICA (VIRGINIA) WILLIAMS, GENE PALMER 33632 05/17/81 PART II: SPORTS AMERICAN STYLE: BIG, BRUISING BUSINESS DICK SHAAP, PETER BONVENTRE, MIKE LUPICA, DAN JENKINS 33632 05/24/81 PART I: SURVIVALISTS: PREPARING FOR DOOMSDAY KURT SAXON, JOSEPH RUSTICK M.D., ROBERT FIRTH, GENE AND PEARL TARMAN 33633 05/24/81 PART II: DELAYED MOTHERHOOD - HAVING CHILDREN AT AGE 35 JULIE HOUSTON, LYNN POVICH, JACQULINE PESUT, LUISA LA VIOLA, DR. PEGGY EWING 33633 06/07/81 PART II: A VANISHING BREED - THE PROFESSIONAL VOLUNTEER VIVIAN HARRIS, MARY LINDSAY, JEAN DELAFIELD, ISABELLE STEVENSON, GLORIA W. MILLIKEN 33635 06/14/81 PART II: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE TONY AWARDS ALEXANDER H. COHEN, HILDY PARKS 33636 06/21/81 PART I: REPORT FROM THREE DOCTORS - THE LATEST IN MEDICINE ISADORE ROSENFELD, M.D., DR. JOHN H. LARAGH, DR. JOSEPH WILDER 33630 06/21/81 PART II: HOW TO SUE WITHOUT A LAWYER JOHN STRIKER, ANDREW SHAPIRO 33630 06/28/81 PART I: SHOW BUSINESS COUPLES RENEE TAYLOR, JOSEPH BOLOGNA, MERGE REDMOND, JACK WESTON 33634 06/28/81 PART II: WHO REMEMBERS CARTER - JOSEPH CALIFANO DOES, THAT'S WHO 33634 10/11/81 - 08/08/82 STARTING OVER AFTER DIVORCE: MIDDLE AGED SINGLES RICHARD SCHICKEL, ANNE PARK, MARTHA HUGHES, STEVEN BRALOVE, RITA MCDOWELL 33637 10/18/81 - 08/01/82 PART I: THE REAL CHORUS LINE: BROADWAY DANCERS DONNA DRAKE, BOB HEATH, MARYBETH KURDOCK, DAVID EVANS, RON SCHWINN, JOAN BELL, DEAN BADOLATE, MARY ANN NILES 33638 10/18/81 - 08/01/82 PART II: FACES IN THE CROWD - MOVIE EXTRAS ROZ BRAVERMAN, ANDREW MURPHY, BARRY WISEMAN, SHANNON SORIN, VELA CERES 33638 10/25/81 PART I: MAKING MARRIAGE WORK: MARRIAGE COUNSELORS LAURA SINGER, DR. ROBERT RYDER, DR. MEL KRANTZLER, DR. FREDERICK HUMPHREY 35451 10/25/81 PART II: DIVORCE MEDIATORS DR. JOHN M. HAYNES, LAWRENCE GAUGHAN, SAMUEL MARGUILES, VIRGINIA STAFFORD 35451 11/01/81 WHAT PLASTIC SURGERY CAN DO FOR YOU DR. RALPH MILLARD, DR. CHRISTOPHER WEATHERLEY-WHITE, DR. BRUCE CONNELL, DR. MICHAEL HOGAN 35452 11/08/81 - 07/18/82 PART II: THE MYSTERY OF SLEEP DR. RICHARD BOOTZIN, DR. QUENTIN REGESTEIN, DR. ELLIOT WEITZMAN 35453 11/15/81 PART I: MOTHERS WITHOUT CUSTODY ELLEN KIMBALL, "JACKIE", BARBARA 35455 11/15/81 PART II: CAMPUS CONSERVATIVES KEENEY JONES, JOHN GOODWIN, BENNETT COOPER, TERRY QUIST 35455 11/22/81 PART I: A TALK WITH FATHER THEODORE HESBURGH 34556 11/29/81 - 07/04/82 PART I: THE SWINGERS PARADISE OF CLUB MED ROD FRANKEL, DOREEN WOODRUM, SUSAN FRAYTUS, RICKY DETRES, BOB LEIGHTON, CLAUDE KEBBE 35454 11/29/81 - 07/04/82 PART II: RETURN TO THE NEST STEPHANIE GANGI, TOM RIPP, FRANK SCHIRALLI, SCOTT MARTONE, ANGELA DIVERGILIO 35454 12/20/81 - 06/27/82 PART I: DON'T GO NEAR THE WATER! ELEGANT NEW SWIMWEAR LIZA BRUCE, ANNE COLE, STANLEY REGENBOGAN, FRANK FRIEND, MIRIAM RUZOW 35459 12/20/81 - 06/27/82 - 01/08/84 - 07/22/84 - 02/16/86 PART II: ALL ABOUT HANGOVERS DAVID OUTERBRIDGE, NELSON DEMILLE, PETER WALSH, HERBERT GOULD, M.D. 35459 01/03/82 PART I: AN INTERVIEW WITH GLADYCE BEGELMAN: CO-AUTHOR OF "NEW YORK ON $1000.00 A DAY" 35457 01/03/82 - 08/29/82 - 04/01/84 PART II: CAN YOU ERASE THOSE WRINKLES? THE TRUTH ABOUT SILICON AND COLLAGEN DR. LEWIS FEDER. DR. ROBERT AUERBACH, DR. JAMES LEYDEN 35457 01/20/82 - 07/25/82 PART I: TOUGHLOVE: PARENTS FIGHT BACK PHYLLIS AND DAVID YORK, LANE PEER, RICHARD SURVING, JEAN BAKER WUNDER 35459 01/10/82 - 07/25/82 PART II: ALL ABOUT CATS ANITRA FRAZIER, SIMON BOND, SAMANTHA SUSSKIND, JERRY BENISATTO, PATRICIA NELL WARREN, RICHARD GEBHARDT 35459 01/17/82 - 08/15/82 PART I: WEIGHT LOSS NORMA SKOPIN, STEVE SILVA, GERALDINE O'CONNOR, ANNE MCCARTHY, IRENE CURTIN 35459 01/17/82 - 08/15/82 - 03/25/84 - 09/16/84 - 02/09/86 - 07/06/86 PAT II: "LISA H." OPERATION LINTON WHITAKER, M.D., JAMES KATOWITZ, M.D., DEREK BRUCE, M.D., CH.B 35462 01/24/82 "NO MR. PRESIDENT, WE'RE NOT BETTER OFF" PART I: VICTIMS OF THE BUDGET CUTS MATILDE COLON, ZELDA WEINER, MARY GARBUTT, MURIEL ZGARDOWSKI, MARY GALE 35463 02/07/82 - 09/26/82 PART I: BACHELORS OF THE MONTH MICHAEL JEFFREY GRIFFITH, PETER KUHN, O. STEVEN FREDRICKSON, JIM ZERBE, JOEL DIAMOND 35465 02/07/82 - 09/26/82 PART II: CHIROPRACTORS VS. M.D.'S DR. STEPHEN BARRETT, LOUIS SPORTELLI, D.C., CHESTER WILK, D.C., REUBEN HOPPENSTEIN, M.D. 35465 02/21/82 WHO'S HOT, WHO'S NOT - WHO'S IN, WHO'S OUT - THE LATEST GOSSIP MADELLEINE SCHAAP, MAXINE MESSINGER, LIZ SMITH, JAMES BRADY, BOB COLACELLO 35467 02/28/82 PART I: ASTROLOGERS PREDICRT WHAT'S IN THE STARS FOR 1982 MARIA ELISA CRUMMERE, MARTIN SCHULMAN, DARRELL MARTINI, MAE WILSON-LUDLAM 35464 02/28/82 PART II: SABINA SHALOM 35464 03/07/82 THE WILD WORLD OF SPORTS DICK SCHAPP, DAN JENKINS, MIKE LUPICA, DAVE ANDERSON, MIKE DOWNEY 35469 03/07/82 TRAVELLING SALESMEN JIM O'CONNOR, JOEL KATZ, JIM PRENDERGAST, DICK ORNSTEIN 35469 03/14/82 - 07/11/82 CRIMINALS ARE GETTING AWAY WITH MURDER PHIL SEELIG, BILL CLARK, JUDGE EDWIN TORRES, SEYMOUR WISHMAN 35471 03/21/82 - 09/12/82 PART I: ARE WOMEN THEIR OWN WORST ENEMIES? MARY VANN HUNTER, MONIQUE VAN VOOREN, KATHRYN LIVINGSTON, DORIS LILLY 35471 03/21/82 - 09/12/82 PART II: NICE GIRLS DO DR. IRENE KASSORLA 35471 04/04/82 - 08/29/82 SUPERMOMS COLETTE ROSSANR, KATHRYN DARROW, MEG WHITCOMB, PENNY HAWKEY 35470 04/18/82 PUBLIC SERVICE OR PUBLIC RIP OFF? - UTILITIES EDWARD LARKIN, EDWARD HYNES, THOMAS FITZPATRICK, KAREN BURSTEIN, CAROL BARGER, ALFRED NARDELLI 35473 04/25/82 ON THE VERGE OF RUIN: AMERICA'S DESPERATE FARMERS NITA GIBSON, WAYNE CRYTS, JOHN STULP, PETER CURRA, VAREL BAILEY 35476 05/02/82 COUNTDOWN TO DOOMSDAY: THE NUCLEAR ARMS DEBATE ADMIRAL ELMO ZUMWALT, DR. DANIEL MACGUIRE, DR. SCOTT THOMPSON, JACK GEIGER, M.D., FRITZ ERMARTH, CONGRESSMAN THOMAS DOWNEY 35477 05/09/82 PART I: FAST AND FUNNY - COLLEGE DEBATERS DAVID BAILIN, HARRY WALTERS, LARRY EICHENFIELD, EDWARD O'TOOLE, DAVID KIDD, J.J. GERTLER, GRANT OLIPHANT, RICHARD SOMMER 35473 05/09/82 PART II: VIDEO GAME CRAZE EDWIN VELAQUEZ, CRAIG ROSS, JEFF LOMBARDI, OPHELLA VONBRANDON, JOHNNY ZADUBARA, NANDO RAMOS, MICHAEL BLANCHET 35473 05/23/82 - 10/03/82 "I'M ON WELFARE AND I HATE IT" - A WELFARE MOTHER SHARON HUNT 35478 05/30/82 PART I: NOT FOR MEN ONLY - BLUE COLLAR WOMEN TINA NANNARONE, LAURA SCHWARTZ, JANE KELLEY, SHARON HOLMES, JUDY HUGHES 35480 05/30/82 PART II: OUT OF CASH - TRY BARTER ANNIE PROULX, JERRY WEINER, GENE HOLYZMAN, CONNIE STAPLETON 35480 06/13/82 WHO CAN AFFORD COLLEGE ANYMORE? - PART I: ADMINISTRATORS JAMES POWELL, STEPHEN TRACHTENBERG, WILLIAM MAXWELL, HARVEY GROTRAIN 35482 06/13/82 WHO CAN AFFORD COLLEGE ANYMORE? - PART II: PARENTS JOSEPH ZULLO, JOHN KAUFMAN, FREDERIC KRAMER, GLORIA GATTI, ALEXANDRA GREELEY 35482 06/20/82 NO MORE LAND OF PLENTY NORMAN BERG, KREKEL KARCH, NEIL SAMPSON 35484 06/20/82 CAREER COUNSELORS JOHN CRYSTAL, STANLEY HYMAN, ROBERT SWAIN, IRENE ANSHER 35484 10/24/82 - 08/28/83 TOP TRIAL LAWYERS DEMONSTRATE THE ART OF JURY SELECTION PHILIP CORBOY, HAROLD PRICE FAHRINGER, AARON BRODER, BILL COLSON 35483 10/31/82 - 07/17/83 PART I: COCAINE: A 30 BILLION DOLLAR EPIDEMIC ROBERT MILLMAN, M.D., ANDY KOWL, TOM HENDERSON, "AMY" "A.J.", "LIZA" 35475 11/21/82 - 01/26/86 - 05/25/86 - 08/17/86 PART I: DOLLAR A DANCE - TAXI DANCERS ARIEL LUCAS, PAUL PRICKETT, PENNY PRUCHA, ELLEN STOKES, CAROL SUNDQUIST 37030 02/27/83 PART II: THE MYSTERY OF THE COMMON COLD STEVEN MOSTOW, M.D., R. GORDON DOUGLAS, M.D., SANFORD CHODOSH, M.D., HYLAN BICKERMAN, MN.D., JOHN ABELES, M.D. 37042 03/06/83 PART I: ANGRY CRIME VICTIMS DIANI MONTENEGRO, SHIRLEY BERNSTEIN, GUILIA PAGANO, ROBERT GRAYSON, DR. MICHAEL ROBINSON 37047 03/20/83 - 06/10/84 PART I: PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES JAMES IRVIN GLOVER, GRADY O'CUMMINGS III, LESTER BYERLEY, GERARD HIMMELMAN 37049 05/22/83 - 08/07/83 PART I: LONELINESS JANE ADAMS, JOAN GOULD, JOHN HOLLANDER, MURRAY KELLMAN, MAURA SWANSON 37058
UNITED STATES SENATE 0900-1000
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate proceeds to two hours of debate on the motion to invoke cloture on the Reid motion to concur with the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R.4853, Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2010 with the Baucus amendment #4727 (tax cut extension for those making up to $250,000 and other measures). If cloture is not invoked, the Senate would immediately proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Schumer amendment #4728 (tax cut extension for those making up to $1 million and other measures). 09:00:12 Senator Orrin Hatch: British parliament to repeal the 09:00:14last of several controversial colonial taxes. his wisdom was instructive for today's vote. i quote -- and remember, this is sir edmund burke arguing for the colonists in america. 09:00:30quote -- "could anything be a subject to more just alarm of america than to see you go out of the plain highroad of finance and give up your most certain revenues and your clearest interests merely for the sake of insulting your colonies." burke's point was the parliament was acting unwising by 09:00:47maintaining a tea tax primarily primarilyto spite the colonists. four years from day, we will support tax day 2011. it will impose a punitive tax hike on virtually every american 09:01:03taxpayer. that day of reckoning has been clear since my friends took power almost four years ago in both houses of congress. my friends on the other side, with all due respect, your actions this morning amount to meddling. you possess part of the sovereign power to change the tax law to prevent this tax 09:01:18increase. instead you have forced this body into a political showdown. the proponents of the so-called millionaires tax say the reason to do is -- quote -- "fiscal discipline." this proposal preserves less than half of the revenue of the 09:01:35related provisions in the reid-baucus substitute. if that's the case and revenue is the goal of the proponents of the millionaires tax, they ought to stick with the reid-baucus substitute. but let's set aside the moment the fact that the revenue raised 09:01:51is a fraction that the broader tax hike on the reid-baucus substitute. does anyone take seriously the -- that the revenue raised will go to deficit reduction? does anybody really believe that? you know they're going to spend every dime of it if there were 09:02:08any revenues. where is the mechanism in the amendment to assure taxpayers of that? more importantly what is the record of my friends on the other side on this point? you need to only look at the fine print. in the revenue and spending of the president's budget. 09:02:23as an aside the president's budget is the most transparent presentation of the fiscal features of the agenda of my friend on the other side. hiking marginal tax rates on singles making more than $200,000 and on families 09:02:39making over $250,000 translate to about .6% of 1% of gross domestic product, g.d.p., per year over 10 years. the new above baseline spending initiatives in the president's budget translate to .7500 of 1% 09:02:59of g.d.p. per year over 10 years. what does that mean? the revenue raised by the tax hike in the reid-baucus substitute is less than the new spending in the president's budget. 09:03:10it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. and as i've stated earlier the revenue raised from my friend from new york he's amendment is less than half of the reid-baucus substitute. does anybody really believe that lesser amount of revenue is less 09:03:27likely to be spent? so much for the fiscal discipline argument. there's some very disturbing points to ponder in this so-called millionaires tax. i'm going to alert my friends on the other side to them. the first point is that capital is the lifeblood of business. 09:03:45put more capital into business and it will respond. the business will gain economic energy. curtail the flow of capital to a business and it will -- and it will respond. the business will lose economic energy. 09:03:59and that's what's happening in america. according to the latest internal revenue service statistics of inkol data a lot of capital gain income is earned by the taxpayers targeted by senator schumer's amendment. s.o.i., in other words, 09:04:16statistics of income data, states that 56.6% of the net long-term capital gain from traditional capital assets is reported by taxpayers with $1 million or more dollars in income. more importantly if capital 09:04:31gains from transactions involving partnerships and other flow-through entities are a concern, that percentage rises to 64.7%. there can be little doubt that we are talking about a large pool of capital. if my friends on the other side 09:04:47were to prevail it would a game changer for the tax treatment of a large pool of capital of in -- of income from capital. the change in the capital gain would surely be a negative one. i have chart that illustrates the change in the playing field 09:05:04for capital transactions. it shows where we are today. that's 15% capital gains rate. 09:05:14if my friends on the other side are successful in a little over 27 days from now the marginal rate will rise to 20%. the health care reform bill has banked in another 3.9% rate hike and that kicks in a little over 09:05:29two years from now and that's this one right here, 23.9%. what does this chart show? it shows that the marginal rate on nearly two-thirds of taxable long-term capital gains transactions could be affected. it means investors who supply 09:05:46that capital, lifeblood of business, will see the marginal tax rate on capital gains rise by nearly 60% in a little over two years. everything else being equal, a rise in the marginal tax rate means a decline in the after-tax 09:06:02rate of return. the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation always cautions us about this effect in their revenue estimates. here's what joint tax says and i quote -- "we anticipate that taxpayers would respond to the 09:06:17increased marginal rate by utilizing tax planning and tax avoid ant strategies that will decrease the amount of income subject to taxation." unquote. my gosh, what more do you need to understand economics? capital is the lifeblood of 09:06:33business. raise the marginal rate on capital gains transactions, the result will be a decrease in the after-tax rate of return on capital investments. what will happen? capital will go out of taxable activities in many cases. 09:06:50capital, the lifeblood of business, will be constricted. with capital constricted, does anybody see business activity affected in any way that is positive? it would be hard to imagine that outcome. 09:07:04when most folks hear about a so-called millionaires tax, they probably think it would have minimal impact on the business environment. that they -- the data i discussed shows the op sivment it also shows that any revenue raised will likely be spent. 09:07:22anybody who believes that by raising revenues, that we're going to pay off the national debt hasn't live in this country for the last 34 years that i've been in the senate. our friends on the other side 09:07:35will always spend that money. that's how they keep themselves in power. does it make sense to send a tax policy signal to investors to move their capital out of taxable business activity? in the worst economic 09:07:51environment in many years, now 9.8% unemployment, shouldn't we be going in the opposite direction? instead of finding way to kill jobs when our unemployment rate continues to stagnate at 10%, let's find a bipartisan solution protect all americans, 09:08:07especially our job creators, from crushing tax hikes. it's time to put a stop to this nonsensical political theater and get down to the people's business. just one last thought. over the last summer president obama said, and i would -- quote -- "the last -- this is 09:08:24president obama now, and he said it just over the last summer -- quote -- "the last thing you want to do is to raise taxes in the middle of a recession because that would just suck up, take more demand out of the 09:08:39economy and put businesses in a further hole." unquote. i think the president was right. and i think the economists think it was right in making that statement. and it should be the last thing we do is raising taxes in the 09:08:56middle of this downturn that now is even more down because the 9.8% unemployment rate. and, really, that only tells part of the story. if you really talk about the underemployment rate, those who don't have jobs, can't find 09:09:11jobs, et cetera, are dependent on the federal government and those who have stopped looking for jobs, and there are a lot of people like that, you're talking 18% or better. we've got to wise up here. what -- the last thing on earth we need to do is increase taxes 09:09:27at this late date. mr. president, this is an important debate, but the democrats have had four years to change this where they controlled the houses of congress and in the last two years not only controlled both houses and the presidency, and 09:09:42now at this last minute to come in and say we've got to do something, it just shows a lack of -- well, you name it. i won't name it. i yield the floor. A SENATOR:mr. president? THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator from south dakota. Thune (R-SD):mr. president, i 09:09:57think the american people when they spoke at the election this year basically were saying one thing, and that is we want to keep the main thing the main thing and the american people the main thing is getting the 09:10:11economy growing again and creating jobs. now, almost everything that has been done here in congress in the last couple of years has been the exact opposite of that. because you've seen policies put in place that increase the cost of doing business in this country and make it more 09:10:26difficult for small businesses to create jobs. and so here we are today debating what evidently has become the democrat economic theory which is raise taxes to create jobs. 09:10:41now, we've seen it in play throughout the last year -- the last couple of years. the cap-and-trade bill was a tax on energy. it didn't get through the senate here because we were prepared to stop it, but it passed in the house of representatives, was headed here. the health care bill raised 09:10:57taxes on medical device manufacturers, and drug companies, and health insurance plans, all of which is going to get passed on to small businesses in the form of higher insurance premiums. here we are debating a frontal, direct tax increase on small 09:11:16businesses. it is the most astounding theory about how to create jobs that i have ever seen. raise taxes to create jobs. that hasn't worked. it hasn't worked in practice. the senator from iowa i think eloquently pointed out 09:11:32historically if you go back in the past half century, not only does it not create jobs, it doesn't create additional revenue. as he pointed out, when you raise taxes, you don't get more revenue. when you lower taxes, you the get not less revenue, you get more. 09:11:48why? because it affects the behavior of the american people. it affects investors, it affects allocation of capital, it affects people across this country when they know that their tax rates are going to be low. and so this, to me, seems to be completely off the track and off the point that the american 09:12:04people want us to focus on, which is keeping the main thing the main thing. how can we expand the economy? how can we create jobs? we do that by keeping taxes low on small businesses which, by the way, create two-thirds of the jobs in our economy. 09:12:20now what will be the impact of the proposal that we will vote on today in terms of small businesses and their ability to create jobs? according to the joint tax committee, half of small business income would be subject 09:12:36to higher taxes. now, that translates into $750 -- 750,000 small businesses that would be faced with higher taxes. and that incidentally impacts about 25% of the workforce in this country. how does that translate in real terms? 09:12:52when these taxes go up on january 1st, for people who make more than $250,000 a year, who are going to be paying probably the 33% or the 35% marginal income tax rate today, their taxes are going to go up to 36% or 39.5%. now, if they're a family of four 09:13:11and they've got personal exemptions, those phase out, there's a cap on the number of itemized deductions kick it, their marginal tax rate increase could go up to 41%. if you're a small business today 09:13:26paying at the 33% rate and you end up paying 41% as a result of this increase -- this tax increase that's going to take effect on january 1, you're looking at roughly a 25% increase on your income. now, that's obviously going to 09:13:42increase the cost of doing business. when you increase the cost of doing business, it makes it that much harder for small businesses to invest, to make that new capital investment, to buy that new piece of equipment or to hire that additional person or hopefully additional people in 09:13:59the workplace. and so all we are simply doing here is trying to implement a failed policy that hasn't worked in the past and isn't going to work in the future. and it doesn't have to be -- you've got all the science, history and facts to support 09:14:15this and it is counterintuitive of the american people. how many people think that the way to create jobs is to increase the cost of doing business in this country? when small businesses create two-thirds of the jobs in our economy, it is absolutely fundamental that you don't 09:14:31increase their cost of doing business, you don't raise taxes if your ultimate goal, if the main thing is to create jobs. now, the best thing that we can do for the high unemployment numbs and for the debate -- numbers and the the debate we're having for unemployment benefits 09:14:47being extended is to get people back to work. this is the exact opposite way of going about that. this is just -- it's completely counterintuitive. raising taxes to create jobs. as it failed economic theory and it failed in practice. 09:15:03now, i think if the democrats' tax hike goes into effect -- and make no 09:15:10mistake about it, i mean, i hear the other side talking about tax breaks and tax cuts. these aren't tax breaks or tax cuts. taxes are going up january 1, pure and simple. that's -- that's all there is to it. taxes are going up. they're going up on income, they're going up on capital gains, they're going up on 09:15:27dividends, they're going up on estates. if action isn't taken here by congress, we are going to see the largest tax increase in american history. and the other side says well, let's cushion it, let's just limit it to those making more than $250,000. of course, that affects a lot of 09:15:44l.l.c.'s, a lot of partnerships, a lot of subchapter s corporations whose income flows through to their individual income tax return and who are going to be faced with the higher income tax rates, not to mention the higher capital gains rates and the higher dividend rates. 09:15:58the very people that we're asking to pull us out of this recession and create jobs. and so where does that leave us? well, we're going to have an alternative. the alternative would that be we just extend the tax relief, not raise taxes, not increase the costs of doing business, allow our small businesses to prosper and to grow and to flourish and 09:16:16to create more jobs for the american people so that we can get that 9.8% unemployment rate down and reduce the amount of unemployment benefits that we have to come back periodically here and approve. 9.8% unemployment. 09:16:30we were told a year and a half ago or a little over that, almost two years ago, when the stimulus bill was being debated, that if we just passed a trillion-dollar stimulus bill, that we could keep unemployment under 8%. that didn't work. obviously, we borrowed a trillion dollars to do that from 09:16:46our children and grandchildren, and what do we have to show for it? we've got a 9.8% unemployment rate today. and no apparent prospect for the economy to pull out of this sluggishness that we're in. the best way to accomplish that, the best way to make that 09:17:04happen, in my view, mr. president, and i think the views of the american people -- and i speak as one individual who's under the $250,000 threshold -- that i understand, as i think most americans do, that the people who create jobs in this country are the people who make more than $250,000. and i hope that they continue to 09:17:21do well, because the small businesses, when they can increase their top-line sales and revenues and increase their bottom-line profits, are going to be in a better position to create jobs. i get that. and i think the american people get that. which is why they so consistently, and particularly 09:17:37the best poll that was taken was the election day poll, where they came out in big numbers to voice their disapproval of the policies here in washington, d.c., that continue to kill jobs. so i think we ought to be looking at what we can do not to kill jobs but to create jobs, what we can be doing to 09:17:53incentivize small businesses to create jobs, not putting more burdens on them and increasing the cost of doing business in this country. there isn't anything that, in my view, that's happened in this last year, if you're -- if you're concerned about creating jobs, that has been conducive to 09:18:08that. now, there were a group -- there was a group of c.e.o.'s that was pulled in to visit with the president here sometime last summer, and when the president posed the question of them, mr. president, why -- or, why are you as c.e.o.'s, why are your corporations, rather, why are you not creating jobs? 09:18:26and i'll paraphrase this, but i think the answer very simply was, mr. president, it's your agenda. and that's the problem. we've got an agenda here that is killing jobs because it's increasing the cost of doing business in this country. it's a very simple proposition. i don't think it takes a lot to get it, and that's why i think 09:18:40so many people are beginning to realize that either of these proposals, the baucus proposal or the schumer proposal, are the wrong way in which to approach an economic downturn in this country and the wrong way to get that economy back on track and get people back to work. and the latest i think example 09:18:57that was today in the "new york times" and i quote, "in the latest sign of how this tax issue continues to wrang he will and divide democrats, white house officials said the administration opposes raising the income threshold to $1 million." so we've got the $250,000 vote that's going to occur, the 09:19:12million-dollar vote that's going to occur, but the other thing i want to point out, is even under the schumer bill, which is the million-dollar threshold, according to the joint tax committee, that still impacts 350,000 small businesses in this country who -- whose income flows through to their 09:19:28individual tax returns. so it's a question of who you want to raise taxes on, 750,000 small businesses with the baucus amendment or 350,000 small businesses with the schumer amendment? and obviously, one's better clearly than the other. 09:19:44but the point very simply is this -- the economic theory that we're debating here today about raise taxes to create jobs is the wrong one. it's been proven wrong historically. it's counterintuitive to anything anybody who knows anything about economics, which is why 60% of all the prominent 09:20:01economists in this country, as was quoted by the senator from iowa earlier today, have come out and said the best way to create jobs and grow and expand 09:20:10the economy is to extend these tax provisions come -- that are going to expire on january 1. that's what this debate's about, mr. president. i hope that we will keep the main thing -- the minimum thing for the american people -- the main thing for the american 09:20:23people, and not get distracted on all these other things. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator's time has expired. Thune (R-SD):with that, mr. president, i urge my colleagues to defeat both of these amendments. and i yield the floor. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:who yields time? the senator from montana. Baucus, M. (D-MT):mr. president, i yield ten minutes to the senator 09:20:39from vermont. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator from vermont. Sanders (I-VT):thank you. mr. president, what this debate 09:21:00is about is whether or not we continue to take money from the middle class and working families of this country who are struggling in a way that they 09:21:14have not struggled since the great depression, force their kids to borrow huge sums of money in order to provide $700 billion over a ten-year period 09:21:31to the wealthiest people in this country. mr. president, i hear my republican friends time and time again coming down to the floor of the senate, and they say, we 09:21:47have a huge deficit. we have a huge national debt. and today, what they want to do is to drive that national debt up by $700 billion over the next ten years in order to give huge 09:22:07tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires. so, please, my friends, say what you want, but stop talking about the deficit and the national debt when what you're doing 09:22:22today is driving that debt up by $700 billion over the next ten years. and, second of all, what everybody in america knows is that what's going on in our country today is that the middle class is collapsing, poverty is 09:22:40increasing, but the people on top are doing phenomenally well. in the last 25 years, 80% of all new income created in this country went to the top 1%. 09:23:01you don't have to worry about the top 1%, the millionaires and the billionaires in this country are doing just fine. they don't need a huge tax increase. 09:23:13today in america, we have the most unequal distribution of income and wealth that we have had in this country since before the great depression. isn't it enough for you that the top 1% now earns 23.5% of all income? 09:23:32isn't it enough for you that the top 1% earns more income than the bottom 50%? isn't it enough for you that in the last 25 years, almost all new income has gone to the top 1%? 09:23:47do you really think that the c.e.o.'s on wall street who makes hundreds of millions of dollars a year really need a tax break? do you really think so? i don't think most of the american people think that our kids and grandchildren have got 09:24:07to see their taxes go up in order to provide tax breaks for the richest people in this country. and thirdly, mr. president, what i would say without the slightest doubt is if these guys 09:24:21are successful in giving $700 million nor tax breaks to millionaires -- more in tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires, the next thing they'll do is run down on the floor and they'll say, "oh, my word, the deficit and the debt are going up. 09:24:37we've got to cut social security because we have such a large debt." yeah, we've raise the debt by $700 billion. now we've got to cut social security. we can't afford to extend unemployment compensation. we just can't do it. millions of workers out there 09:24:54today, as we get to the holiday season, are worried about how they're going to take care of their families, how they're going to maintain the minimum level of economic security. we can't afford to extend 09:25:08unemployment security but we can afford to give billions and billions of dollars in tax relief to the top 1%. so, mr. president, i think this 09:25:22is a very easy vote. and the vote is to say okay, let's give tax relief, let's extend the tax cuts to 98%, many of whom are struggling. but let us not give tax breaks today to the millionaires and billionaires of this country who 09:25:39in many ways have never had it so good. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. Kyl (R-AZ):mr. president? THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator from arizona. Kyl (R-AZ):thank you, mr. president. i think what we've just heard illustrates why it's been so hard for us to reach a bipartisan agreement on how to 09:25:56resolve the tax issues that all americans face in just four short weeks. but last tuesday, a group of us went down to the white house to visit with the president, the vice president, some of his folks in a spirit of cooperation, i must say, and a 09:26:11spirit in which the president reached out to us and said all right, the elections are over, my party didn't do so well but it's time now for to us get together, work together, and the first piece of business we have to resolve is this tax issue. we have to figure out how we're going to fund the government for the remaining ten months of the 09:26:27fiscal year and we have to figure out how we're going to prevent americans from getting a big tax increase come january 1. and what i'd like for you-all to do, talking both to democratic and republican leaders in the house and senate, is to sit down and try to negotiate this in a 09:26:45bipartisan spirit that really would give credit to the congress and give the american people some confidence that they can move forward with some degree of clarity about what their tax obligations are going to be. we agreed and he asked us if we 09:26:58would be willing to sit down literally immediately to begin these discussions. we said yes. he named two of his chief spokesmen, the treasury secretary tim geithner and jack lou, the head of o.m.b., to 09:27:15discuss those issues on behalf of the administration. and each of the four leaders in the house and senate named someone to join the discussions as well. leader mcconnell asked me to do that on behalf of senate republicans. we immediately scheduled a meeting and we got together to discuss the parameters of how we 09:27:32should move forward, and it was a very productive discussion. but it also became apparent, and it became apparent the second time we met, that actually there weren't going to be any bipartisan negotiations to reach a decision until there had been 09:27:50a political catharsis on the democratic side. and so let me respond tbreefl --respond briefly to comments y the majority leader this morning, who seemed to lay at the feet republicans delay in 09:28:02getting this tax issue resolved, when, in fact, it's been due to the fact that house and senate democrats have had to demonstrate to many of the people in their political base that they can't accomplish what their base would like them to accomplish and, therefore, 09:28:17ultimately they'll have to negotiate something with us. i understand sometimes that you -- you need to go through a process whereby it makes it easier for you to make concessions. and i suspect that's part of what this is all about. and i certainly don't denigrate 09:28:34the motives of any of my colleagues, because this is hard and they're getting a lot of pressure from people in their political base about not giving in to the republicans and so on. but the president asked us to discuss this in a bipartisan way 09:28:48and republicans have been willing to do that. but, first of all, speaker pelosi scheduled a vote in the house that was the democratic position, to allow taxes to be increased on hundreds of thousands of small businesses and others in this country. 09:29:04that vote was finally held, and i might add that 20 democrats left the fold and joined republicans in saying no, that's not the way to reach a consensus here. and then the senate democrats decided to schedule the same 09:29:20vote and one more vote to try to accomplish the same purpose. because of the lateness of the time in which that was done, the cloture didn't ripen until this morning rption which is why we're here this morning getting ready to cast these two votes. but i just to want make it clear 09:29:36that i have a disagreement with the majority leader if he's suggesting it's somehow republicans who have delayed these negotiations. the fact, is we've had three meetings and i've sat there and we've been very congenial with each other but it's been very 09:29:51clear that we're not going to be negotiating anything until all of this political process is over with. until the partisan votes have been cast. and then, and only then, will people sit down to seriously negotiate how we're going to resolve the issue. 09:30:05the problem is, of course, there's very little time before christmas. the president has some other things on his agenda, as does the p.m. themajority leader. i now understand we're going to have to schedule time next week for an impeachment trial, for example, that could take about a day and a half. 09:30:20the president would like to see the start treaty brought up in the senate and resolved before christmas. there are other things that have to be done. i just want to make it clear that it's not republicans' fault that these things are taking time and we still don't have the 09:30:37tax issue he resolved. we've been in the lame-duck section two weeks and we -- session for two weeks. the senate has passed a food safety bill which turns out to be unconstitutional. two weeks of lame-duck session and essentially nothing 09:30:52accomplished. our democratic colleagues have been caucus for hours -- hours trying to figure out what to do while republicans are yesterdayy to -- are ready to negotiate, ready to act. but until this political ka -- s finally run its course, there 09:31:11appears there will be no more negotiation. now, i'm assuming that next time the negotiators get together, i hope it will be monday morning whenever we can get together, that we will then be able to actually sit down and work 09:31:26through the process so that we can extend the policies, the tax policies that have been in place for the last decade so that no americans will have their taxes increased, so businesses will have certainty, that families will have certainty about what 09:31:43their tax obligations will be going into the next year. if that process can begin quickly, i think that we can reach a bipartisan agreement that would make the american people proud and would demonstrate that we can actually come together on an important issue like this for the -- on behalf of the american people. 09:32:00let there be no mistake, the votes taken in the house of representatives and will be taken here are not because republicans wanted to take these votes. these are votes that the democrats believed were necessary to demonstrate, essentially, that they can't get the support they need to do what they would prefer to do, 09:32:16therefore, enabling them to sit down and talk to republicans. those are the facts. we understand that this takes time. i just don't want to be blamed for taking the time when it's, in fact, not the republicans' fault that negotiations have not been completed. 09:32:34THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator from alaska. Begich (D-AK):mr. president, thank you very much. as you know i was presiding this morning. i wasn't scheduled to speak, but this time i decided to inform my staff prior to speaking so they 09:32:47would not be surprised. with all due respect to the senator from arizona, let's not cast shadows on either side. you can't blame one side or the other for delay. i can argue that the food safety bill took too long because of 09:33:05three filibusters from the other side. we're here. i'm new to the whole process the last two years and i've been patient about the issues we face and talk about. but this one is a fundamental issue. it's not the question of how long we extend these tax benefits for the middle class, 09:33:21it's who gets them, the middle class or the wealthy, the millionaires and billionaires? i heard my good friend who sponsored a piece of legislation that passed from south dakota to talk about the small business people, that they'll be 09:33:36affected. well, i'm going to give you some data points. because it's one thing to have opinions. it's one thing to have facts. let's just focus on the facts. the bottom line is businesses in this country -- and i can speak as a small business person. i think the only one, if not probably pretty darned close, 09:33:53the only one who has small businesses in this -- in this chamber, my wife has four retail businesses. she started her businesses selling smoked salmon at the back of a vending cart. 09:34:10today she employs -- has 30-some employees. who are these people, this small business community that i hear from the other side they talk about? i have no clue most of them have been in it or not, but i have. who are these people? these are people we get our dry 09:34:26cleaning from or we go to the convenience store or the pizza parlor, or wherever it might be, these are the small businesses we're talking about. the small business community of this country who make one million -- $1 million gross, 09:34:40that's not their taxable income, gross, $1 million and under, which probably their net income is well below $200,000, the taxable income is 95% of the businesses of this country. 09:34:56i like the $250,000 and under proposal, i also like the compromise, the compromise that senator schumer brought forward, 09:35:05a million and under. because it catches 95% plus of the small businesses in this country. when you hear and i continue to hear on the other side that we're going to have an impact on the small business community, you're not. if you support the efforts of 09:35:21helping the middle class and you support the efforts of helping small business, businesses that gross a million dollars -- $1 million an under. for those who don't know the difference between gross and 09:35:35net. net is the profit, gross is what they sell the product for, not what they get taxed on. don't confuse the numbers and confuse the american people. it is 95-plus percent of the businesses will enjoy the tax relief break. 09:35:52don't be confused by some of the numbers thrown around on the other side or their one-liners. i'm going to tell you from an alaskan, when i thron the constituency, when i get the phone calls, e-mails, the thousand-plus letters and 09:36:08e-mails i get every single week, what do they want? they want to be sure that the small business community -- in our state 56% of the employment is generated by small business. small businesses that every day are making a difference. those are the folks we're focused on. 09:36:23it's a question of not how long these extensions are or how long these breaks are, it's who gets them. is it the millionaire, billionaire club or who people on the other side complain that we're here on a saturday. 09:36:39you know what? there are a lot of alaskans, a lot of americans, a lot of folks from colorado, mr. president, who are working today. they're working on saturday. working on sunday. working one or two or three jobs. so, first i'd say to my 09:36:55colleagues we're here to have a debate. some might want to call it political. welcome to politics where 100 people get elected to a political process. this is what i came for, to debate and discuss what is important to the american 09:37:10people, important to alaskans. yesterday the "wall street journal", as well as "the washington post," which some may consider a liberal newspaper, just read their headlines. we can talk about what's making the economy move. 09:37:27what's making the economy move is consumer confidence. not millionaire an billionaire confidence. i can tell you that. they have $2 billion stuffed in a bank account -- my friend from iowa, we have done work together, he's right $2 trillion stuffed away with the 09:37:44millionaires and billionaires. but the people who are expending the resources and buying this economy are people who are the middle class, the working people of this country. so it's a question of who do we support? who are we going to help? and we do have this huge deficit. 09:37:59we have to make some decisions sooner or later here and today is one of those decisions. we're going to make a decision, hopefully, that millionaires and billionaires, we're not going to fund your tax bonus, your tax giveaway from the taxpayers on the backs of the future. 09:38:16but we are going to help the small business community. we are going to help the middle class. when you look at the numbers, cybermoney, somebody may not know what this is. i do because we're in the retail business in our family. first there's black friday, and 09:38:33then vibe are monday. cybermonday alone raked in a historic -- a historic $1 billion. no disrespect to the millionaires and billion nation they're not on cybermonday. 09:38:49every day americans are, every day alaskans are. double-digit -- double-tijt increases to the automobile industry. -- double-digit increases to the automobile industry. 09:39:03we helped out to help them survive, now they're having double-digit details. existing home sales, which is critical to the industry, frc the real estate industry, i know this, 10.4% increase in october. 09:39:19that's not millionaires and billionaires buying those homes. these are working alaskans, working americans spending their money because they believe in the future. here we are about to have this political debate and there's a 09:39:35lot of swapping and trading going on and who knows what will happen next week on other legislation. to be frank with you, this is not the way it should operate. it should be voted on the merits. the merits of the 95-plus% that will benefit. 09:39:53the 98% of the middle class that will benefit, that's who we should be talking about. when you look at the data points in regards to the consumer confidence we're in now, the third running of -- the third 09:40:06month of running increased consumer confidence. 30 retail chains talk about their record increases in sales. again, i -- you know, the people who are shopping at these places, people like myself, my family, my brothers and sisters, 09:40:22many alaskans, that's what this is about. it's not a question about how long to extend these things. it's who will benefit from the right public policy discussion and decisions? small business folks benefit. and, you know, i understand the 09:40:39other side doesn't like the $250,000 and under, so a lot of us on this side, moderates, said why not try something a little different. let's up it a little bit. let's get to the million dollar threshold because it covers basically everybody except for 09:40:55the millionaire and billionaire club. that's reasonable. i have yet to see a compromise from the other side. that's what the election told us. it wasn't one side won, one side lost. what people in alaska are telling me every day, get busy, solve problems, compromise, and 09:41:12move forward. the compromise should not be on how long these go, but who benefits? so in my view, again, i'm going to support both of these. i think the compromise on the million dollars and under, so the argument i hear from the 09:41:28other side and i will tell you this from the other side, i'm a small business person, i know who these people are. so when you talk about it and talk about an economist says this or that, i worked in it, i lived it, i see it. so i understand what they're asking me to do. 09:41:44and going up to that compromise is the right decision in the long term. so i'd encourage my friends that we can reach a compromise here and get to help our small business community, middle class, and put money to reduce the deficit. 09:42:01to reduce the deaf the sit. -- the deficit. help our economy, reduce the deficit. i'd say that's a pretty good deal and that's what the taxpayers told us and the voters told us in this last election. to my friends on the other side, we're reaching out. 09:42:15they may not like the $250,000. but the million dollar and under is a step in a -- and a positive step to help our communities. and, again, why would we give millionaires and billionaires $300 billion in 09:42:32another bonus? it makes no sense to me. they're not the ones driving the economy. despite what my friends on the other side might say. it is the people in the small business community. it is the people who work every single day. who are working today while we deliberate this issue. 09:42:46who will be working tonight and tomorrow and monday. for us to sit around and say let's wait until monday to have a compromise, today is the day. right now. this is what we're doing. mr. president, i yield the floor. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the 09:43:09senator from montana. Baucus, M. (D-MT):i yield 10 minutes to the senator from oregon. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator from oregon. 09:43:47A SENATOR:mr. president? THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator from oregon. Merkley (D-OR):mr. president, i rise to contrast the democrat plan, plan a, and the republican plan, plan b, and what they mean 09:44:01for the working citizens of the united states of america. let me start by talking about the democratic plan, plan a. it's plan a because it's america's plan. now, why is it america's plan? 09:44:17first, it benefits every single taxpayer in america. that's the first reason. now, some of my colleagues across the aisle have liked to talk about how the democratic plan only helps those who earn 09:44:36under $250,000. but that's because they're not paying attention or they're deliberately distorting the tracts. because the democratic -- facts. because the democratic plan provides a tax break on the 09:44:51first $250,000 no matter what you make. so it helps every single american. the second is reason it's focused on citizens earning less than $250,000 is because it's the working citizens of the 09:45:04united states of america that have been getting the short end of the stick. the amount of money -- the average income for workers in america plateaued in 1974. that happens to be the year that i graduated 09:45:20from high school. earlier this year, i had the pleasure of taking my son to his first day of high school, the same high school i went to, exactly 40 years later. so for almost 40 years, the working wages for working 09:45:38americans have been flat. but during that time period, the wealth of this country has increased enormously. the productivity of the american worker has increased enormously. and up until the mid-1970's, 09:45:54when the productivity increased, the wages of working american always increased. they shared in the productivity of our economy because they were the driving factor in our economy. unfortunately, for the last 3 1/2 to 4 decades, that has not 09:46:11been the case. and then along comes the great bush recession. this recession, caused by the deregulation of retail mortgages, allowing predatory mortgages, allowing kickbacks for mortgage originators to 09:46:26create predatory mortgages when folks qualified for prime mortgages, and then the deregulation of wall street so those could be packaged into securities with a two-year ticking time bomb because they had these teaser rates on the 09:46:42mortgages. and when the interest rates went from 4 1/2% to 9% or 10%, not only did the mortgages blow up but the securities based on them blew up and we blew up the whole entire economy. so thank you, very much, friends across the aisle, for attacking the most important financial 09:46:58instrument to american families, the american mortgage, distorting it, allowing predatory mortgages, allowing predatory securities, blowing up this economy and attacking the american family. i can't tell you how many millions of american families 09:47:13are suffering because of the policies that you-all implemented over the last decade. and what is the result? the american family's home has lost value, tremendous amount of value, families underwater. what is the result? 09:47:28huge unemployment caused by this meltdown in the great bush recession. retirement savings decimated. folks who think they could have retired maybe now, maybe in two years, maybe in five years, realizing they may have to work as long as they're able to work, 09:47:46as long as they're able to keep a job. their dreams are blown up. thanks to these bush policies. well, there is a third reason that the democratic plan is the american plan and that's because four out of five americans 09:48:01support it. 79%, or roughly 80%, four out of five americans support tax breaks for families earning less than $250,000. extending those tax breaks. so that's plan a, america's plan. 09:48:19because it helps all americans, because it's focused on the american worker, who has been hit so hard by the great bush recession, and because four out of five americans support it and understand that we need it. but now let's turn to the republican plan, plan b. 09:48:39plan b consists -- go ahead and we'll switch to the next one here. plan b consists of bonus breaks for billionaires. 09:48:53millionaires and billionaires. now, why bonus? because every person helped under the republican plan who earns a million dollars or a billion dollars has already been helped under the democratic 09:49:08plan. but my colleagues across the aisle, they want extra for the wealthiest, most successful americans. now, i respect tremendously the entrepreneurs who have been so successful, but there is a time when we have to ask, are bonuses 09:49:26to those best off the best strategy for america to go forward? now, this is quite a tongue twister. bonus breaks for billionaires. and it gets even worse. these are an extension of the 09:49:42bush breaks. and because my colleagues across the aisle are trying to sell it as a job creator -- an issue we'll get to in a minute -- they're bogus. so we've got the bogus bonus bush breaks for billionaires. that's the republican "b" plan that they are saying they will 09:49:59obstruct any issue on the floor of the u.s. senate so they can 09:50:04get these bonus breaks for their best friends earning millions and billions. well, i'll tell ya, these are expensive. 09:50:18let's ask ourselves, how much is the average value of the republican bonus break? well, $100,000 per taxpayer, that's how much. now, if you take the $700 billion that the republican plan 09:50:36creates in more deficit and more debt, you take that $700 billion and you divide it by the number of citizens, men, women and child in america, 300 million, that's $2,300 for every man, woman and child in america. 09:50:54so when my colleagues across the aisle are proposing taking $2,300 out of every child's and adult's pocket in america to give breaks, $100,000 breaks to millionaires and billionaires. 09:51:12so let's look at the total cost of this. total cost -- $700 billion before you add on interest. let's add on interest. it's almost a trillion dollars. now, that is a huge increase in 09:51:29our deficit. so it is deficit busting, debt adding, financed by china, and placed on to our children. is that really what the excited 09:51:48republican team coming fresh out of an election is going to say is their top priority in america, is taking $2,300 from every man, woman and child in america so they can give $100,000 tax break to millionaires and billionaires? well, they have a way of trying 09:52:04to camouflage this. and that camouflage is to talk about jobs. so let's talk about jobs. let's look at the republican plan in terms of job creation. well, c.b.o. ranked the 09:52:19republican plan against many other plans, and where does it come in? dead last. now, i have here the detailed chart from the congressional budget office, and up here at the very top is the democratic 09:52:36plan. and that's to provide assistance to the unemployed. and down here at the very bottom is the republican plan, which is bonus breaks for millionaires and billionaires. let me tell you just how different these are. 09:52:52increasing aid to the unemployment is estimated to create 8 to 19 jobs for every million dollars in expenditure. 8 to 19 jobs. now, how many jobs are created by the republican plan? 09:53:11one to three. one to three jobs. so the democrats are saying, let's take the dead-last plan in job creation, the republican plan, and let's replace it with the best plan, the democratic 09:53:24plan. republican plan, one to three jobs per million dollars. one to three for a million dollars. the democratic plan, 8 to 19. well, my good friend from south dakota was out here and saying, 09:53:41it's just all common sense. yes, it is common sense. you take the plan that's the worst for job creation and you replace it with the plan that's best for job creation. well, friends across america, this is about jobs. 09:54:01and the word "jobs" will come out of the rhetoric on the opposite side of the aisle with every speech. but it's bogus. their plan, dead last. democratic plan, top of the list. 09:54:16check the c.b.o. study. it hurts to hear folks who are out of touch -- THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator has spoken for ten minutes. 09:54:34Merkley (D-OR):thank you. i ask to yield for 30 seconds. it hurts to hear folks -- Baucus, M. (D-MT):mr. president, might i ask my good friend how much more time he seeks? Merkley (D-OR):one minute would be fine. Baucus, M. (D-MT):one minute to the senator from oregon, please. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:without objection. 09:54:51Merkley (D-OR):i thank my friend from montana. it's summarized like this. we have american families that are hurting, they've lost their joz their retirement savings, the value of their house. let's have the plan that's best for creating jobs, not the plan that's worst for creating jobs. 09:55:02thank you very much, mr. president. i yield the floor. Graham, L. (R-SC):thank you. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the 09:55:16senator from south carolina. Graham, L. (R-SC):am i allocated ten minutes, i think? okay. can you let me know when i'm at nine minutes. i don't want to go over. THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the senator will be allowed. Graham, L. (R-SC):thank you. thank you for allowing me to speak. senator grassley, senator baucus, i appreciate this. i guess the first observation i 09:55:32would make is that we're here on a saturday morning and this is democracy in many ways i think at its best. people understand the two votes are going to fail but it's good for americans to have genuine differences to be able to discuss what makes us tick, why we want to go one way versus the 09:55:50other. so the fact that america is divided on a lot of big issues is -- is just the result of living in a free country. now, what was the lessons of the last election? they are what you would like them to be but here's my 09:56:04observation, for what it's worth. our democratic friends really took a beating. as republicans, we have been there. in 2006 and 2008, we took a beating. 2006, the iraq war was going very badly and americans were very frustrated. 09:56:20president bush's popularity plummeted. in 2008, we had an economic meltdown that i thought was related to housing, that we lent money to people who couldn't afford to pay their mortgages, the mortgages were repackaged and sold as all kind of exotic 09:56:37instruments throughout the world and it brought the whole world economy down. and we've been trying to struggle ever since. we can talk about how much fannie mae and freddie mac were the cause of this problem, how much loose practices when it came to lending, but i think most people understand that our 09:56:52economic crisis was created by the -- the mortgage -- the housing market being overextended and people getting into that market in exotic ways without a whole lot of regulation. now, here we are a couple years later. i think the last election was a 09:57:08message to our democratic friends, for the last two years, you've been going down the wrong road. the health care bill, which about 80% of americans, if it ever becomes law, will become -- will be under government-controlled health 09:57:23care, was an overreach. the stimulus package was $780 billion-something that wass never done what it was billed to do. the democratic party has been engaged in what is way above 09:57:40what every american charged them to do. this election was not pro-republicans but to our democratic colleagues, stop. and the way you get stopped around here is you get replaced. so the house had a dramatic election. we picked up seats in the senate and some of us thought maybe we 09:57:54could have picked up two or three more and made some pretty poor choices when it came to the candidates. but that's now behind us. and what i would like to tell my colleagues, that when i look at america, i don't see an undertaxed nation. i think our tax code is far too complicated. 09:58:1035% is the rate now. how much is enough? is it 39.6%? is that the difference between, you know, a -- a social justice country and -- and a land of the rich? i mean, if -- are we going to increase taxes for the upper incomes by 10% when we can't create enough jobs for americans 09:58:28who are unemployed? i do believe this idea that upper-income americans are the ones who create most jobs for the middle class and people looking for work. that's just a fact. here's how our tax code works today. 09:58:4240% of americans pay no federal income tax. so 40% of us really don't pay any income tax at all. of those who do, 50% of those who pay federal income tax pay 3%. the other 50% pays 97%. the top 10% of wage earners in 09:59:02this country pays 70% of the taxes. now, i'm for a progressive tax system but that's just not right. that seems to me to be taking the country in the wrong direction. there's 750,000 small businesses 09:59:16will get a tax increase if we do not extend the bush tax cuts for everybody. i'll make a prediction. there's a lot of unsolved mysteries in this world, a lot of things that we'd like to know, we don't know the answer to. this is not one of them. what will happen, hopefully next 09:59:32week, is that all bush-era tax cuts will be extended because we have high unemployment and now is not the time to pass on to business or upper-income americans more taxes. and i hope we can extend some o the obama tax cuts. i don't want to raise taxes on 09:59:47anyone. if you don't pay taxes, then you shouldn't be getting a tax cut because you have no tax liability. but if you're in the eitc range where you have some tax liability, the obama tax cuts in the stimulus helped you, i'm one who considers that to be
UNITED STATES SENATE 1800-1900
The senate convene for a period of morning business. They discuss the White House compromise on the the GW Bush tax cuts. BERNIE SANDERS FILIBUSTER CONTINUES. SEE MARS RECORD FOR TRANSCRIPT. 18:00:02 BERNIE SANDERS but they really want and you would I suspect they will continue to fight for a complete repeal of the estate tax. so just to give you one example -- i don't mean to pick on the walton family, but just as a flesh-and-blood example. 18:00:25salt walton's family -- and the waltons, of course, are the heirs to the wal-mart fortune. they are worth -- and this may 18:00:34be wrong because it's a couple of years old -- but give and take, $86 billion. that's one family, $86 billion. the walton family would receive an estimated $32.7 billion tax break if the estate tax was completely repealed. 18:00:52does anybody in their right mind believe that when this country has a national debt of $13.7 trillion and when we have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world and our unemployment rate 18:01:08is 9.8%, can anybody for one second faith only member of the united states -- fathom members of the united states senate saying we want to give a $32 billion tax break to one family? 18:01:22so in terms of the estate tax, what we have done is made it even more regressive. we have given substantial help to exactly the people who need it the least. and that, to me, is not what we should be doing. 18:01:37our job here -- i know it's a radical idea, i admit it -- should be to represent the vast majority of the people in this country, the middle class, the working families of this country, and not just the top 1% or 2%. so under this proposal, this 18:01:54lowering of the estate tax, which will cost our government substantial sums of money because the revenue's not going to come in, this will benefit only the top .3%. and again, if some of my 18:02:15republican colleagues are successful in their desire -- and they're moving down the path -- if we repeal the estate tax entirely which is what they want to do -- i know it's hard to believe and some of the listeners out there think that i am kidding, but i am deadly serious, they want to completely 18:02:32remove the estate tax, which would drive up the national debt by a trillion dollars over a ten-year period. so, mr. president, that is this lowering of estate tax rates and 18:02:48raising the exemption is clearly an onerous -- clearly an onerous provision. and it is not just the walton family of wal-mart who benefits. 18:03:05according to "forbes" magazine, 18:03:09there are 403 billionaires living in this country with a combined net worth of $1.3 trillion. that's not shabby. that's pretty good. 403 billionaires are worth $1.3 trillion. 18:03:22anyone lucky enough to inherit this extraordinary wealth would benefit the most from repealing the estate tax. as robert frank wrote in his book, the wealthiest people in this country accumulated so much 18:03:42wealth that they have been competing to see who could own the largest private yacht, who could own the most private jets, who could own the most expensive cars, jewelry, art work, et cetera. in 1997, for example, leslie 18:03:57wexler, the chairman and c.e.o. of limited brands, the company that owns victoria's secret -- and none of us know what victoria's secret is, i know that -- paid a german ship maker to build what was then the largest private yacht in the 18:04:12united states. it's called the limitless. and there is a photo -- i guess this is the photo. it's a nice boat. it stretches 315 feet and has 3,000 square feet of teak wood 18:04:29and a gym. it's got a gym. according to "forbes" magazine, mr. wexler is one of the 400 richest people in this country worth an estimated $3.2 billion. permanently repealing the estate tax would allow mr. wexler's two children to inherit all of his 18:04:44wealth without paying a nickel to help this country deal with the enormous problems that we have. so i wish mr. wexler -- and i don't know him. i hope he is alive and well and i wish him a long life. but i believe very strongly that 18:05:02in this country, if we are going to see the middle class survive and our kids do well, we cannot repeal the estate tax and we cannot lower estate tax rates. mr. president, i want to get to 18:05:17another issue which i talked about earlier which i think there is some misunderstanding. and i know, mr. president, you raised this issue and i'm glad you did, at a recent meeting that we had. you know, all over the country, 18:05:32people say, isn't it great, we are going to lower the payroll tax on workers? we're going to go from 6.2%, which workers now pay, down 4.2%. people are going to have more money in their pocket, which 18:05:48certainly is a good thing. it's going to cost us $120 billion in social security payroll tax. here's the point. yes, we do want to put more money in workers' pockets. 18:06:03that's why many of us in the stimulus -- in the stimulus package supported a $500 -- it was a $400-a-year tax break for every worker -- virtually every worker in america. that's what we said. we want people in these 18:06:19difficult times to be able to have the money to take care of their families. and when they have that money, to go out spending it. and when they spend it, they create other jobs because people have got to provide goods and services for them. it has a good stimulus impact. yes, we do want workers to have 18:06:36more money in their pockets. but while this idea of lowering the payroll tax sounds like a good idea, in truth, it really is not a good idea. and, mr. president, i don't know if you know this, but this idea originated from very 18:06:54conservative republicans whose intention from the very beginning was to destroy social security by choking off the funds that go to it. and this is not just bernie 18:07:12sanders' analysis. mr. president, there was recently -- and i distributed it recently at a meeting that we held -- a news release that came from the national committee to preserve social security and medicare. 18:07:28and the headline on their press release is, "cutting contributions to social security signals the beginning of the end payroll tax holiday is anything but." and what the national committee to preserve social security and 18:07:45medicare, which is one of the largest senior groups in america, well understands is that there are people out there who want to destroy social security and one way you do that is you divert funds into the social security trust fund and 18:08:02they don't get there. now, what the president and 18:08:06others have said is, not to worry, this is just -- this is just a one-year program, just one year. and, in fact, they say, the general treasury -- the general treasury will pay the 18:08:23difference. so the social security trust fund is not going to lose funding. here's the problem. the problem is that historically, and the reason we have a $2.6 trillion surplus today in social security, the reason why social security is good for the next 29 years to pay out all benefits, is because 18:08:41it comes from the payroll tax, it is not dependent upon the whims of congress and the treasury. now, the president, republicans say well, this is just a one-year program, don't worry. i do worry. i worry that once you establish 18:08:56this one-year payroll tax holiday that next year our republican friends will say, oh, you want to end that? you're going to be raising taxes on workers. and enough people will support that concept. 18:09:11and this one-year payroll tax holiday will become permanent. and when you do that, you're going to be choking off over a period of years trillions of dollars that we need to make sure that social security is viable and is there for our kids and our grandchildren. 18:09:30but don't listen to me, listen to somebody who knows a lot more about this issue than i do. barbara kennelly is the -- a former congresswoman from connecticut. she's the president and c.e.o. of the national committee to 18:09:46preserve social security and medicare. and this is what barbara kennelly says. she is -- quote -- "even though social security contributed nothing to the current economic crisis, it has been bartered in 18:10:01a deal that provides deficit-busting tax cuts for the wealthy. diverting $120 billion in social security contributions for a so-called tax holiday may sound like a good deal for workers now 18:10:19but it's bad business for the program that a majority of middle-class seniors will rely upon in the future." end of quote, barbara kennelly. the headline "cutting contributions to social security 18:10:32signals the beginning of the end." this is not a good approach. providing and figuring out a way that we can get more money into the hands of working people, as we did in the stimulus package, does make a lot of sense. 18:10:52going forward with a payroll tax holiday is a backdoor method to end up breaking social security, and it's not anything that we 18:11:06should support. mr. president, let me just mention and quote from a gentleman who understands this issue very, very well and he understands the politics of what's going on here. his name is bruce bartlett. 18:11:22he is a former top advisor for presidents reagan and george h.w. bush. and he recently wrote the following in opposition to this payroll tax cut. and this is what mr. bartlett 18:11:40wrote "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow" -- ever allow -- "this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates 18:11:58and then when it came time" -- right now -- "for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history. 18:12:15if allowing the bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax cut in history, one that republicans claim would decimate a still fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax 18:12:32holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of america. republicans" -- this is brute bartlett who i'm -- bruce bartlett who i'm quoting, a 18:12:47former advisor to president reagan and the first president bush -- "republicans who would wish to destroy social security's finances or permanently fund it with general revenues switch the revenue base from the payroll tax to general revenues than allow a once 18:13:04suspended payroll tax to be 18:13:07imposed. arch social security hater peter ferraro once told me --" and again, this is bruce bartlett, former advisor to president reagan and bush one -- "peter ferraro once told me that funding it with general revenues was part of his plan to destroy 18:13:23it by converting social security into a welfare program rather than an earned benefit. he was right." in other words, what this issue is about is breaking the bonds that we've had since the 18:13:40inception of social security, where social security was paid for -- paid for -- by workers, you pay for it when you're working and you get the benefits when you're old. that's the deal. there is no federal money coming in from the general treasury. and this gentleman, 18:13:59mr. bartlett, thinks, and i suspect he is quite right, that -- that this is the beginning of an effort to destroy social security. and i would say that social security -- you know, the real debate about social security, 18:14:16mr. president, is not one about finances. there has been a lot of misinformation and disinformation out there. i hear from some of my friends on the republican side that social security is going bankrupt, it's not going to be 18:14:31there for our kids, and that is absolutely not true. social security today has a $2.6 trillion surplus. social security can pay out every benefit owed to every eligible american, if we don't 18:14:48start diverting funds for the next 29 years, at which point it pays out about 79% of benefits. so our challenge in 29 years is to fill that 22% gap. that's it. can we do it? sure, we can. president obama, when he was campaigning -- and i think has repeated since -- a very good 18:15:05suggestion that instead of having a cap in terms of which people contribute into the fund at $106,000, what we should do is do a bubble, go up to $250,000, and people -- $people who make $250,000 or more should 18:15:23contribute into the social security trust fund. if you did that and nothing else, you have essentially solved the social security problem for the next 75 years. very easy, it is done. so what this payroll tax holiday 18:15:39is doing in my view is pretty dangerous. i don't think enough people understand that, and i think that is one of the strong reasons why this agreement should be opposed. now, mr. president, another 18:15:55reason that i believe that this agreement is not as good an agreement as we can get is that it provides tens and tens of billions of dollars in tax cuts for various types of businesses. 18:16:11and i'm not here to say that these tax cuts cannot do some good. i suspect that they can. but i think there is a lot better way to create the jobs 18:16:25that we need than providing these particular business tax cuts. frankly, i think economists from almost all political spectrums, conservative to progressive, understand that if we are serious about creating the kinds 18:16:45of jobs that this economy desperately needs, and if we want to do that as rapidly and as cost-effectively as we possibly can, the way to do that 18:16:59is not to provide business tax cuts, because right now, right now corporate america is sitting on close to $2 trillion cash on hand. they have a ton of money. the problem is that the products that they are creating are not 18:17:16being bought by the american people because the american people don't have the money to buy those goods and services. so if we are serious, mr. president, in creating the 18:17:29jobs that we need, i think that what we have got to do is start making significant investments in our crumbling infrastructure, and that is -- that is rebuilding our bridges, our 18:17:48roads, our water systems, broadband, cell phone service, public transportation, our rail system, dams in every single one of these areas. we are seeing our infrastructure 18:18:04crumbling, and the point is that 18:18:06if you simply ignore a crumbling infrastructure -- and i say this as a former mayor who dealt with this issue -- if you simply ignore a crumbling infrastructure, you know what? it doesn't get better all by itself. 18:18:21and i know many mayors and governors would very much like to think that they can turn their backs on the infrastructure. it's not a sexy investment. it's not a sexy investment. but the reality is that if you don't pay attention to it today, 18:18:38it only gets worse and it costs you more money. it's like having a cavity. you can get your cavity filled. you neglect it, as i have, and you end up doing root canal, far more painful, far more expensive. that's what it's about. do we maintain our 18:18:57infrastructure? clearly, we are not. according to the american society of civil engineers, we should be spending about about $2.2 trillion in the next five years in order to maintain our infrastructure. 18:19:13i don't know about alaska, i don't know. i spent a very brief time in your beautiful state, but i do know that in vermont, we have bridges all over our state that are in desperate need of repair. it is fair to say the stimulus 18:19:31package has been very, very positive in my state. we spent a lot of money on roads and bridges, but we have a long, long way to go. we're putting money into roads and bridges, we're hiring people to do that work, that's what we should be doing all over the country. 18:19:45but, mr. president, it is not just roads and bridges. it is water systems. i told the story i guess a few hours ago now about a mayor, the mayor of rutland, vermont, which is the second largest city in the state, and i was in his office and he showed me a pipe. 18:20:03and the pipe was in pretty bad shape. he said, you know, this pipe was laid by an engineer, who then after he did this went off to war. he said what war do you think he went off to fight? 18:20:17he said it was the civil war, the civil war. so this was pipe laid in rutland, vermont, which is still being used which was laid i'm guessing in the 1950's, maybe -- 18:20:35in the 1850's, maybe 1860's. we have to spend $50 million, 20 years ago, rebuilding our waste water plant and making sure that a lot of pollution and filthy water didn't get into our 18:20:48beautiful lake, lake champlain. it's an expensive proposition. but right now we are going to have to invest in that. it's our water systems, our dams, our levees, our roads, our bridges. i mentioned earlier -- i mentioned earlier and contrasted 18:21:09what was going on in infrastructure in the united states as opposed to china, and i quote interested a book called third world america written by 18:21:24arianna huffington who tells us, essentially, that if we don't get our act together, that's what we will become, a third world. and she points out that compared to countries like china, our investments in rail is 18:21:43absolutely pathetic and inadequate. in china right now, that country is investing billions and billions of dollars in high-speed rail, building 18:21:57thousands and thousands of miles of high-speed rail. they are buildingver 100 new airports, and what are we doing? so, mr. president, one of my many objections to the proposal struck between the president and the republican leadership is i 18:22:13think we can do better in job creation than in business tax cuts. there is a time and a place for business tax cuts, and i am not against them, but i would say that at this particular moment in american history, in this particular moment, it makes a 18:22:31lot more sense to create over a period of years millions of jobs rebuilding our rail system, our subways, our roads, our bridges and our water systems and many other aspects of our infrastructure. there are places in vermont and throughout this country where 18:22:49people cannot today get decent quality broadband service, can't get cell phone service. in that area, we are behind many other countries, not wealthy countries around the world. 18:23:05when we make those investments in infrastructure, we not only create jobs, but we make our country stronger and more productive, and we enable ourselves to compete effectively in the international economy. mr. president, another one of my 18:23:24objections to this proposal, and why i think we can do a lot better is that i was really quite disturbed to hear that the president and others who would 18:23:40defend this proposal talk about one of the --quote, unquote -- compromises that was struck was to extend unemployment benefits for 13 months. now, to my mind, as i've said earlier, at a time of deep 18:23:55recession, at a time of horribly high unemployment, it would be absolutely wrong and immoral for us to turn our backs on the millions of workers who are about to lose their unemployment benefits. 18:24:10if we do that, it's hard to imagine what happened to those families, for many of whom this is their only source of income. what do they do? do they lose their homes? do they move out onto the streets? do they -- how do they take care of their kids? 18:24:26i don't know. there are parts of this country where it is very, very hard to get a job. extended unemployment is at the highest level we have ever seen. you can't turn your backs on those families. but i get upset when i hear that the republicans' willingness to 18:24:45support an extension of unemployment benefits for 13 months is a major compromise. i would tell you, mr. president, i think a lot of the american people don't know this, that for the past 40 years, 40 years, 18:25:00four decades, under both democratic and republican administrations, whenever the unemployment rate has been above 7.2%, above 7.2% unemployment -- and today we're at 9.8%, always, 18:25:18whether the democrats were in control or the republicans were in control, the president was democrat, the president was republican, what people did is say we have got to extend unemployment benefits. 18:25:31it's kind of common sense, it's not partisan. so when you have a program that has existed for 40 years in a bipartisan effort, it sounds to me that it is not much of a compromise for the republicans to say okay, we will do what democrats and republicans have 18:25:46done for 40 years. what a major compromise. it is not a compromise. it is just continuing existing bipartisan policy which is sensible. it's sensible from a moral perspective. you can't leave fellow american 18:26:02families out high and dry, and it is good economics because what the economists tell us is the people who will spend that money quickest are people who receive unemployment compensation because that's all they have got. they're going to go out and they 18:26:17are going to buy, and when they buy from the neighborhood store, they create jobs. so it's good economics and it is the moral thing to do, but frankly, mr. president, in my view, this is not much of a compromise. 18:26:32this is just continuing four decades of existing policies. mr. president, as i've said 18:26:50earlier, there are very clearly positive parts of this agreement. no question about it. i think almost every american will tell you that it would be totally absurd -- i know there 18:27:04are some who disagree, but i think the vast majority of americans believe that in the time when the middle class is collapsing, when median family income has gone down, when unemployment is high, that it would be a real horror show if we did not extend the bush tax 18:27:24breaks for the middle class who are 98% of the american people. 98%. that's what we want. you know, we could have crafted it much tighter, couldn't we? we could have said nobody above 18:27:39above $100,000, nobody above above $150,000. that's pretty generous. we said a family earning earning $250,000 should get an extension of these tax breaks. that is 98% of the american 18:27:57people. that's not good enough for our republican friends. they are fighting tooth and nail 18:28:04to make sure that the top 2%, the millionaires and billionaires, the c.e.o.'s earn tens of millions a year. they are fighting. it's like they're at war. they are so engaged to make sure 18:28:20that these fabulously wealthy people receive at least a million dollars -- in some cases for people who are making a million a year, they are going to receive on average, on average, $100,000 a year in taxx 18:28:38breaks. for the very, very wealthiest, it could be over a million dollars a year. mr. president, i know you joined me just two days ago in saying that at a time when senior citizens in this country and disabled vets for two years in a row have not received any cola, 18:28:52that maybe it was the right thing to do because we know that health care costs and prescription drug costs are soaring, that maybe we provide a a $250 check to those seniors 18:29:08and disabled veterans one time, one time. i could not get one republican vote in support of that proposition. we won 53-45, but around here it doesn't take 50 votes to win -- 18:29:26it doesn't take a majority to win, it takes 60 votes, we couldn't get one republican vote. so here you have every republican voting against a $250 check for a disabled vet or a senior citizen who is living on on $15,000, $16,000 a year. 18:29:43can't afford it, but we can afford a $1 million a year tax break for somebody who is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. now, somebody may understand that rationale. i don't, i really don't. i can't understand that. 18:29:58i can't understand asking our kids and grandchildren to pay more in taxes as the national debt goes up in order to provide tax breaks for the richest people in this country. so, mr. president, while there 18:30:14are some good provisions in this bill, and certainly extending the tax breaks for 98% of our people, for the broad, very broad middle class, i think if 18:30:31the american people demand it in our democracy, we can do better. now i don't know if you or i alone will be able to convince some of our republican friends 18:30:46or maybe some of our democratic friends to make this into the kind of proposal we need for the working families and for our children, for our next generation. 18:31:00i don't know if we can do it inside this beltway. as i said earlier, i think that the way we win this battle, the way we defeat this proposal and come back with a much better proposal is when millions of americans start writing and e-mailing and calling their 18:31:18senators, their congress people and say, wait a second, are you nuts? do you really think that millionaires and billionaires need a huge tax break at a time when this country has a $13.7 trillion national debt? 18:31:35what are you smoking? how could you for one second think that makes any sense whatsoever. i tell you, mr. president -- i don't know what my phones are doing in my office right now, but in the last three days i'm guessing 5,000 phone calls and 18:31:54e-mails, and about 99% of them are in disagreement with that -- with this proposal. i'm looking at a chart here, and we've got 2,100 calls that just 18:32:13came in, i'm informed today. i don't know what kind of calls other members of the senate are getting, but certainly those are the calls that i am getting. now, also, mr. president, and this point cannot be made 18:32:30strongly enough. what our republican friends want to do -- and they have been pretty honest and upfront, especially the extreme right-wing people who have been running for office and in some 18:32:45cases have won. they have been honest enough to say that they want to bring this country back to where we were in the 1920's, that their ultimate aim is the basic repeal of almost all the provisions that 18:33:00have been passed in the last 70 18:33:03years to protect working people, the elderly and the children. they believe in a darwinan style society in which you have the survival of the fittest, that we 18:33:16are not a society which comes together to take care of all of us. you take care of me in need and i take care of you in need and your family in that we are one people. and their strategy is pretty clear, i think. they want to ultimately destroy 18:33:35social security. and what we are beginning to hear more and more of is why don't we raise the retirement age to 68 or 69. that deficit-reduction commission which i thought the 18:33:49people on that commission were bad appointees by the president. you could have put together some good economists to say how do we in a fair way -- in a fair way -- address the deficit and national debt crisis. that wasn't what that commission 18:34:04did. these folks are talking about major cuts in social security, medicare, medicaid. they want, at a time when it is so hard for young people to afford to go to college, they want to raise the cost by asking 18:34:20our young people while they're in college to be accruing the interest on their loans. so i think that if the president believes that if this agreement is passed, that the republicans 18:34:35are going to come to the table and we're all going to live happily in the future. we're going to all work together in a nonpartisan way. i think he's not understanding the reality. these people are going to come back, and they're going to come 18:34:52back very aggressively for major cuts in social security, medicare, medicaid, education, child care, pell grants, you name it, because their belief is -- i don't quite understand it -- that it is somehow good public policy to give tax breaks 18:35:08for the wealthiest people in this country who in many ways have never had it so good while you cut programs that the middle class and working families of this country desperately depend upon. 18:35:23so i would suggest that this big debate we're having right now on whether or not we should accept the proposal agreed to by the president and the republicans is just the beginning, just the beginning of what's coming down the pike. and if we surrender now on this issue, we can expect next month 18:35:42and the following month another governmental crisis, another threat of a shutdown unless they get their way. so i think rather than asking the working families of this country to have to compromise, instead of asking our kids to 18:35:59pay more taxs to bail out billionaires, maybe -- i know this is a radical idea, but maybe we should ask a handful of our republican friends to join us. 18:36:14maybe a handful of honest conservatives over there who have been telling us for years their great concerns about deficit spending and a huge national debt. maybe they should be prepared to vote against a proposal which raises the national debt and our 18:36:34deficit by giving tax breaks to some of the richest people in the world. now, i, quite frankly, don't think that i'm going to be able to convince them. i don't know that you're going to be able to convince. but you know who i think can 18:36:49convince them? inch their constituents can convince them. i think the american people can convince them. i said earlier that if the american people stand up that we can defeat this proposal and that we can create a much, much 18:37:05better proposal. clearly we must extend tax breaks for the middle class. clearly we must make sure that unemployed workers continue to get the benefits that they 18:37:21desperately need. but equally clearly, we must make sure that we are not raising the national debt, which as shaopb as i'm standing -- as sure as i'm standing here will 18:37:36result in cuts, social security, medicaid, medicare, education, other programs by passing -- if this proposal is passed. mr. president, this is not only an important proposal unto itself -- $900 billion-plus even 18:37:56in washington is nothing to sneeze at -- but it is an 18:38:01important proposal in terms of the direction in which our country goes into the future. if we accept this proposal of a two-year extension for the richest people in america, i believe that will evenly become 18:38:17either a long-term extension or a permanent extension. if we accept the proposal that lowers the rates on the estate tax which benefits only the top .3%, 99% of americans get 18:38:39nothing. but if we give them what they want, i believe that over a period of years it will lead to the complete abolition and ending of the estate tax which will cost us $1 trillion over a ten-year period. 18:38:52so i would hope that this issue is not one that just progresses. i would hope that honest conservatives who in their heart of hearts believe that this country is seriously in danger 18:39:11when we have unsustainable deficits and a huge national debt that they will tell their officials here in washington not to pass a piece of legislation which increases the national debt significantly and in fact 18:39:26will allow for the permanent over years, in my view, extension of these tax breaks. that is what this debate is about. it is about, fundamentally whether we continue the process 18:39:45by which the richest people in this country become richer at a time when we have the most unequal distribution of income and wealth of any major country on earth. 18:39:58as i said earlier, mr. president, this is not an issue that is discussed. i don't know -- well, i do know why. it is just not an issue that people feel comfortable about because they don't want to give 18:40:15a front to wealthy campaign contributions. contributors will take on the lobbyists that are out there. that is the reality. throughout the entire world the united states has the most unequal distribution of income. top 1% earning 23.5% of all income. 18:40:31that, mr. president, is more than the bottom 50%. and that is not just immoral. it is bad economics. because if the middle-class gets crushed entirely, who is going to be buying the tkpwaopdz and 18:40:50services pro -- the goods and services produced in this economy. this piece of legislation, as important as it is unto itself -- and it is very, very important -- is equally important in terms of what it 18:41:04says about where we are going into the future. are we going to protect the middle class and working families of our country? are we going to make sure that every young native american america, regardless of -- every 18:41:22young person in america regardless of income has the ability to go to college or are we going to allow college to become unaffordable for young people or else force them to leave school deeply in debt? 18:41:35are we going to create a health care system which guarantees health care to all of our people -- high-quality health care -- or are we going to continue a situation where 18:41:5245,000 americans die each year because they don't have access to a doctor? are we going to invest in our energy system so that we break our dependence on foreign oil? we spend about $350 million a year importing oil from saudi 18:42:11arabia and other foreign countries. almost $1 billion a day which should be used to make this country energy independent, which should be used to transform our energy system away 18:42:28from fossil fuel into energy efficiency and technology such as wind solar, geothermal and biomass. mr. president, by the way, none of that has been addressed, as i 18:42:43understand it, in this proposal. so my point here is not just that this proposal is a bad proposal as it stands before us now. but it is going to move us in the future in a direction that i do not believe this country 18:42:59should be going. i mentioned earlier that my own personal family's history is the history of millions and millions of americans. my father, as it happened, came to this country at the age of 17 without a nickel in his pocket, 18:43:16worked hard his whole life, never made very much money. but he and my mom -- my mom graduated high school, she never went to college. but they had the satisfaction, a very significant satisfaction 18:43:33knowing their kids got a college education. my older brother larry went to law school and i graduated from the university of chicago. i think what's going on in this country and why the anxiety level is so high is not just that people are worrying about 18:43:50themselves. parents worry more about their kids than they do about themselves. and what parents are sitting around and worrying about now is they're saying will for the first time in the modern history of this country, my kids have a lower standard of living than 18:44:06their parents? will my kids earn less income? will me kids not have the opportunity to travel and learn and grow as i have done? are the best days of america behind us? that's really what the question is about. 18:44:23and i don't think that has to be the case. but i will tell you as i mentioned earlier, if we were going to change the national priorities in this country, if we're going to start devoting our energy and attention to the 18:44:38needs of working families and the middle class, we've got to defeat this proposal, we've got to defeat similar types of proposals which come down the pike. when this country has a $13.7 trillion national debt, it is 18:44:55insane to be talking about huge tax breaks for people who don't need them. as i mentioned earlier, ironically you've got a lot of these millionaires out there who apparently love their country 18:45:10more than some of the people in this chamber. you have some of the richest people in america -- bill gates and all the charitable work he does; warren buffet, and many others who say you know what? i'm doing fine. i'm a billionaire, i'm a 18:45:24multibillionaire, i don't need your tax break. i'm worried about the high rate of childhood pforts, a.m. worried about the infrastructure crumb manying, i am worried bel americans dying this year without access to health care. 18:45:42i'm about global warming. invest in transforming our energy system. these are patriotic americans. they're rich. they love their country. and now what they are saying to us is we don't even want it. we are giving people money who in some cases don't even want 18:45:57it. and i know -- i do know that there are others out there who do. and i think, mr. president, if there is one issue that we as a congress and as a government have got to address, and that is 18:46:13the administered level of greed in this country. we have got to stand tall and draw a line in the sand and simply say, enough is enough. how much do you want? 18:46:28how much do you need? how many yachts can you own? how many homes can you have? isn't it enough that the top 1% now earns 23.5% of the income in 18:46:45this country? how much more do they want? do they want 30%, 35%? isn't it enough that the top 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 90%? 18:46:59how much more do they need? mr. president, i mentioned earlier when i talked about the situation that got us into this horrendous recession, and that is the collapse of wall street, and i talked about what i think 18:47:16most americans understand very well, and that is the incredible greed and recklessness and dishonesty that exists on wall street. we must not allow ourselves to encourage and continue the kinds 18:47:37of greed that we have seen in recent years. it is an abomination that the people who caused this economic crisis, the worst recession since the great depression, that the people who caused it on wall 18:47:53street are now earning more 18:47:57money, more money than they did before we bailed them out. earlier today, i was reading some e-mails that came to my office from vermonters who are 18:48:12struggling to keep their heads above water. and they were just terribly painful and poignant stories about honest and good and decent people who are now choosing about whether or not they should 18:48:26put gas in their car or buy thed into they need or buy the prescription drugs they need, not just a vermont story; it is an american story. and that is the reality out there for tens of millions of americans. so in my view, we can negotiate 18:48:45a much better agreement than the one that president obama and the republican leader did. there are some good parts of that agreement which obviously should be retained and perhaps even strengthened. 18:49:00and those include, of course, making sure that we extend unemployment benefits to those who need it and of course that we extend tax breaks for the middle class. and there are other -- some other very good provision flz 18:49:16there that i think are very worthwhile. but i think if the american people stand up and agree with those of us who say, no more tax breaks for the very wealthiest people in this country, we can defeat this proposal and we can come up with a much better one 18:49:33that is fairer to the middle class of this country and is fairer to our young children. i do not want to see our young kids -- my children, my grandchildren -- have a lower 18:49:48standard of living than their parents. that's not what america is b so, madam president, what i think we've got to do is defeat this proposal. i think we have got to urge our fellow americans to stand up and say "no" to tax breaks for those 18:50:07who don't need it. i think we have got to work in a very serious way about creating the millions and millions of good-paying jobs that this country desperately needs. 18:50:21i personally believe that far more effective approach than giving the variety of business taxes that were in this proposal at a time when corporate america is sitting on $2 million of unused cash -- they've got the money -- i think a much better 18:50:37approach, as i said earlier, is investing in our crumbling infrastructure. i think that makes us healthier and stronger as a nation for the future and in the global economy, and i think it creates jobs quicker and in a more cost-effective way than these 18:50:54tax cuts. i think also, madam president, that it is high time -- high time that the american people move -- they want us to move in 18:51:10an entirely new direction in terms of trade. i am always amazed how republicans and democrats alike -- i speak as the longest-serving independent in congress -- come election time i 18:51:26see these ads on television, oh, we've got to do something about outsourcing, we've got to do something about our trade policy. but somehow the day after that election when corporate america continues to throw american workers out on the street and moves to china, moves to other low-wage countries, somehow that 18:51:45discussion seases to competents -- ceases to exist and that legislation never seems to appear. so it seems to me, madam president, that we have got to defeat this proposal that in defeating this proposal we're 18:52:02going to tell the american people that there are at least some of us here, some of us here, who understand what our jobs and our obligations are, and that is that we are supposed to represent them, the middle 18:52:20class of this country, and not just wealthy campaign contributors or bow to the interests of the lobbyists who are all over this place. madam president, when i talked a 18:52:35moment ago about the need to invest in our infrastructure as a way to create jobs being more cost-effective than some of these business tax breaks, i'm looking right now at a "wall street journal" article, 18:52:52december 9, 2010, and here's 18:52:57what the article says. "companies" -- headlined "companies cling to cash." the headline "companies cling to carchlt" "coffers swell to 51-year high as cautious firms 18:53:12put off investing in growth." a story by justin laheart. here les the story. he makes the point that i have been trying to express her. "corporate america's cash pile 18:53:27has hit its highest level in half a century. rather than pouring their money into building plants or hiring workers, nonfinancial companies in the united states were sitting on $1.93 trillion in 18:53:47cash" -- i said $2 trillion. i stand corrected. $1.93 trillion in cash and other assets at the end of the september, up from $1.8 trillion at the end ever june, the federal reserve said thursday. 18:54:00cash accounted 7.4% of the companies' total assetted, the largest share since 1959. the cash buildup shows the deep caution many companies feel about investing in expansion while the economic recovery 18:54:17remains painfully slow and high unemployment and household finances continue to limit consumers' ability to spend." well what have we been talking about all afternoon? this is the "wall street 18:54:33journal," frankly not my favorite paper. but that's what they are saismg the way you are going to get the economy moving again is to put money in the hand of working people who will then go out and buy the goods and services that these companies produce. 18:54:50i have my doubts about whether or not these tax breaks will in fact have the desired result, but, as i said earlier and will say again, i think the most effective way to create jobs, 18:55:06the most important way to create jobs, is to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. and that is our roads, our bridges, our rail systems, our water systems, our waste water plants, our dams, our leaf vies visas, the need to -- our leaf 18:55:23veerks the need to improve broadband, to make sure every community in america has access to good-quality broadband, has access to cell phone service. unfortunately, as best as i can understand, there has not been one nickel -- one nickel 18:55:44appropriated in this piece of legislation, this proposed legislation, which would go to infrastructure improvements. 18:55:57so, madam president, i think that this proposal should be defeated because it is not a strong proposal for the middle class. it is a proposal which gives much too much to people who 18:56:12don't need it. and it is a proposal which i think sets the stage for similar type proposals down the pike. and i apologize to anyone who has been listening for any 18:56:28length of time -- and i know that i've been, to say the least, a by the repetitious, but the concern here is that when the president and some of my republican colleagues talk about some of these tsm breaks being "temporary," we're just going to 18:56:45extend hem for two years, talking about this payroll tax holiday being just one year, i've been in washington long enough to know that that assertion just doesn't fly. that what is temporary today is long-term tomorrow and is permanent the next day. 18:57:02so i fear very much that this proposal is bad on the surface. i fear very much that this proposal will lead us down a very bad track in terms of more trickle-down economics, which 18:57:18benefits the tricklers and not the ordinary americans. i think that it is a proposal which should be defeated. but, madam president, the point that i want to make is that it is not just my poifnlt i think 18:57:35it should be defeated. i think we can do a lot better. but i've got to tell you that the calls that are coming in to my office are -- hears wha we got today, i guess. 18:57:552k,122 calls oppose the deal. and i think 100 calls are supportive of the deal. so you can do the arithmetic on it. but that is at least 95% of the calls that i got today are 18:58:09saying this is not a good deal. we can do better. i note that in the last three or four days we have gotten probably now 6,000 or 7,000 calls that say this. and this is not just vermont. and some -- many of those calls come from out of state, by the 18:58:24way, not just from vermont. but i think that is true all over this country. so, madam president, let me conclude -- and it has been a long day. let me simply say that i believe 18:58:43the proposal that was developed by the president and the republicans are nowhere near as good as we can achieve. i don't know that we are able ourselves to get the handful of 18:58:56republicans that we need to say "no" to this agreement. but i do believe that if the american people stand uppedz -- and by the way, it may not be just republicans, there may be some democrats as well -- if the american people stand up and say, we can do better than this, 18:59:12that we don't need to drive up the national debt by giving tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires, that if the american people are prepared to stand -- and we're prepared to follow them -- i think we can defeat this proposal, i think we 18:59:27can come up with a better proposal which better reflects the needs of the middle-class and working families of our country and to me, most importantly, the children of our country. and with that, madam president, i would yield the floor. 18:59:55A SENATOR:i suggest the absence of a quorum. 18:59:58THE PRESIDING OFFICER:the clerk will call the roll.
UNITED STATES SENATE 15:00-16:00
The senate convene for a period of morning business. They discuss the White House compromise on the the GW Bush tax cuts. 15:00:07 BERNIE SANDERS are we nuts? what are we doing in wasting the extraordinary intellectual potential of all of these young people? what we're saying to them is because you don't have the money 15:00:21and because college is so expensive and because our federal government is so busy giving tax breaks to millionaires and fighting two wars, we are not investing in you. that makes no sense at all. when you invest in your kids, you're investing in the future 15:00:36of america. they are america. and if they're not well educated, how are they going to become productive members of society? how are we going to compete against china and europe and other countries around the world that are investing in education? 15:00:55and here's something that we don't talk about enough. the fastest-growing occupations are those that require higher levels of education and technical competence. 15:01:13it's true in vermont and true all over the country that you have jobs out there, good jobs, and those jobs cannot be filled because our young people don't have the job skills to fill them. 15:01:28how absurd is that? i remember there was a piece in one of the papers -- i think it was in ohio -- where after the worst of the recession, there were a lot of layoffs, they were beginning to rehire workers. these were sophisticated 15:01:45high-tech jobs. they brought workers in and they brought them in and they brought them in, and they couldn't come up with the number of workers they needed to fill the jobs they had. what does that say about our educational system? data from alliance for excellent education 2009, 1,800 vermont 15:02:04dropouts cost the state $459 million of lost lifetime earnings for the state and $19.4 million in health care costs. in other words, what everybody understands, if you don't invest 15:02:20in your young people, they are not going to become productive tax-paying workers. as often as not, they will get involved in self-destructive activity -- drugs, crime, 15:02:37whatever. they'll end up in jail and we'll spend tens of thousands of dollars keeping them in jail rather than keeping them out there as productive members of society contributing their fair share of taxes. the urban institute says that we can reduce child poverty, which 15:02:55i mentioned earlier, is the highest in the industrialized world by 35% if we provide child-care subsidies to families with income less than 50% of state median. 15:03:10this is an issue i feel very, very strongly about. it is, to me, beyond comprehension that in vermont and throughout this country, it is extremely difficult for working class families to find 15:03:28affordable, good-quality child care. we're not back in the 1950's where daddy went to work and mommy stayed home taking care of the kids. mom is at work as well. and you have families all over this country, middle-class, 15:03:43working-class families are saying you know, i cannot find quality child care where i'm comfortable leaving my two-year-old or three-year-old; can't find that child care at a rate that i can afford. in this area, again, we are far 15:03:59behind many other countries around the world, because kids who do not get intellectually challenging early childhood education, kids who do not get the emotional support they need from zero to three to of course 15:04:15they will enter school already quite behind other kids. and then five years later, ten years later, they'll be dropping out of school and they'll be doing drugs, and they'll be ending up in jail at great expense. 15:04:29how long does it take us to understand that investing in our children, our youngest children is enormously important for our country, and it is a good investment. it is much better to invest in child care than in keeping people locked up in jails. mr. president, 75% of american 15:04:51youth who applied to the military are ineligible to serve because of low cognitive capacities, criminal records or obesity. this is really quite unbelievable. 15:05:04we're not only now talking about not being able to compete internationally because we are not bringing forth the kind of educated people that we need because of the inquad is is of our schools -- inadequate tphaoeur of -- nature of our 15:05:27schools. 75% of our youth who apply to the military are inable to serve because of low cognitive capabilities, capacities, criminal records or obesity. mr. president, it gives me no 15:05:47pride, no happiness to bring forth these statistics. but as a nation, we're going to have to grasp these things. either we can ignore these things, either we can run away from reality, put our heads underneath the carpet here, or 15:06:03we can say that we are not going to allow america to become a third world nation, that we're going to thurpb country around -- turn this country around. but we're not going to turn this country around unless we rethink our priorities, and one of our 15:06:20priorities cannot be more tax breaks for the richest people in this country. mr. president, from the 1960's to 2006, the u.s., the united states, fell from first to 18th out of 24 industrialized 15:06:36nations in high school graduation rates. now what happens in today's economy if a kid does not graduate from high school? and if my memory is correct, about 30% of our kids -- and i know these figures are fuzzy 15:06:53because it's hard to determine who is dropping out and not. but my understanding is about 30% of our kids drop out of high skaofplt what happens to those kids? where do they go? how many end up in jail? how many do drugs? as a nation, i think we can do a 15:07:09lot better than that. we should not have gone from 1st to 18th out of 24 industrialized nations in high school graduation rates. mr. president, dropouts are eight times more likely to be 15:07:27incarcerated. in other words, when kids fail in school, they are going to end up in jail. eight times more likely. 82% of those in prison are high school dropouts. states -- i can tell you a funny experience. 15:07:41i was in burlington last week and i met this fellow and he was chatting with me. he said i just got out of jail. what really struck me is he was a well-educated young man. he was very articulate. i suspect he had gone to college. 15:07:57what struck me is how rare that is. as the statistics amply demonstrate, the people who end up in jail overwhelmingly are high school dropouts, people who don't have the education to make it in the world. mr. president, when we talk 15:08:14about the need to substantially increase funding for early childhood education, we should understand that state-funded prek programs currently serve 24% of four-year olds and 4% of three-year olds. 15:08:33in other words, there are millions of families that would like to see their kids be able to access good-quality child 15:08:43care, but just can't find that in their states. mr. president, again, in contrast to giving tax breaks to billionaires who don't need it and in some cases are not even asking for it, the younger the 15:08:58age of investment in human capital, the higher the rate of return on that investment. if society invests early enough, it can raise cognitive and socioemotional levels in the health of disadvantaged kids. 15:09:13you don't need to be a psychologist to understand that. if kids get off to a good start in life, if they have the intellectual support, the intellectual development, emotional support, those kids are much, much more likely to do 15:09:29well in school, much less likely to drop out, much less likely to be a burden on society, much less likely to end up in jail, much less likely to do drugs, et cetera. this is an investment that we should be making. 15:09:46mr. president, i want to get back for a moment to the agreement that the president made with the republican leadership and why i think it is 15:10:01a bad agreement and why i believe we can do much better. and the way we are going to improve this agreement is when millions of people all over this kwupbt say -- all over this country say wait a second. 15:10:18this was an agreement reached behind closed doors. there are members in the house and the senate who are upset that we didn't know about the agreement. what about the average american out there? i wonder how many people really believe that it makes a lot of sense with a $13.7 trillion 15:10:35national debt to be giving huge tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country. i've got to tell you, mr. president, the calls in my office are coming 98%, 99% to one against these agreements. 15:10:56people think we can do better, and our job is to do better. and the way we do better is when people all over this country stand up and say, wait a minute, congress, your job is to represent the middle class, 15:11:10represent our kids and not to represent the wealthiest people in this country. i mentioned earlier, and i think certainly one of the major objections to this agreement is that it provides tens of billions of dollars to the 15:11:27wealthiest people in this country at a time when the rich are already doing phenomenally well and at a time when the wealthiest people have already experienced huge tax breaks. and i think most people think 15:11:43that that does not make sense. let me just give you an example. i just want to, not to pick on particular individuals. that's not my goal here. but just so you know this. according to the citizens for tax justice, if the bush tax 15:11:58breaks for the top 2% are extended, these are some of the people who will benefit and what kind of benefits they will receive. rupert murdoch, the c.e.o. of news corporation, would receive a $1.3 million tax break next year. 15:12:16mr. murdoch is a billionaire. do you really think he needs that? jamie dimon, head of j.p. morgan chase whose bank got a bailout from the federal reserve will 15:12:30receive a $1.1 million tax break. trust me, jamie dimon, head of j.p. morgan chase, he is doing fine. ecrom pandit, head of citigroup, he would receive $175,000 tax 15:12:52breaks. ken lewis, former c.e.o. of bank of america, the guy is already fabulously wealthy, would receive a $713,000 a year tax break. the c.e.o. of wells fargo, he's are the largest banks in 15:13:07america, c.e.o.'s of these banks already making huge compensation, he would get -- john stumph, c.e.o. of wells fargo would receive a $813,000 tax break every single year. 15:13:23c.e.o. morgan stanley would receive a $926,000 a year tax break. the c.e.o. of he the narcotics ronald will kwrarbs of he the -- the c.e.o. of aetna would 15:13:39receive a tax break worth 15:13:44$875,000. mr. president, i contrast that, as i did earlier, to the fact that two days ago you and i and a total of 53 members of the senate said, you know, maybe we 15:13:56should provide a $250 check this year to seniors on social security and to disabled vets because they haven't gotten a cola for two years. $250 check. people are making $14,000, 15:14:14$15,000 a year desperately need a little bit of help. we couldn't get one republican vote. but when it comes to the c.e.o. of a major bank who is already a multimillionaire, we're talking about $600,000, $700,000 a year in tax breaks. 15:14:28that is not what we should be doing as a nation. furthermore, mr. president, i know that president obama and others have said, well, let's not worry because these tax breaks are just temporary. 15:14:46just temporary. they're only going to be given for two years. i have been in washington long enough to know that when you give a temporary tax break for two years, you are in fact giving a long-term tax break or 15:15:03maybe even a permanent tax break because two years from now the exact same arguments will be made, that if you do away with those tax breaks for the rich, you're really raising taxes. do you really want to raise taxes, a terrible thing to do. 15:15:21understand that same argument can be made. but there is one difference. the difference is, when president obama ran for president and since he are has been president, he has time and time and time again come out against those tax breaks. 15:15:34he does not believe in them, and i believe him. i know that he doesn't. but if he says -- if he is the democratic candidate for president -- that elect me ar reelect me to be president because then in the future i'm really going to bet rid of these tax breaks, i am afraid that his 15:15:51credibility is not very, very high, because that's what he said last time. and you can only cry wolf -- i guess there's a limit to home times you can cry wolf. so i think -- let's not kid ourselves. if these tax breaks for the wealthiest people are extended 15:16:06for two years, there is a very, very strong likelihood that they will be extended for many, many years beyond these two years and perhaps even permanently, which brings us back to the bush-era nonsense of believing that tax 15:16:22breaks for the rich and trickle-down economics are going to help the middle-class and working families of this country. but while the personal income tax issue and extending them for the top 2% has received a lot of 15:16:39national attention, what has not gotten a whole lot of discussion is that that is not the only unfair and absurd tax proposal out there. the agreement struck between the president and the republican 15:16:54leadership continues the bush era 15% tax rate on capital gains and dividends, meaning that those people who make their living off of their investments will continue to pay a substantially lower tax rate 15:17:09than firemen, teachers, and nurses. so if you are a wealthy person and you earn -- and i believe that the overwhelming majority of capital gains benefits accrue to the top 1% -- you're going to 15:17:25be paying a tax on that income of 15%, which is less than you pay if you are a fireman, whether you are a police officer, you are a teacher, or a nurse. 15:17:38so what we're doing there is extending not only the personal income tax rates for the very rich but a host of other taxes as well. mr. president, on top of all of that -- and i know that many of my colleagues have picked up on 15:17:58this and are extremely upserkts and i think it is one of the reasons why the democrats in the house just yesterday said that they do not want to bring this proposal to the floor for a vote -- is that this agreement includes a horrendous, a 15:18:15horrendous proposal regarding the estate tax. and the estate tax, as some may know, was a proposal that teddy roosevelt talked about in the year -- in the year 1906 and was eventually enacted in 1916. 15:18:35and here is what teddy roosevelt said about this issue in august 15:18:42of 2010, and i quote, and it is worth repeating that, because what the proposal struck between the president and the republican leadership does is lower the estate tax substantially. and here's what teddy roosevelt 15:18:57said in 2010. and here's the chart with his words. he said, "the absence of effective state, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class 15:19:13of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power." this is teddy roosevelt, who by then had served as president of 15:19:27the united states. "no man" -- this is rose volt. "no man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. every dollar received should represent a dollar's worth of service rendered -- not gambling 15:19:43in stocks, but service rendered." end of quote. my good in this guy was pretty prophetic. this is back in 1910. then he continues, "the really big fortune, the swollen 15:20:02fortune, by the mere fact of its size acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is passed by men of relatively small means. therefore, i believe in ... a 15:20:16graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion and increasingly rapidly in amount with the size of the estate." end ever quote. wow, teddy roosevelt hit the 15:20:31nail on the head. and that was 100 years ago. what he worried about is that a small group of people with incredible money would be able to pass that money on and that what you would create in this country is an oligarchic form of 15:20:52government with a few people not holding just economic power but holding significant power as well. 15:21:02right now as a result of this disastrous citizens united decision, what roosevelt foretold, predicted is exactly what's happening. you're having a handful of billionaires now sitting around deciding how much of their fortune they're going to invest in political campaigns all over this country to defeat people 15:21:21like me that are opposed to their agenda and support other people who are in agreement with their agenda. that's what roosevelt talked about. that is exactly what is happening. so what we're looking at is, in this proposal we're looking at a 15:21:42situation where the estate tax rate, which was 5 5% under president clinton, will decline to 35% in -- with an exemption. here's the important point that 15:22:02has to be made because i think a lot of people don't understand it and certainly our republican friends have done a very, very good job in distorting reality on this one. there are millions of americans who believe that when they die, 15:22:23that i their children will have to pay an estate tax 678 that's absolutely and categorically incorrect. as this chart shows, only a tiny 15:22:34fraction of estates from deaths in 2009 owed any estate tavment that number is about .24%, less than .3% of american families paid any tax on the estates that 15:22:53they were left. 99.% 7% of american families -- 99.7% of american families did not pay anything in estate taxes. 15:23:08the so-called "death tax" that our republican friends talk about a whole lot is the estate tax, 99.7% of families don't pay a nickel on t the people who do pay are not the rich. it is the very, very, very rich. and let me just give you one 15:23:30example of the absurdity of lowering the tax rate, or even worse, of ending the estate tax 15:23:42as some of my republican colleagues would like to do. here's this chart. to give you one example of what ending -- this agreement does not do that; it just lowers the rates. 15:23:53but if they were to wipe out completely, as the republicans want to do, walmart's owners -- and that's the sam walton family, the waltons own walmart. they are the heirs to the walmart fortune which is worth 15:24:11-- this may be dated, it may be more, may be less now -- about $86 billion. that's what this family is worth. one family, $86 billion. they're doing pretty good. if we abollish the estate tax, as our republican friends would have us do, the walton family 15:24:28alone would receive an estimated $32.7 billion tax break, if the estate tax was completely repealed. one family, $32.7 billion. this is patently insane. 15:24:43this is insane. we have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world. we have massive unemployment. i am trying to get 50-plus million a $250 check. 15:25:01by the way, a $250 check because we have not seen a cola in the two last two and a half years for seniors and vets, thaltd that would cost about $13 billion. 15:25:15the wahlton family would get more than double in a tax break what some of us are fighting for for over 50 million seniors and disabled vets. so we can't afford to give $14 billion to help some of the people in this country who are struggling the hardest, can't do 15:25:31that. but somehow we can afford to give $32.7 billion in tax breaks to one of the richest families in this country. if that makes sense to anybody, please call up my office. because it doesn't make stones me, and i think it does not make sense to the vast majority of 15:25:47the american people. so under this agreement, the estate tax rate, which was 55% under president clinton, will decline to 35% with an exemption on the first $5 million of an 15:26:08state's estate, $10 million for couples. and let us again -- this tax applies to only the top .3% of the families in this country. and this again is not just a tax break for the rich; it is a tax 15:26:21break for the very, very rich. and, again, this agreement say, well, we're only going to extend this for two years. well, frankly, i doubt that very much. i suspect two years from now, the same argument. they will be extending it. 15:26:36and frankly our republican colleagues, representing the richest people in the world, are hell bent on aboll iraq the estate tax completely. so those are some of the reasons that i think we should be voting against this agreement. 15:26:59third, mr. president -- and this is an issue i have been talking about and i'm happy to hear that there is more discussion about in the last few days -- and that is the so-called payroll tax 15:27:12holiday. and what that is about is that this would cut $120 billion in social security payroll tax for workers. now, on the surface, this sounds 15:27:27like a very good idea because the worker instead of paying 6.2% into social security pays 4.2%. but i think, if you think about it for two second, you really understand that it is not a good 15:27:42idea because this is money being dwrerted from the social security -- being diverted from the social security trust fund. and social security, in my view, has been the most successful federal program in perhaps the history of our country. in the last 75 years, whether in 15:27:59good times or bad times, social security has paid out every nickel owed to every eligible american. today social security has $toy 2.6 -- social security has $2.6 trillion surplus. tai social today social securitn 15:28:15pay out benefits for the next 25 years. we must be able to extend is it beyond 29 years to the next 75 years. if you divert $120 billion from the social security trust fund rands give it to workers today, what you're doing is cutting 15:28:33back at viability, the long-term viability of social security. 15:28:40that is not just bernie sanders raising this issue. there are many people representing millions of senior citizens who are deeply, deeply concerned about this proposal, 15:28:57this provision in the agreement between the president and the republican leadership. the national committee to preserve social security and medicare is one of the very largest senior groups in america. 15:29:11they do a very, very good job. i know we have many seniors in vermont who are members of this organization and their job is to do what the title of the organization suggests, and that is to preserve social security and medicare. and just the other day, they sent out a news release and the 15:29:28title of the news release washings and i quote, "cutting contributions to social security signals the beginning of the end ." "payroll tax holiday is anything but." 15:29:42and let me quote from barbara kennelly, who is a former member of congress, she is the president, c.e.o. of the national committee to preserve social security and medicare. what she writes is that -- quote -- "even though social security contributed nothing to the 15:30:00current economic crisis, it has been bart teared in a deal that provides deficit-busting tax cuts for the wealthy. diverting" -- and that's what we're doing here -- "$120 billion in social security contributions for a show of 15:30:14called tax holiday may sound like a good deal for workers now, but it's bad business for the program that a majority of middle-class seniors will rely upon in the future." end of quote, bars bra kennelly, president and c.e.o. mr. president, i think many of 15:30:32shoes understand where this concept really originated. this is not a progressive idea. this is an idea that came from republicans and conservatives who want to end social security. 15:30:50and i want to read you an interesting quote from a gentleman named bruce bartlett. mr. bart slate former top advisor for president george h.w. bush. 15:31:05this is what he wrote in opposition to this payroll tax cut. that is guy who was an advisor to president reagan and the first president bush. this is what he said. he said -- quote -- "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow this one-year tax holiday to expire? 15:31:23they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend 15:31:37them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history." end of quote for a moment. so what mr. bartlett is saying -- and i'm going to go back to his quote in a second -- what he's saying is we all know to be true, that around here in congress, if you provide a tax 15:31:54break for one year -- in this case, a payroll tax holiday -- a year from now, if you restore the old rates, which are 6.2%, our republican friends are going to say, democrats are raising 15:32:08your taxes. it ain't going to happen. this one-year extension could well become a permanent extension. and if it becomes a permanent extension, you are diverting a huge amount of money to social 15:32:24security and you are weakening the entire financial structure of social security in this country, which i expect is exactly what some would like to do. now, president obama says, well, not to worry, it's only one year 15:32:40and, don't worry, that one year's going to be covered by the federal government. so for the very first time out of the treasury department, money is going to come in to social security which has always been 100 dependent, as it should be on, payroll taxes. 15:32:55for the first time, we are breaking that. and around here, you do it once, it is going to continue. what barbara kennelly, the president of the national committee to preserve social securitymedicare says, is cutting these contributions to 15:33:10social security signals the beginning of the end. so we should be very, very, very mindful of that. we should not support this payroll tax. it is one of the more dangerous provisions in this agreement. but let me get back now, if i might, mr. president, to what 15:33:28bruce bartlett, who is the former top advisor for presidents reagan and george h.w. bush, recently wrote, and i'm continuing his quote. 15:33:38quote -- "if allowing the bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax increase in history, one that republicans claim would decimate a still fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would 15:33:54also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of america. republicans would be" -- this is bruce bartlett -- "republicans would prefer to destroy social 15:34:09security's finances or permanently fund it with general revenues than allow a once-suspended payroll tax to be reimposed. arch social security hater peter ferrarro, once told me that funding it with general revenues 15:34:24was part of his plan to destroy it by converting social security into a welfare program rather than an earned benefit. he was right." and once again, that quote is from bruce bartlett, a former top advisor for presidents 15:34:41reagan and the first president bush. so what he is saying -- and this is maybe one of the sleeping issues in this agreement between the president and the republican leadership -- is we may be taking a huge step forward in destroying the most important 15:34:57program in this country, which is social security, by diverting now $120 billion and in the future, hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars into this program so that, in fact, it will not be there for our kids and our grandchildren. mr. president, the fourth point 15:35:18that i want to make in opposition to this agreement -- and one that i've made before -- and read a little bit about is -- is that while some of the business taxes in this agreement may work to create jobs, some of them won't. 15:35:36but the more important point is that economists on both ends of the political spectrum believe that the better way to spur the economy and to create the millions and millions of jobs that we must create is to 15:35:52rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. just a few minutes ago, i read from a -- excerpts from a very good book from a good friend of mine, ariana huffington, "third 15:36:10world america," and the purpose of her book was to give us a warning that if we as a nation don't get our act together in a variety of ways, including our physical infrastructure, we are headed down the pike to be a third world nation. according to the american society of civil engineers, we as a nation need to spend 15:36:27$2.2 trillion in the next five years alone in order to take care of our infrastructure needs. but, unfortunately, this agreement signed by the president and the republicans doesn't put one penny into infrastructure. 15:36:41so i think that if we are serious about creating jobs, if we're serious about making sure that our economy can be competitive in the global economy, we've got to be watching what other countries are doing and they're investing far, far more than we are. i can tell you, mr. president, 15:36:58in the stimulus package, by the way, will help us very much in vermont in this area. but right now if you were to drive around the state of vermont, and i think around many other places in this country, and you took out your cell phone, you would find it very hard to make calls in a number 15:37:13of areas of the state. a few months ago, i was literally a mile and a half away from our state capital in mont montpelier new northfield, vermont, i could not make a telephone call with my cell 15:37:29phone. that's flew many parts of vermont. that's true in many other parts of america. we are lagging many, many other countries in terms of the accessibility of cell phone service and broadband. and broadband. so i am happy to say that in vermont, we received a very 15:37:45generous grant through the stimulus package. it is going to help us. other states did the same. but that's the area that we have got to invest. we've got to invest in broadband. we've got to invest in making sure that cell phone service is available in rural america, all 15:38:00over america. i talked a moment ago about our train services. there are train services today which are worse than they were 30 or 40 years ago. it takes longer to debt from destination a to destination b. china is investing human huge sf money building high-speed rail 15:38:17at a rate that we could not even dream about. so in this agreement, we do have money for business tax cuts, but i do not think that that is the best way to invest taxpayer money if we're serious about creating the jobs that we need. 15:38:35corporate america already is sitting on close to $2 trillion 15:38:39cash on hand. i don't know that more tax breaks are going to help them very much. i think that it is a lot smarter, and i think most economists agree with me, that we should be investing in our infrastructure, both to create 15:38:55jobs now and to improve our competitiveness in years to come. further, mr. president, i want to say a word on this. i mentioned it earlier today. president obama talks about this being a compromise agreement. 15:39:12you can't get everything you want and i certainly understand that. but one of the aspects of the compromise he points to is an extension of unemployment benefits for 13 months. well, let me be very clear. i think at a time when 2 million 15:39:28of our fellow americans are about to lose their unemployment at a time when unemployment is extraordinarily high, long-term unemployment is i think higher than at any point on record. 15:39:43people are, you know, looking for work month after month after month, they're not finding it. it would be morally, morally unacceptable if this country did not extend unemployment benefits for those workers for 13 months. yet the president sees this as a 15:40:00great sign of compromise. i would argue the contrary. i would suggest to you, mr. president, that for the past 40 years, under both democratic and republican administrations, under democratic and republican leadership here in the senate or in the house, whenever the 15:40:18unemployment rate has been above 7.2% unemployment, unemployment insurance has always been extended. in other words, this has been bipartisan policy for 40 years, 15:40:33and i don't want to see us seeing and accepting as a really great give on the part of republicans -- a really, you know, something that they're giving us as part a compromise -- when it's been bipartisan policy for 40 years 15:40:47under democratic and republican leadership. so i don't accept that this is a great gift. i think what the american people understand is you don't turn your backs on unemployed workers, people who've been unemployed for long periods of time, you don't allow those people to lose their homes, you 15:41:04don't force these people out on to the streets, you take away the shreds of dignity they have remaining. that's not what you do. and that has always been republican philosophy as well as democratic philosophy. this is not a great give, so i 15:41:19do not accept that this is a -- a compromise. mr. president, let me be very 15:41:35clear, as i said earlier, that i do believe that there are positive parts of this agreement that must be maintained as we move forward toward a better agreement. and let me give you just some of them that make a lot of sense to 15:41:53me that we have got to retape rn and build on. the obvious one is in addition to extending unemployment benefits, it's clear that we have got to extend middle-class tax cuts for 98% of americans. as i have been documenting over 15:42:10and over again today, we are looking at a situation where the middle class in this country is collapsing under president bush. median family income went down by $2,200. people are losing their health care. 15:42:26and it would be asinine, it would be unacceptable if the middle class did not continue to receive the tax breaks that were developed in 2001 and 2003. and that to a large degree is what this fight is about. we've got to extend those tax breaks for the middle class but 15:42:44not tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires. further, in this agreement, there are some other good provisions. you've got the earned-income tax credit for working americans and the child and college tax credits are also in this agreement and they are very, very important. 15:42:58they will keep millions of our fellow americans from slipping out of the middle class and into poverty and they will allow millions of our fellow citizens to send their kids to college. just talked about a moment ago that we have over 100,000 families in this country where 15:43:16kids graduate high school, to want go to college, can't afford to do it. this proposal will help them do that and that's fine. but, mr. president, despite the fact that there are some good, important provisions in this proposal, when we look at the overall package, when we look at 15:43:32a $13.7 trillion national debt and a declining middle class, i 15:43:38think what we have got to say is that this package just doesn't do it. it's just not good enough. now, the president says that he knows thousand count votes -- knows how to count votes and i understand that. he says, you know, you had a 15:43:53couple of votes here to make sure that we would not give tax breaks to millionaires and the president has been very clear, he does not want to do that. i understand that. but he says, what choice do i have? and i think the answer is, we have got to fight this issue. in my view, the solution ultimately will not be resolved 15:44:11here inside the beltway, in the senate or in the house t. will be resolved when -- house. approximate t will be resolved when millions of americans -- it will be resolved when millions of americans get on 15:44:23their telephones, get on their computers and let members of the senate and members of the house of representatives know that they are profoundly outraged, that at a time when the rich have never had it so good and when we have a huge national debt, that this agreement contains huge tax for those -- 15:44:41huge tax breaks for those people who don't need it. that's how we defeat this. i'm not sure that alone here in the debate i'm going to turn any of my republican or some democratic colleagues around. but i do believe that if people all over this country stand up 15:44:55and say, wait a minute, how much do the richest people in this country want? i just documented a few moment ago -- moments ago the top 400 wealthiest people in this country saw a doubling of their income under president bush, a doubling of their income, tax rates went down. 15:45:11when is enough, enough? how much do they need? so i think and i would hope, by the way, that this is certainly not just the -- a progressive issue. i'm a progressive. this is a conservative issue. 15:45:27i have heard year after year, mr. president, our conservative friends telling us, my goodness, we cannot continue to raise the national debt. we've got to do something about this unsustainable deficit. this agreement grows, increases 15:45:43the national debt. what kind of honest conservative can vote to inrecess the national debt? and if they do, please, please no more lectures here on the floor of the senate. your hypocrisy will be known to 15:45:59everybody. don't tell us that you're concerned about the national debt. give tax breaks to billionaires and raise the national debt so that our kids and grandchildren in the middle class will have to pay -- and the middle class will have to pay higher taxes in 15:46:14order to pay off the debt that was caused by you giving tax breaks to millionaires. please, no more lectures. say, okay, rich people contributed to my campaign. i've got to be honest. no more concern about your 15:46:32concern about the national debt. again, i want to rethe it rate this point and that is -- reiterate this point, than is, don't worry, it's only two years. this is not, in my view, two years. if you do them for two years, the same old argument will be 15:46:47back two years from now and we'll be in the midst of a presidential election and what our republican friends will say and i'm glad we have a gentleman putting this in the congressional record. i want people to go back to the congressional record. 15:47:03i'm sure i will be proven right that two years from now our republican friends will come back and they will say, oh, employ board, if you re -- oh, my word, if you repeal these tax rates, you'll be raising taxes. we can't do that. and what will make the situation even more difficult two years 15:47:20from now than today, if you have president obama, if he's the democratic candidate, he'll say, i don't believe in the tax breaks for the rich, i'll do my best to repeal them, but his credibility has been damaged because he said that in his last 15:47:37campaign. that's what he's been saying all along. the president does not believe in extending tax breaks to the wealthy. i know that. but if he caves in now, who's going to believe that he won't do the same thing two years from now. 15:47:51that's the damage. what i think is even more troublesome is once we move down this path of more tax breaks for the very, very wealthy, we are accepting the heart and soul of trickle-down economics, which has been, to my mind, a proven 15:48:09disaster and a failure. i would remind the listeners, and my colleagues, that they these tax breaks have been in existence since 2001. they were in existence 15:48:25throughout almost all of president bush's tenure. the end result was that we lost 600,000 private sector jobs. 15:48:37lost 600,000 private sector jobs. the worst job performance record maybe in the history of this country. trickle-down economics does not work. giving tax breaks to billionaires does not stimulate 15:48:50the economy. helping working families and the middle class get decent jobs, tax breaks for people who need the money and are going to spend the money is what's going to create jobs, not giving tax breaks to billionaires who don't 15:49:06need it and won't spend it. if people think this is just temporary, this is just two years, i believe you're kidding yourselves. i believe that two years from now the debate will be about extending them or perhaps even making them permanent. 15:49:23at a time, a i -- as i mentioned earlier where the top 1% has seen a huge increase in the percentage of income they earn in this country. going from 18% in the 1970's now. 15:49:37to 23.5%. the top 1% earn more than the bottom 50%. it is totally absurd to give tax breaks to people who do not need them and it is not good economics as well. here's the other -- i guess by this time i've got to be doing a 15:49:56little repetition here. as i mentioned earlier you have a number of millionaires and some of the richest people in this country who will benefit from these tax breaks. you know what warren buffett is saying? you know what bill gates is saying? 15:50:10you know when ben from bed and jerry's -- ben & jerry's is saying? hey, thanks. i don't need it. it is more important to protect children. it is more important to protect working families. our tax rates from soar -- we have the absurd situation is not 15:50:30only is this bad public policy, we are actually forcing tax breaks on people who don't need them and don't even want them. richest people in this country, bill gates, warren buffett, we don't want them. 15:50:45now, here's something else -- here's something else that needs to be understood. what the republicans are doing in this agreement is driving up the national debt. and you may think, well, that's not what republicans really 15:51:02believe in. they're supposed to be conservatives. they don't want a high national debt. why would they give tax breaks to the rich? these guys are not dumb and i think they know what they're doing. 15:51:16here's what the argument is, if you drive up the national debt and the deficit, you then come back to the floor of the senate and you say, you know what is this this -- you know what? this national debt is unsustainable and the only way we can deal with it now is by 15:51:34cutting, cutting, cutting. and we are already beginning to -- beginning to hear what some -- how some of those thoughts are going to develop. there was, as you know, mr. president, a deficit reduction commission appointed 15:51:50bit president. and i had very -- when i heard who was going to be chairing that commission or co-chairing it, alan simpson, a very nice gentleman, but a very, very conservative republican who has attacked social security for a 15:52:07very long period of time, erskine bowles, a conservative democrat, i had serious doubts about what was going to come out of that commission. the good news is they needed 14 votes to pass their recommendations. they didn't get the 14. 15:52:22but a lot of the ideas that senator simpson and mr. bowles develops are going to be filtering around this institution. and what the republicans will say is that when you have a huge debt, which they helped create, 15:52:41we're going to have to cut. what are we going to have to do? as you'll recall, mr. president, the commission recommended a savage cut, 20% in social security benefits for workers. 15:52:54there was talk about raising the social security age up to i think 69. they're talking about cuts in medicare, cuts in medicaid, cuts in education. i mean right now is -- i think i've documented a dozen times it 15:53:11is a horrendous situation when so many of our young people can't afford to go to college and when they do go to college and graduate they have $25,000 in debt. these guys on the reduction 15:53:26commission were recommending that the interest on that debt be accrued while students are in college. so here we have slipping behind 15:53:34the rest of the world in terms of our percentage of college graduates and this recommendation is on young people who don't have a lot of money, borrowing money, they're going to have to pay more to go to college. here's the argument and it will be in the congressional record, 15:53:48check it out. see if i'm right. the argument will be the national debt is going up, we'll have to cut social security, medicare, medicaid, veterans programs, senator landrieu made this point, made a point a little while ago, she said -- 15:54:04and i think this is roughly right, our soldiers, men and women in the armed forces are going to get a 1.8% increase in their salaries. people putting their lives on the line to defend this country. $250 check for 50-plus million 15:54:23seniors and disabled vets. we couldn't pass it. they're going to come back and cut and cut and cut in the name of trying to deal with the high deficit which they are now increasing, and that's an issue 15:54:36that we must be addressing. so, mr. president, in my view while there are some good parts of the proposal, it is certainly one that should be significantly 15:54:54improved. and i believe that the way it can be improved is by the american people beginning to get 15:55:06involved in the process. i can tell you, as i said earlier, i don't know how the calls are going today in my office, because i have been here. but for the last three days we have received thousands of phone calls an e-mails and over 98% of them have been against this 15:55:23proposal. the american people believe, the people in development believe that we can -- in vermont believe we can do a lot better job in crafting a proposal that represents the middle class and our kids and not just the wealthiest people in this country. mr. president, when we talk 15:55:42about this proposal negotiated by the white house and the republican leadership, again, it has to be put within the broad context of what's going on in america. and that context is not a pretty picture. 15:56:00that context -- that context requires us to understand that the middle class, which has been the backbone of this country for so very long, is in the process of disappearing. 15:56:15in the context -- and that context makes us understand that millions of families in this country are worried, parents are worried not just about their own lives. they're prepared to work 50 or 60 hours a week. they're prepared to cut back on 15:56:30their own needs. but i think what is hurting them more deeply is the kind of future they are contemplating for their children. they are worried that for the first time in the modern history of america their kids will get jobs, which will pay them lower 15:56:47salaries than what the parents have earned. they are worried that unemployment will be much more likely for their kids than for themselves. they'll be worried that while they were able to scrape 15:57:00through, and in my case, i was able to scrape through college, you know, borrowed some money and did some jobs and make -- made it like millions of other people. they're worried with the high cost of education and the reduction in real earnings, they're not going to be able to 15:57:16send their kids to college. i have received e-mails, as i'm sure you have, mr. president, the saadest things in the -- the sadest thing in the world, the most we wanted to do is send our 15:57:32daughter, our son to college, we can't do that now. and that is the overall context that this agreement has got to be placed in. and the issue is again and again and again, the richest people in this country do not need tax 15:57:48breaks. they're doing phenomenally well. they've already been given huge amounts of tax breaks. it is the working families, the lower income people that we've got to be worrying about, and not just the wealthy and the powerful. 15:58:03mr. president, when we talk about why the middle class is declining, that is a tough issue and i'm not here to suggest that i know all of the answers. i surely don't. it is a complicated issue and people have differences of opinion. let me touch on a few areas that i think will explain why poverty is going up and the middle class 15:58:22is going down. and one of them deals with our trade policies. i can remember, mr. president, a number of years ago i was in the 15:58:35house of representatives, and i can remember the lobbyists and the big money interest coming around and saying, well, if you guys only pass nafta, this would create a whole lot of jobs in 15:58:47the united states because we would be able to ship products made in america to mexico. and, in fact, as i recall, and it seems almost humorous now is what they said if we pass nafta it would solve the problem of illegal immigration because the 15:59:04economy of mexico would be so strong, people would stay in their own country and not try to sneak across the border. it is somewhat humorous that that issue was even discussed. but one of the reasons, mr. president, that, 15:59:21unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, we have not dealt with is our starterus -- disasterus trade relations, that is trade 15:59:40policies which have encouraged large corporations in this country to send jobs abroad because they can find workers in other countries, in low-wage countries, who are prepared to work for pennies an hour. 15:59:57and, you know, i think -- not only haven't we addressed this issue from an economic perspective, the way we should -- and i have to tell you, mr. president, i know that during campaigns a lot of members of congress put their
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN DELIVERS REMARKS ON COVID-19 RESPONSE
FS23 WH REMARKS ON COVID RESPONSE AND VACCINE PROGRAM POOL 3 1255 NBC POOL 132255 BIDEN>> Good afternoon. There are 3 things I want to speak briefly, today, with you all about: the new -- new milestone in our progress against Covid-19 here, at home, steps we're taking to fight Covid internationally, and an important tax cut for families with children under the age of 18. And that's where I'm going to start. Today is Tax Day, when -- when everyone's taxes are due. 132326 No one likes to pay taxes, I know. But as my dad used to say, "It's a small price to live in this country." But I want to tell everyone with children why, as they're filling their taxes to -- filing their taxes today, they should know that a new tax cut will be coming their way, for working class and middle class folks, and very soon. As everyone knows, I firmly believe -- we firmly believe the need to make our tax system work for the middle class. 132355 That's why I think we should ask corporations and the top 1% to start paying their fair share, and why we should crack down on millionaires and billionaires who escape taxes by cheating. But I also think we need to give ordinary families a break, a tax break, to help them with the cost of raising their kids. Most people don't know it but, for families with children, we -- we put that tax cut into the American Rescue Plan, which was signed not long ago. 132425 And I signed the tax cut in the law in March. 90% of the families, all middle class and working class families will get this tax cut. It's a one-year cut that reduces your taxes by $3,000 a year for each child you have under the age of 18. Two kids, it's a $6000 tax cut, and if those kids are under the age of six, you will actually get $3600 per child. So as you file your taxes today, know that your tax cut is coming. 132500 But this -- here's the great news: you won't have to wait until your next year's tax return to get that break. I'm announcing today that, on July 15th and the 15th of every month thereafter, throughout the year, you will get deposited in your bank account half of your tax cut at least, $250 per child each month, a direct deposit into your account. So if you're a working family with two kids, you're gonna get $500 a month into your bank account on the 15th of every month, starting in July. 122535 We're getting -- and we are getting you a tax cut this year now when you need it and not have to wait. And if you get your tax cut refund deposited in your bank account automatically, this tax cut will be put into your account automatically. If not, it will be mailed to you. In addition to helping Americans hardpressed and working families, experts have told us this will cut child poverty in America in half. 132602 This tax cut sends a clear and powerful message to American working -- working families with children: Help is here. Now, let me take -- talk to another milestone in a long battle with Covid. 132617 Today, for the first time since the pandemic began, cases -- pandemic cases are down in all 50 states, first time. That's right. Thanks a lot to the hard work of so many people, Covid cases are down in all 50 states. Now, I can't promise that we'll continue this way. We know there will be advances and setbacks, and we know that there are many flare ups that could occur, but if the unvaccinated get vaccinated, they will protect themselves and other unvaccinated people around them. 132654 If they do not, states with low vaccination rates may see those rates go up, may see this progress reversed. Ultimately, those who are not vaccinated will end up paying the price. The vaccinated will continue to be protected against severe illnesses, but others may not be if you're not vaccinated. 132714 But given that the vaccination is convenient and free, it will be a tragedy if -- and a needless one -- to see Covid cases among those who do not get vaccinated go up. We're not done fighting this virus. We still have tens of millions left to vaccinate, but we are making significant progress. 132735 In fact, when tomorrow's vaccination numbers come out, they'll show that 60% -- 60% of Americans have received at least one shot. Everyday, the light at the end of that tunnel is growing brighter. 132750 This vaccination effort has been a historic logistical achievement for our nation. And I want to thank the scientists and the researchers, the companies manufacturing the vaccines, the National Guard, the US Military, FEMA. the nation's governors, doctors, nurses, pharmacists And I want to thank the American people who have stepped up, and done their patriotic duty and gotten vaccinated. 132816 In less than four month, we've gone from less than 6% to 60% of adults in America with at least one shot. We're seeing the results in live -- and we see the results of people's lives and in their livelihood. Deaths are down from Covid by 81%, and also at their lowest level since April of 2020. As a result of our prompt action to roll out the vaccine and boost the economy, we've gone from stagnation to an economy that is growing faster than it has in nearly 40 years. 132852 We've gone from anemic (?) job creation to a record of creation form more -- for a new administration, none has ever created this many jobs in this time frame. The progress is undeniable, but we're not done yet. And some of the hardest work is ahead. We're still losing too many Americans and we still have too many unvaccinated people in America. Last week, the CDC announced that if you're fully vaccinated, you no longer have to wear a mask. 132922 It reported that science -- the science now shows that your vaccination protects you as well as being masked or better than being masked. So you can protect yourself from serious illness from Covid by getting vaccinated or wearing a mask until you're fully vaccinated. Either way, you're protected. As I said last week, some people may want to continue to wear masks even if they are fully vaccinated. That's a decision they can make. 132951 Some business may want to continue to require wearing masks. Let's all be kind and respectful for one another as we come out of this pandemic, and respect those who want to continue to wear a mask even if they've been vaccinated. Above all, let's work together, though, to meet the target, I've said, of 70% of adults -- all adults with the least one shot by July, the fourth. Seven states have already done this. 133018 Getting vaccinated has never been easier. We are -- 80,000 locations where you can get a shot. 90% of you live within five miles of one of those locations. You can now find a vaccine site near you by texting your zip code 438829. 438829. Your zip code and that number. You'll get all the places near you. Many places don't require an appointment. Just walk in and get the shot. It's free, and everyone 12 years and above is eligible. 133055 If you need help getting your vaccine site ---etting to or from your vaccination site, site Lyft and Uber are offering free rides to take you to the vaccination site and bring you back home between May 24th and July the fourth, to anyone who wants to get vaccinated. And I've called on employers to do their part as well, offering their employees paid time off to get vaccinated. 133128 And we've set up a program nationally to reimburse those businesses for the cost of giving employees the time off. Now, it's time to get your shot. We have the vaccine. We've secured enough supply to vaccinate all adults and children above the age of 12. I repeat, now's the time to get your vaccine shot. Now, over the past 118 days, our vaccinations program has led the world. 133158 And today, we're taking an additional step to help the world. We know America will never be fully safe until the pandemic that's raging globally is under control. No ocean is wide enough, no wall's high enough to keep us safe. Rampant disease and death in other countries can destabilize them, those countries, and pose a risk to us as well. 133223 New variants could arise overseas that could put us at greater risk. And we need to help fight the disease around the world to keep us safe here at home, and to do the right thing of helping other people. It's the right thing to do. It's the smart thing to do. It's the strong thing to do. 133229 In March, we shared over four million doses of our AstraZeneca vaccine with Canada and Mexico. At the end of April, we announced that we would provide another 60 million doses of our AstraZeneca vaccine overseas. Remember, this is the vaccine that's not authorized for use in the United States yet. 133301 So we're gonna be sending it to folks, once the FDA has reviewed this and said, "it's safe." This is all the AstraZeneca vaccine produced in the United States -- all of it will be sent to other countries. And today, I'm announcing that we'll also share US authorized vaccine doses of Pfizer and Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, as they become available, with the rest of the world as well. 133330 These are vaccinations and vaccines that are authorized to be put in arms of Americans and, by the end of June, when we'll have taken delivery of enough of such vaccines to protect everyone in the United States, the United States will share at least 20 million of those doses, that extra supply, with other countries. This means over the next six weeks, the United States of America will send 80 million doses overseas. 133357 That represents 13% of the vaccines produced by the United States by the end of June. This will be more vaccines than any country has actually shared to date, five times more than any other country -- more than Russia and China which have donated 15 million doses. 133417 You know, there's a lot of talk about Russia and China influencing the world with vaccines. We want to lead the world with our values, with this demonstration of our innovation, ingenuity, and the fundamental decency of the American people. Just as in World War II, America was the arsenal of democracy in the battle against COVID-19 pandemic, our nation is going to be the arsenal of vaccines for the rest of the world. We'll share these vaccines in the service of ending the pandemic everywhere. 133449 And we will not use our vaccines to secure favors from other countries. We'll work with COVAX, the international organization set up, and other partners to ensure that the vaccines are delivered in a way that is equitable and that follows the science and the public health data. Today's announcement to share 80 million doses is our next step as we ramp up the efforts to respond to COVID-19 around the world. 133515 In the weeks ahead, working the world -- with the world's democracies, we'll coordinate a multilateral effort to end this pandemic. I expect to announce progress in this area at the G7 Summit in the United Kingdom in June which I plan on attending. This is a unique moment in history, and it requires American leadership. 133537 But I want to be clear: beating this pandemic globally is beyond the capacity of any one nation, even the United States. But we'll continue to -- the United States will continue to donate our excess supply, as that supply is delivered to us, but that won't be nearly enough. We need -- what we need to do is lead an entirely new effort, an effort that involves working with the pharmaceutical companies and others and partner nations to vastly increase supply, to create partic-- most of it here in the United States -- the kind of capacity that can beat this pandemic worldwide in a way that creates jobs here at home and saves lives abroad. 133620 This will take longer than our immediate work to donate from the existing supplies. And we're gonna be asking other nations to help shoulder the economic cost of this effort. But the consequences will be more lasting and more dramatic. Doing this will help us beat the pandemic, and leave us with the manufacturing capacity here to prepare for the next crisis, the next vaccine needed. 133645 I'm putting Jeff Zients, who's leading our Covid team and the Covid efforts to beat the virus here in the United States, in charge of this effort. Jeff will be working with our National Security Council and a talented, dedicated team that has been stood up all across our government. It will include Gayle Smith at the State Department, leading in diplomacy, and experts from our Agency for International Development and the Department of Health and Human Services as well. 133712 We're gonna bring the same whole-of-government response to the global effort that made us so successful here, at home. Again, we have enough -- we -- we, the United States has secured enough supply for all eligible Americans, all Americans 12 years -- 12 years old and older. And we still have work to do, though. Hard work. But because we have done so much here, because of the power of American companies, research, and manufacturing, we can continue to do more to help the rest of the world. This is a rapidly changing world. And it's a mistake to bet against democracies. 133755 Just as democracies led the world in the darkness of World War II, democracy will lead the world out of this pandemic. And America will lead those democracies as they work to bring greater health and hope to the world in the months to come. And folks, think back. Four months ago, four months ago, was audacious goal that we had to put a million shots in the arms in my first 100 days as president. 100 million, I should say. We did over 220 million shots in that time frame. 133830 Back then, most adults weren't eligible to get the shot. Now, everyone 12 years older is eligible. And tomorrow, 60% -- by tomorrow, 60% of all American adults will have received at least one shot. Look at what we've done, look at what we've done, America. Look at what you've done, America. There's not a single thing beyond our capacity to do in this country when we decide to do it and we do it together. 133858 We can do whatever we set our minds to do if we do it together. And that's exactly what we're going to do. Solve the problem here in the United States, which we're well on our way of doing, and help solve the problem for the world by organizing the rest of the democracies of the world. I want to thank you all. God bless you and may God protect our troops. Thank you very much. 133918 Q>> Mr. President, will you -- [inaud] ? Mr. President, will you insist on a ceasefire, given the escalation of violence? Q>> Sir, are you worried about sedition in India, sir? Q>> Mr. President, will you now insist upon a ceasefire, given the escalation in violence we've seen over the weekend? 133932 BIDEN>> I'll be speaking with the Prime Minister in an hour, and I'll be able to talk to you after that. Thank you. Q>> Do you still believe -- you've defended Israel's right to defend itself. Do you still believe its actions are proportionate to what they're facing? 133943 [BIDEN AND HARRIS EXIT, INAUD] #####
United States Senate 1200-1300
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will convene and resume consideration of H.R. 1591, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill. 12:16:17.5 quorum call: mr. coleman: madam president. 12:18:50.4 the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. coleman: i ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. coleman: i rise to talk about the reint imraition of our returning soldiers into their families and their communities. i begin by sending a letter to 12:19:07.0 the editor published in the st. paul pioneer press on saturday by army national guard champion lane john morris "it takes communities to bring all soldiers all the way home." without objection i would like to submit the letter for the 12:19:22.3 record. the major is a member of the minnesota -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coleman: major more vis a member of the national guard. there are 2,600 members of the minnesota national guard serving 12:19:38.9 in iraq as part of the brigade combat team deployed last march after spending six months in mississippi. i visited them in december in fallujah and they were excited to return home this month to see their families. 12:19:54.7 some of them are returning home for the first time since september of 2005. but they did not get it come home, madam president. on january 10 of this year it was announced the 134 th would be extended 125 days, hopefully returning home some time later this summer. 12:20:11.1 this additional deployment time, the 134 th will be in iraq 35 days longer than that of any other unit serving in iraq. it is a long time. it is interesting to talk to our national guard folks, they are not complaining. 12:20:27.6 they are doing their duty. but i know it weighs heavilily on my fellow minnesotans and their families and those who represent them in the congress. and the -- when the extension was announced i shared the 12:20:44.4 frustration that they would not be coming home as scheduled. we had deep concerned about the way it was noticed. the families heard about it before the folks in iraq heard about it, while watching a press conference. the army apologized. we have to do better on issues 12:21:00.7 like this. i strugglessed to find the best way forward. i visiting the troops and wondered what we could do to ease the burden. now, madam president, the initial shock and frustration of the extension has subsided it is 12:21:17.0 time to address the challenges they and their families have faced since their deployment and the challenges they will face when they return home. in the last few weeks many of my colleagues have taken to the floor and to the air to speak about the commitment we must 12:21:31.9 make to our returning heroes. there aren't many things we can agree, or to get much agree on in this body but all 100 of us agree that we need to support our troops when they come home, just as much as we support them 12:21:47.6 when they are defending our nation and our freedom abroad. we need to support our troops and their families before, during, and after their deployments. so the question is not, if we should maintain the strong 12:22:02.3 commitment to our returning warriors, but, rather, how. how do we provide the highest level of medical care to our soldiers, our veterans? how do we assist military families for readjusting to their loved one returning home -- a difficult readjust mat? 12:22:17.6 how do we streamline the bureaucratic challenges all soldiers face? how do we sustain our support over the long haul? these young men and women are returning home, some badly wounded, how do we sustain our support over the long haul. the chaplain states "if you are 12:22:36.6 a politician don't politicized 9 shortfalls in the v.a. or military medical system. we are pawns in an election cycle. we are your constituents and counting on you to fix the problems." energize the committee to do 12:22:51.7 right by us. we are not asking for showy programs or asking for tangible signs of support in terms of services offered. madam president, the challenges our heroes will face will not be solved by throwing more money at 12:23:06.8 the problem or be solved by finger-pointing or playing the blame game but will be solved through thoughtful efforts aimed at fixing the problems and we will do it one at a time. madam president, i have been seeking answers to the challenges by reaching out to leaders in my state on this 12:23:24.2 issue. and to the leadership of those involved in the v.a. health care system. having conversations with the directors of the v.a. hospitals in minneapolis, st. cloud, to see if there is anything we can do to deliver the highest level of care. 12:23:37.0 one of the good things that came out of the horrible stories we saw of what was happening in the outpatient facilities at walter reed is that my state, and i'm sure the committee chair's state, folks went back and did a room by room review to find out, are there failings? 12:23:54.2 are there things that needed to be fixed? how can we improve the quality of care? minnesota folks have, i think, a high degree of confidence in the care in our v.a. facilities. in minneapolis and in st. loud. and-st. cloud and we count fargo 12:24:13.0 as ours. i met with certains organizations including the v.f.w. and minnesota paralyzed veterans it hear their questions. most importantly i spent time touring my state to meet with military families of the i 12:24:27.4 talked to active duty soldiers, the national guard and veterans. many have a loved one stationed overseas while others have a loved one just returned. there are tremendous support groups in our state. they have a lot of -- families who really did not know each 12:24:47.7 other beforehand have become united with a special bond. one said, she hoped their husbands -- we did not know each other before the deployment, now we are friends. so you have new extended families. 12:25:01.6 the good lord gave us two ears and one mouth and it is amazing when we use them if that proportion. i take some time to talk about some of the many cerz i heard from folks across my state and how to better address them. madam president, more than anything, one thing is clear, 12:25:19.2 and education benefits for our soldiers continue to be of paramount importance. unfortunately, the national guard and army reserve are still operating under antiquated system of education benefits that does not reflect the additional and critical role 12:25:33.6 they are playing in the global war on terror. under current policy our national guard and reserve soldiers have to use their education benefits when they are in the national guard and reserve. i had the mother of a national guard soldier visit my office in washington to tell my staff and 12:25:49.5 me about her son's particular situation. her son had with the -- had beenin the national intx years. he has been deployed to bosnia and now iraq with uptraining time spent away from home within 12:26:06.0 the united states. because of his extension he will not be able to finish school before he enlistment ends and because national guard troops 12:26:15.5 cannot use their education benefits after separating from the service, we will leave him on his own to find a way to pay for the reminder of his studies and his graduate school, should he choose that path. after all this, after serving extended time on active duty 12:26:32.9 defending our country. there's a bill in the senate to correct this discrepancy. it is my honor to join senator lincoln in our total force enhancement and integration act. 12:26:48.3 it is important. this bill allows national guard and reserve troops to use their education benefits up to 10 years from the time they separate from their service. it alsos their benefits according to their time on active duty. 12:27:01.7 this is a good start it adjusting education benefits in a changing environment. another concern i heard during the listening session was the difficulty our troops have applying for college when overseas. many troops want to began their education but going through the college application process is 12:27:18.0 hard enough if you work on your home computer in your living room. it is harder if you are station onned 7,000 miles away from home with limited access to phone. mail, or free time, for that matter. we need to find a way to help the deployed soldiers use their 12:27:34.2 education benefits by helping them through the difficult application process. not only will this improve participation in the program but it will improve our soldiers' morale and their ability to reinti grate. a good thing i heard, some of the colleges are getting this. 12:27:49.9 some of the state system and now the private college system in minnesota is understanding some of their chags and -- their challenges and i applaud this partnership. a final note on education, is the lack of benefit structure 12:28:08.2 program for spouses. for spouses of members of those who are now in the armed forces. mr. president, with over 2,600 minnesotans stationed in iraq we have hundreds of military spouses working to keep their families together while their loved one is overseas. 12:28:23.6 many of them, by the way, were going to school but now their husband is overseas or the wife is overseas and they have to take a job and give up their education. they have less income and they have to take care of their families. one spouse told me that she had been both a single mom and a 12:28:39.9 military wife while trying to go to school and being a single mom was much easier. we need to look at ways to extend benefits to military spouses who are working at home to keep their families together while they try to continue their education. 12:28:55.2 we know the importance of investment education, why should we deny benefits to military spouses who have sacrifices so much? another critical issue i continue to hear of is health care for our returning soldiers and veterans. again, we were shocked to see the conditions revealed at 12:29:11.9 walter reed hospital at the end of february. i am pleased that those who are responsible are being held to account. while the conditions in the outpatient facilities at walter reed are being fixed, now is a good time to revisit the overall structure of health care for our troops and veterans. i share the concern that 12:29:28.4 chaplain morris states in the letter to the press that "we will fix the crisis but forget the problem." i will take a few minutes to discuss the particular challenges i have heard in regard to health care and what i hope can be done to fix them. madam president, i continue to 12:29:43.4 hear about the difficulty associated with tri-care. on my visits around the state i learned that only 40% of health care providers in minnesota are tri-care providers. this is an improvement from the past. but it is still unacceptable. from a health care providers we 12:29:59.0 hear the program is painful to work with and it costs them significant amounts in staff time and energy to navigate the paperwork. for our military families, especially those in rural areas, traveling to a provider that will take tri-care is often a 12:30:14.6 lengthy process that is simply not possible. we need to look at ways to stream line the tri-care system and, if necessary, further incentivize providers to accept tri-care. another problem i heard from my visits around the state is the inability of returning troops to have marriage counseling covered 12:30:31.0 by their benefit plans.ñ tricare does not cover the counseling that is often necessary when our warriors return to their homes and to their families. many of our troops have been deployed for extended periods of time and when they return home, 12:30:47.4 it's difficult to readjust. it's difficult to readjust. and, clearly, this is the kind -- maybe we didn't think about it before, but we better be thinking about it now. if a returning soldier wanted to receive marriage counseling, they must go to their family 12:31:03.6 doctor and get a referral for menial health issues caused by manchet then it becomes possible for a soldier to act on mental 12:31:15.1 health concerns and see a marriage and family therapist. we've got to do better for the our returning warriors than this, madam president. another major issue we confront with tricare is the lack of tri-chemical dependency treatment centers. because of the burdensome 12:31:29.6 certification process, we have 257 chemical dependency treatment centers that are certified by the state of minnesota but in the a single one is certified by tricare. so if any of our returning heroes come home and develops a problem with substance abuse, there is in the a single place 12:31:45.0 in minnesota that they can immediately go for for help. this is a critical oversight which must be corrected. another issue we need to be prepared to handle is post-traumatic stress disorder. we all no he that ptsd is going to be an issue we will face for 12:32:01.2 years to come as more and more of our soldiers come home from abroad. and if we are committed to dealing with it, as we should be, we need to be committed to the facilities and people who will be working to cure the disorder on a daily basis. one way we can do this is to 12:32:17.3 incentivize mental health care professionals to join our military hospitals system. i've learned in my outtreatment across the state that it is difficult to recruit these individuals to the v.a. and military hospitals in roorl 12:32:31.3 areas. i have always said that the quality of your health care should not depend on your zip code. this is especially true for our veterans and military families. we also need to make sure we have adequate facilities for the influx of participation in veterans' programs for the next 12:32:47.3 few years. while most veterans i've spoken with over the past few months have told me that the care they receive at the facilities in minnesota is nothing short of excellent, we need to plan for the strain an increasing number of veterans will have on our facilities that are operating at 12:33:02.9 near capacity. finally, madam president, i'd like to stress the importance of a comprehensive strategy for integrating our returning heroes into society. quite frankly, this is bigger than any one single issue confronting our veterans and military families but 12:33:19.4 encompasses everything i have talked about so far today. in my home state of minnesota, the national guard has developed an innovative program known as "beyond the yellow ribbon" to conduct reintegration academies for the families and their loved ones who are returning from 12:33:35.4 iraq. we have watched with great pleasure as this program has helped countless families deal with the everry day families that aren't touched by washington rhetoric. we are able to engage our returning heroes to ensure that 12:33:51.4 they are comfortably shifting back to life out of the combat zone. i will continue to work with our minnesota national guard, the families, communities, and veterans across the state so we can continue this program and use the experience we gain from it to benefit the entire nation. madam president, inscribed on 12:34:09.7 the base of the korean war memorial is the following: "our nation honors our sons and daughters who have answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met." these words ring as true today as many of our servicemen and 12:34:26.6 women are fighting terror overseas in this war on terror, and we need to make sure that the sacrifice they met is met by a commitment here to do all we can to ease the reentry and take care of their concerns as they 12:34:42.4 return. we need to provide support for the soldiers. we need to provide support for their families, and we need to do it before, during, and after they return home from abroad. it's not about rhetoric. it's not about politics. its a about a commitment to 12:34:58.5 listen and a commitment to get things done. and i look forward to working with my colleagues to this end during the coming months and years. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the 12:35:13.8 senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. last month at a senate agriculture committee hearing, rhonda stewart, a single mother from hamilton, ohio, in butler county, in the southwest part of my state, testified that despite working full-time, caring for 12:35:33.4 her 9-year-old son wyatt, even serving as president of the p.t.a., she and her son must rely on food stamps to survive. at the end of each month, she told you she must forego dinner so her son can eat because the food stamps, about $6 a day, 12:35:49.5 just don't go far enough. at the beginning of the month, she gefs wyatt pork chops and he knows he eats better at the beginning than at the end of the month when she's running out of money and at the end of the mont she often sits with him and 12:36:03.9 tells him she's not feeling well as her son eats because she wants him to have enough when she doesn't. on the same day that ms. stewart testified, u.s. treasury 12:36:14.1 secretary paulson told the senate banking committee -- this was about an hour later -- that the economy was doing well. repeated over and over again that g.d.p. was up 3% -- g.d.p. was 3u7% for the quarter. he kept insisting, senator, you 12:36:29.1 don't understand. things are good, things are going very well in this country. g.d.p. is up 3%. people are making money. companies are profitable. well, madam president, worker -- when you think about all of that here's the story. profits are up, the stok stock market is doing well, 12:36:43.9 millionaires are engaging exorbitant tax breaks and worker productivity is up but the workers aren't sharing in the profits, in the increasing profits that most corporations are making. workers across the country too often are losing their jobs. a single mother working 12:36:59.6 full-time can't afford to eat dinner, even with the $6 a day in food stamps. a "wall street journal" article reported this week that since 2001, the economy has grown by 16% -- by 16% since 2001 while worker pay, held for inflation, 12:37:17.6 has grown less than 1%. 16% growth in the economy, profits up, workers making -- gaining less than 1%. wrongheaded economic policies and job-killing trade agreements have fueled income disparity at 12:37:34.0 home and abroad. a few years ago, after the north american free trade agreement passed, several years after that, congress was considering another one of these job-killing trade agreements. i traveled to mcallen, texas, where i crossed the border into mexico, rent add car with a 12:37:50.4 couple of friends and went to visit some families in mexico, just the other side of the american border, maybe a couple of miles from the united states. i met a husband and wife who worked for general electric, mexico, they had -- they lived in a shack about 20 feet by 20 feet. 12:38:06.8 no running water, no electricity, dirt floors. when it rained hard, the floors turned to mud. they worked 10 hours a day, six days a week, each made less than $1 an hour. behind their little shack was a ditch, three feet wide, perhaps, full of who knows what -- human 12:38:26.3 industrial waste going through this ditch. the children playing in this ditch -- in fact, the american medical association said the area along the mexican-u.s. border is one of the most toxic places in the entire western hemisphere. we then went and visited an auto plant, a modern, high-tech auto 12:38:44.1 plant nearbivment the plant in mexico looked just like an auto plant in lordstown, ohio, or in avon lake, ohio, or in cincinnati. the were working hard, the floors were clean, the tech million to was up to date, the 12:38:58.0 productivity was very good, but there was one difference between the mexican auto plant and the auto plant you'd see in ohio. and that difference was the mexican auto plant did not have a parking lot. the mexican workers are not making enough to buy the dhars 12:39:14.1 they made. you can go halfway around the world to a motorola plant in mall lay shavment the workers aren't micking enough to buy the cell phones they make. or come halfway again around the world to costa rica. they don't make enough to buy 12:39:30.7 the toys for the children, that they maifnlg the workers in a nike plant aren't make enough to buy the shoes that they're making. these workers are simply not sharing in the wealth they create for their employer. that's why these trade 12:39:47.1 agreements, these job-killing trade agreements, don't work. only when workers share in the wealth they create will we know that our trade policy is working. in fact, when the poor in the developing world, those people who are working hard, working 56 hours -- 50 to 60 hours a week, 12:40:04.2 working with their hand, only when the poor in those countries are able to make -- able to buy the products that they're making for us will we know that our trade policy in the united states is actually working. during the fight against the central american free trade agreement two years ago ago, the 12:40:19.6 largest-ever bipartisan fairtrade group was formed, democrats and republicans, environmental groups, groups -- religious groups, labor organizations, business groups, united and together we changed forever the debate on trade. 12:40:34.9 that coalition is alive and well, not just in the house of representatives but also for the first time in the united states senate, already working to revamp our nation's trade policy, already working to establish a manufacturing policy. senators byron dorgan, lindsey 12:40:50.5 graham, and i -- a republican and a republican and i -- have introduced legislation that would ban imports from sweatshops. we've called for tougher world trade organization action to be taken against china, a country where at least in 2005, 5,000 political prisoners were 12:41:09.5 executed -- 5,000. the human rights violations 12:41:12.0 continue in china. the oppression of workers continues in china. the kinds of -- the kinds of values that we hold dear in this country are violated every day by that government, and every day by these companies doing business in china. 12:41:26.5 a country that manipulates its currency and continues to exploit its workers. our government must renegotiate these trade agreements -- the trade agreements so they lift up workers here and abroad, that reward u.s. businesses that stay here, reward u.s. businesses 12:41:42.5 that produce here, reward u.s. businesses that create jobs here. and that means doing away with current fast-track authority. that means doing away with the fundamentally flawed north american free trade agreement -- nafta model trade agreements. make no mistake, we want trade, 12:41:59.4 we want more of it. but we want fair trade. it is not a matter of if we real vamp u.s. trade policy, but when and who benefits from that trade policy. america is a nation of innovation. the future of our manufacturing policies firmly planted in the research and development of 12:42:15.9 alternative energy. today i spoke with several people from ohio, several business owners and plant managers, who were part of a group called the manufacturing extension partnership. it is a relatively small government program that helps small manufacturers, small businesses in ohio and across 12:42:31.8 the country, help them learn to compete better, help them learn to cut their health care costs, help them learn to be more energy-efficient, help them learn how to export some of their product. yet we have a long way to go. observer land college is home to 12:42:48.5 -- oberland college is home to the largest campus completely powered by solar energy. when they built this building, they had to buy the components, the solar panels from japan and germany because we don't make 12:43:02.8 enough of them in this country. the same when you talk about wind turbines. another company makes components for wind turbines in ohio. it is a great opportunity as all 12:43:20.6 of alternative energy production s it is a great opportunity for us as a nation to use that in part to help rebuild our manufacturing capabilities, to cut energy prices and to do the right thing for the environment. it works in every way. that's why, madam president, as 12:43:36.5 we in the next couple of months, as we move toward votes on trade promotion authority, we move forward perhaps on votes on bilateral trade agreements with colombia, with peru, with korea, and ultimately with panama and 12:43:52.9 perhaps other countries, it's time that we pass trade agreements in this country that lift workers up, that help our small manufacturers, that help to continue to preserve and expand our manufacturing base. it's american values to reward hard work. 12:44:09.4 this congress has a real opportunity not just to talk about a different trade regimen, but to go if a very different direction, to replace trade promotion authority with a trade promotion authority legislation model that will help to lift our workers up, help create jobs in this country, help in the 12:44:26.5 developing world lift their living standards up so that we can continue to -- so that we can reward work and continue to fight for our values as a nation. thank you, madam president. i suggest -- 12:44:44.2 a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. rhode island, excuse me. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, i would ask upon completion of my remarks that senator alexander of tennessee be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without 12:44:58.5 objection. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, the emergency appropriations bill passed by the senate this morning is urgently needed for our troops in iraq and afghanistan, for our wounded verts and for scores of americans facing natural disasters on the home front. and i want to commend chairman 12:45:15.7 byrd and senator cochran for their hard work and close collaboration and as the acting chairman of the military construction veterans afairs and related agencies subcommittee, i also want to thank senator hutchison and her able staff along with my staff for the help 12:45:32.0 that they gave in crafting portions of the supplemental which dealt with military construction and veterans affairs.ñ the total for military construction and veterans affairs in this supplemental is $6.548 billion. 12:45:47.9 it includes in title 1, $1.644 billion for military construction. also contained in this section is a proviso restricting the obligation of $280 million until the secretary of defense certifies that none of the funds 12:46:03.2 will be used for purpose of establishing permanent u.s. military bases in iraq. 12:46:11.3 and i think that's an important point to clarify. title 2 of the recommendation includes a total of $4.9 billion for military construction and also for activities at the department of veterans affairs. 12:46:24.0 this includes $3.137 billion to restore funding for brac, which is very important to reset our forces as they are returned from overseas and to help reconfigure all of the services. this fully funds the department of defense's request in fy 2007 12:46:42.4 for this account and will keep the brac process on track. because of the cost of the war are not associated strictly with activities on the battlefield, the recommendation includes $1.76 billion for the department 12:46:57.7 of veterans affairs. in crafting the v.a. portion of this bill, we targeted the funding specifically for purposes of building capacity to deal with the influx of o.e.f. and o.i.f. veterans. hiring claims adjudicators and leveraging technology to 12:47:15.3 expedite benefit claims in upgrading existing v.a. facilities. the v.a. health care system is one of the best in the world. it has specialties in a number of areas, including spinal cord injury and blind rehabilitation. because of these specialties, 12:47:31.9 the v.a. has become a great resource for the treatment of troops wounded in iraq and afghanistan. however, due to the nature of combat in iraq and afghanistan coupled with the advanceness battlefield medicine, both the d.o.d. health care system and 12:47:47.1 the v.a. health care system are treating more military personnel with complex and multiple wounds, and particularly traumatic brain injury wounds. in response to this, in 2005 the congress provided funding to the department of veterans affairs 12:48:03.5 to establish polly trauma -- poly trauma centers. the funding contained in this bill builds on the success of these centers by providing a total of over $163 million in polntrauma care for services ranging from establishing more 12:48:19.8 level 1 comprehensive poly trauma centers to creating poly trauma residential rehabilitation programs to upgrading the entire polytrauma network system. 12:48:35.4 the bill also adds $150 million for entitlements to readjustment counseling, substance abuse programs and mental health treatment capacity. these are specialty areas that the v.a. will need to continue to expand to deal with readjustment issues facing 12:48:50.6 veterans returning from the war zone. in order to begin making progress toward deficiencies identified by the v.a. facilities conditions assessment and to prevent a possible walter reed building 18 situation, the recommendation includes $550 12:49:08.0 million in nonrecurring maintenance and $356 million in minor construction. in addition to funding provided to the department, the supplemental also includes a general provision directing the national academy of public administration to conduct an 12:49:23.9 independent analysis of the management, structure and processes that are in place at the v.a. with regard to providing health care to active duty and veterans of the wars in afghanistan and iraq as well as the provisions of providing 12:49:39.8 benefits to veterans of these conflicts. this study will assist the v.a. and congress in identifying the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape that far too many of our soldiers go through in their transition to the v.a. 12:49:54.3 the bill also includes a provision requiring the congressional budget office to conduct a budget study of the current and future long-term budget impacts of o.e.f. and o.i.f. on the department of veterans administration. we know with the number of these young men and women who have 12:50:11.8 been severely injured, many with brain injuries, and the likely life spans of 50 or 60 more years, that we will have to provide for long-term, consistent robust funding. we should identify that number now and provide for that continuous support for the next 12:50:28.5 several decades. this supplemental marks the continuing high priority that the senate places on ensuring that yesterday, today and tomorrow soldiers are cared for in the highest manner once they have done their duty and once they have come home to america. let me make one other point. 12:50:45.5 i was somewhat disappointed in this bill because i was attempting to include an amendment to rehabilitate a levy system in winsocket, rhode island, to ensure it is up to federal standards. 12:51:00.5 this amendment would have provided $3.25 million for the city of winsocket to rehabilitate the levy, including 12:51:08.3 replacing important tkpwaeupt cables. the present cables are about 40 years oefpltd according to the army -- old. according to the army corps of engineers, failure of a cable can result in an uncontrolled discharge downstream of the dam. 12:51:23.7 winsocket is an old industrial city, densely populated. and these levies protect that city. the project was built between december 1963 and april 1967 by the army corps of engineers. the corps estimates cumulative flooding benefits for the 12:51:39.2 blackstone valley project on more than $82 million. this project in place protects at least $82 million worth of property. given the importance of in flood protection to winsocket and communities along the blackstone river, i believe that federal 12:51:54.3 assistance is warranted to protect life and property. these deficiencies were discovered as a direct result of katrina. we learned in katrina that there were projects, levies that were unsatisfactory. they failed. they closed -- caused billions of dollars in damages. 12:52:11.2 being forewarned we hoped was going to be forearmed, that having studied these problems, now we could come together in congress to provide the resources to help these local communities, many of which do not have the resources themselves to sustain this kind of immediate and rapid 12:52:28.6 expenditure. a recent assessment by the corps found that this project levees and dam did need repairs. the corps has been given the -- the city, rather, until february of 2008 to make these repairs. otherwise, the project may no 12:52:44.1 longer be eligible for federal construction funding through the army corps of engineers. in addition, if these repairs are not made, the federal emergency management agency may determine that the levees no longer offer adequate flood protection and could require 12:53:00.4 residents to buy flood insurance, which is a very expensive proposition. the city of winsocket is economically distressed. it needs federal assistance. there are other communities around the country that might be in similar condition. 12:53:14.9 i think they also should be assisted. the devastation brought by katrina in new orleans shows us what could happen. now we have the knowledge, the foreknowledge, and now we have to afpblgt and i'm disappoint -- to act. and i'm disappointed we did not act in this situation to protect this complex of levees. 12:53:31.9 i will continue to bring this issue to my colleagues again and again because i believe with this knowledge requires action, prompt appropriate action to ensure this community is protected. let me make a very final point because my colleague has been very patient and very 12:53:48.2 considerate in allowing me to go ahead. we have included in this supplemental language with respect to our policy in iraq, which i think is important, indeed perhaps historic. it recognizes that we should begin a phased redeployment of 12:54:03.7 our forces. it recognizes that we also must maintain certain missions in iraq. counterterrorism operations, training iraqi security forces, protecting our forces. but it does emphasize the fact that we should begin at a date 12:54:20.2 certain going forward to take out our forces at a pace, at a level decided by operational commanders. and there is a goal, not a fixed deadline but a goal that our combat forces, those not performing these residual 12:54:38.2 missions, should be out of iraq by march 31, 2008. this is a solution proposed essentially by the iraq study group. it has been recommended, endorsed by the public sentiment of the american people by a wide margin. 12:54:53.6 it allows us to continue missions that are critical to the safety, security of not only ourselves but of the region, but it does, we hope, disengage us from a potential and sometimes very real civil war in iraq. i hope that in the deliberations 12:55:10.6 with the house, we can come up with a measure that combines the best elements of both versions of the spending bill. i hope we can bring this to the president and discuss it with him. it does represent, i think, the 12:55:26.3 sentiment of the american people. it does represent not only the sentiment that we change course in iraq. but as this budget does, we fully fund our forces in iraq. so, i'm hopeful that we can make progress and that we can send to 12:55:41.4 the president a bill after discussing it with him that could be signed rather than vetoed. that is my hope at this moment. and at this point, i would yield the floor to my colleague from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president? 12:56:00.7 the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i believe i'm to be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: that is 12:56:06.9 correct. mr. alexander: mr. president, i'd like to make remarks about three matters of importance to the great american outdoors, all of which have been happening this week and which are important for our country. first, i would like to comment on a provision that the senate struck from the iraq 12:56:25.7 supplemental bill this morning when we were considering it. we struck it in a procedural move based upon a point of order that i raised. and it was a provision that put into the supplemental 12:56:43.8 appropriations bill a billboard amnesty proposal, a billboard amnesty proposal in the midst of legislation that was supposed to be in support of our troops. i called it a billboard amnesty 12:56:59.4 proposal because it suddenly treats as legal billboard sites that have been illegal for 40 years and effectively gutting the highway beautification act of 1965, which is one of the legacies of former first lady, 12:57:16.9 ladybird johnson. i think this deserves a little attention and a little explanation before we leave it, because it was a full-scale assault on one of the most important pieces of legislation 12:57:30.8 that helps keep our country beautiful at a time when we are growing and adding to it a lot of technological developments. there are three problems with this billboard amnesty proposal, as i saw it. 12:57:46.0 the first was the proposal does, or would have done for the billboard industry something that the law does not allow for churches, doesn't allow for schools, doesn't allow for businesses, doesn't allow for other structures. but since 1965 have been on 12:58:03.6 illegal or nonconforming sites. here's what was really happening. in 1965 at the urging of president johnson and mrs. johnson, the nation decided that it would restrict billboards both in terms of 12:58:19.9 their location and their size. as we often do with legislation, we looked ahead and said the billboards could not be some places, could be some places, had to be this size. and as the interstate system grew across the country, much of 12:58:36.3 it is relatively free of large billboards or has a limited number of billboards. the question then arose about what do we do about the billboards and signs that are already up prior to 1965? and the decision was made by the congress at that time to say 12:58:52.6 we'll leave those sites up. we'll grandfather them in. as long as they can stay there, they're fine. but when they fall down, they're gone. 12:59:06.2 in other words, we have been waiting for 40 years for those sites to die a natural death. that was the compromise in 1965. and many of these billboards are large billboards and are in places that we really don't want them; rural areas, scenic areas across the country. 12:59:24.1 but that was the decision we made. now the problem with this legislation as it came into the supplemental appropriations appl for troops was that it said in 13 states suddenly, all of the billboards that were in that state, that were on sites where 12:59:41.8 it would be illegal to put a new billboard were suddenly legal. in other words, it was instant amnesty, overnight amnesty for illegal billboards. now, there are a lot of billboards like this. in the state of tennessee, for 12:59:56.9 example, there are nearly 3,000 sites where there are now billboards, but when those billboards fall down they can't ever be put back up. we've known that for 40 years. in north carolina, probably 2,600 illegal sites in the sense
United States Senate 1200-1300
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will convene and resume consideration of H.R. 1591, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill. 12:16:17.5 quorum call: mr. coleman: madam president. 12:18:50.4 the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. coleman: i ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. coleman: i rise to talk about the reint imraition of our returning soldiers into their families and their communities. i begin by sending a letter to 12:19:07.0 the editor published in the st. paul pioneer press on saturday by army national guard champion lane john morris "it takes communities to bring all soldiers all the way home." without objection i would like to submit the letter for the 12:19:22.3 record. the major is a member of the minnesota -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coleman: major more vis a member of the national guard. there are 2,600 members of the minnesota national guard serving 12:19:38.9 in iraq as part of the brigade combat team deployed last march after spending six months in mississippi. i visited them in december in fallujah and they were excited to return home this month to see their families. 12:19:54.7 some of them are returning home for the first time since september of 2005. but they did not get it come home, madam president. on january 10 of this year it was announced the 134 th would be extended 125 days, hopefully returning home some time later this summer. 12:20:11.1 this additional deployment time, the 134 th will be in iraq 35 days longer than that of any other unit serving in iraq. it is a long time. it is interesting to talk to our national guard folks, they are not complaining. 12:20:27.6 they are doing their duty. but i know it weighs heavilily on my fellow minnesotans and their families and those who represent them in the congress. and the -- when the extension was announced i shared the 12:20:44.4 frustration that they would not be coming home as scheduled. we had deep concerned about the way it was noticed. the families heard about it before the folks in iraq heard about it, while watching a press conference. the army apologized. we have to do better on issues 12:21:00.7 like this. i strugglessed to find the best way forward. i visiting the troops and wondered what we could do to ease the burden. now, madam president, the initial shock and frustration of the extension has subsided it is 12:21:17.0 time to address the challenges they and their families have faced since their deployment and the challenges they will face when they return home. in the last few weeks many of my colleagues have taken to the floor and to the air to speak about the commitment we must 12:21:31.9 make to our returning heroes. there aren't many things we can agree, or to get much agree on in this body but all 100 of us agree that we need to support our troops when they come home, just as much as we support them 12:21:47.6 when they are defending our nation and our freedom abroad. we need to support our troops and their families before, during, and after their deployments. so the question is not, if we should maintain the strong 12:22:02.3 commitment to our returning warriors, but, rather, how. how do we provide the highest level of medical care to our soldiers, our veterans? how do we assist military families for readjusting to their loved one returning home -- a difficult readjust mat? 12:22:17.6 how do we streamline the bureaucratic challenges all soldiers face? how do we sustain our support over the long haul? these young men and women are returning home, some badly wounded, how do we sustain our support over the long haul. the chaplain states "if you are 12:22:36.6 a politician don't politicized 9 shortfalls in the v.a. or military medical system. we are pawns in an election cycle. we are your constituents and counting on you to fix the problems." energize the committee to do 12:22:51.7 right by us. we are not asking for showy programs or asking for tangible signs of support in terms of services offered. madam president, the challenges our heroes will face will not be solved by throwing more money at 12:23:06.8 the problem or be solved by finger-pointing or playing the blame game but will be solved through thoughtful efforts aimed at fixing the problems and we will do it one at a time. madam president, i have been seeking answers to the challenges by reaching out to leaders in my state on this 12:23:24.2 issue. and to the leadership of those involved in the v.a. health care system. having conversations with the directors of the v.a. hospitals in minneapolis, st. cloud, to see if there is anything we can do to deliver the highest level of care. 12:23:37.0 one of the good things that came out of the horrible stories we saw of what was happening in the outpatient facilities at walter reed is that my state, and i'm sure the committee chair's state, folks went back and did a room by room review to find out, are there failings? 12:23:54.2 are there things that needed to be fixed? how can we improve the quality of care? minnesota folks have, i think, a high degree of confidence in the care in our v.a. facilities. in minneapolis and in st. loud. and-st. cloud and we count fargo 12:24:13.0 as ours. i met with certains organizations including the v.f.w. and minnesota paralyzed veterans it hear their questions. most importantly i spent time touring my state to meet with military families of the i 12:24:27.4 talked to active duty soldiers, the national guard and veterans. many have a loved one stationed overseas while others have a loved one just returned. there are tremendous support groups in our state. they have a lot of -- families who really did not know each 12:24:47.7 other beforehand have become united with a special bond. one said, she hoped their husbands -- we did not know each other before the deployment, now we are friends. so you have new extended families. 12:25:01.6 the good lord gave us two ears and one mouth and it is amazing when we use them if that proportion. i take some time to talk about some of the many cerz i heard from folks across my state and how to better address them. madam president, more than anything, one thing is clear, 12:25:19.2 and education benefits for our soldiers continue to be of paramount importance. unfortunately, the national guard and army reserve are still operating under antiquated system of education benefits that does not reflect the additional and critical role 12:25:33.6 they are playing in the global war on terror. under current policy our national guard and reserve soldiers have to use their education benefits when they are in the national guard and reserve. i had the mother of a national guard soldier visit my office in washington to tell my staff and 12:25:49.5 me about her son's particular situation. her son had with the -- had beenin the national intx years. he has been deployed to bosnia and now iraq with uptraining time spent away from home within 12:26:06.0 the united states. because of his extension he will not be able to finish school before he enlistment ends and because national guard troops 12:26:15.5 cannot use their education benefits after separating from the service, we will leave him on his own to find a way to pay for the reminder of his studies and his graduate school, should he choose that path. after all this, after serving extended time on active duty 12:26:32.9 defending our country. there's a bill in the senate to correct this discrepancy. it is my honor to join senator lincoln in our total force enhancement and integration act. 12:26:48.3 it is important. this bill allows national guard and reserve troops to use their education benefits up to 10 years from the time they separate from their service. it alsos their benefits according to their time on active duty. 12:27:01.7 this is a good start it adjusting education benefits in a changing environment. another concern i heard during the listening session was the difficulty our troops have applying for college when overseas. many troops want to began their education but going through the college application process is 12:27:18.0 hard enough if you work on your home computer in your living room. it is harder if you are station onned 7,000 miles away from home with limited access to phone. mail, or free time, for that matter. we need to find a way to help the deployed soldiers use their 12:27:34.2 education benefits by helping them through the difficult application process. not only will this improve participation in the program but it will improve our soldiers' morale and their ability to reinti grate. a good thing i heard, some of the colleges are getting this. 12:27:49.9 some of the state system and now the private college system in minnesota is understanding some of their chags and -- their challenges and i applaud this partnership. a final note on education, is the lack of benefit structure 12:28:08.2 program for spouses. for spouses of members of those who are now in the armed forces. mr. president, with over 2,600 minnesotans stationed in iraq we have hundreds of military spouses working to keep their families together while their loved one is overseas. 12:28:23.6 many of them, by the way, were going to school but now their husband is overseas or the wife is overseas and they have to take a job and give up their education. they have less income and they have to take care of their families. one spouse told me that she had been both a single mom and a 12:28:39.9 military wife while trying to go to school and being a single mom was much easier. we need to look at ways to extend benefits to military spouses who are working at home to keep their families together while they try to continue their education. 12:28:55.2 we know the importance of investment education, why should we deny benefits to military spouses who have sacrifices so much? another critical issue i continue to hear of is health care for our returning soldiers and veterans. again, we were shocked to see the conditions revealed at 12:29:11.9 walter reed hospital at the end of february. i am pleased that those who are responsible are being held to account. while the conditions in the outpatient facilities at walter reed are being fixed, now is a good time to revisit the overall structure of health care for our troops and veterans. i share the concern that 12:29:28.4 chaplain morris states in the letter to the press that "we will fix the crisis but forget the problem." i will take a few minutes to discuss the particular challenges i have heard in regard to health care and what i hope can be done to fix them. madam president, i continue to 12:29:43.4 hear about the difficulty associated with tri-care. on my visits around the state i learned that only 40% of health care providers in minnesota are tri-care providers. this is an improvement from the past. but it is still unacceptable. from a health care providers we 12:29:59.0 hear the program is painful to work with and it costs them significant amounts in staff time and energy to navigate the paperwork. for our military families, especially those in rural areas, traveling to a provider that will take tri-care is often a 12:30:14.6 lengthy process that is simply not possible. we need to look at ways to stream line the tri-care system and, if necessary, further incentivize providers to accept tri-care. another problem i heard from my visits around the state is the inability of returning troops to have marriage counseling covered 12:30:31.0 by their benefit plans.ñ tricare does not cover the counseling that is often necessary when our warriors return to their homes and to their families. many of our troops have been deployed for extended periods of time and when they return home, 12:30:47.4 it's difficult to readjust. it's difficult to readjust. and, clearly, this is the kind -- maybe we didn't think about it before, but we better be thinking about it now. if a returning soldier wanted to receive marriage counseling, they must go to their family 12:31:03.6 doctor and get a referral for menial health issues caused by manchet then it becomes possible for a soldier to act on mental 12:31:15.1 health concerns and see a marriage and family therapist. we've got to do better for the our returning warriors than this, madam president. another major issue we confront with tricare is the lack of tri-chemical dependency treatment centers. because of the burdensome 12:31:29.6 certification process, we have 257 chemical dependency treatment centers that are certified by the state of minnesota but in the a single one is certified by tricare. so if any of our returning heroes come home and develops a problem with substance abuse, there is in the a single place 12:31:45.0 in minnesota that they can immediately go for for help. this is a critical oversight which must be corrected. another issue we need to be prepared to handle is post-traumatic stress disorder. we all no he that ptsd is going to be an issue we will face for 12:32:01.2 years to come as more and more of our soldiers come home from abroad. and if we are committed to dealing with it, as we should be, we need to be committed to the facilities and people who will be working to cure the disorder on a daily basis. one way we can do this is to 12:32:17.3 incentivize mental health care professionals to join our military hospitals system. i've learned in my outtreatment across the state that it is difficult to recruit these individuals to the v.a. and military hospitals in roorl 12:32:31.3 areas. i have always said that the quality of your health care should not depend on your zip code. this is especially true for our veterans and military families. we also need to make sure we have adequate facilities for the influx of participation in veterans' programs for the next 12:32:47.3 few years. while most veterans i've spoken with over the past few months have told me that the care they receive at the facilities in minnesota is nothing short of excellent, we need to plan for the strain an increasing number of veterans will have on our facilities that are operating at 12:33:02.9 near capacity. finally, madam president, i'd like to stress the importance of a comprehensive strategy for integrating our returning heroes into society. quite frankly, this is bigger than any one single issue confronting our veterans and military families but 12:33:19.4 encompasses everything i have talked about so far today. in my home state of minnesota, the national guard has developed an innovative program known as "beyond the yellow ribbon" to conduct reintegration academies for the families and their loved ones who are returning from 12:33:35.4 iraq. we have watched with great pleasure as this program has helped countless families deal with the everry day families that aren't touched by washington rhetoric. we are able to engage our returning heroes to ensure that 12:33:51.4 they are comfortably shifting back to life out of the combat zone. i will continue to work with our minnesota national guard, the families, communities, and veterans across the state so we can continue this program and use the experience we gain from it to benefit the entire nation. madam president, inscribed on 12:34:09.7 the base of the korean war memorial is the following: "our nation honors our sons and daughters who have answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met." these words ring as true today as many of our servicemen and 12:34:26.6 women are fighting terror overseas in this war on terror, and we need to make sure that the sacrifice they met is met by a commitment here to do all we can to ease the reentry and take care of their concerns as they 12:34:42.4 return. we need to provide support for the soldiers. we need to provide support for their families, and we need to do it before, during, and after they return home from abroad. it's not about rhetoric. it's not about politics. its a about a commitment to 12:34:58.5 listen and a commitment to get things done. and i look forward to working with my colleagues to this end during the coming months and years. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the 12:35:13.8 senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. last month at a senate agriculture committee hearing, rhonda stewart, a single mother from hamilton, ohio, in butler county, in the southwest part of my state, testified that despite working full-time, caring for 12:35:33.4 her 9-year-old son wyatt, even serving as president of the p.t.a., she and her son must rely on food stamps to survive. at the end of each month, she told you she must forego dinner so her son can eat because the food stamps, about $6 a day, 12:35:49.5 just don't go far enough. at the beginning of the month, she gefs wyatt pork chops and he knows he eats better at the beginning than at the end of the month when she's running out of money and at the end of the mont she often sits with him and 12:36:03.9 tells him she's not feeling well as her son eats because she wants him to have enough when she doesn't. on the same day that ms. stewart testified, u.s. treasury 12:36:14.1 secretary paulson told the senate banking committee -- this was about an hour later -- that the economy was doing well. repeated over and over again that g.d.p. was up 3% -- g.d.p. was 3u7% for the quarter. he kept insisting, senator, you 12:36:29.1 don't understand. things are good, things are going very well in this country. g.d.p. is up 3%. people are making money. companies are profitable. well, madam president, worker -- when you think about all of that here's the story. profits are up, the stok stock market is doing well, 12:36:43.9 millionaires are engaging exorbitant tax breaks and worker productivity is up but the workers aren't sharing in the profits, in the increasing profits that most corporations are making. workers across the country too often are losing their jobs. a single mother working 12:36:59.6 full-time can't afford to eat dinner, even with the $6 a day in food stamps. a "wall street journal" article reported this week that since 2001, the economy has grown by 16% -- by 16% since 2001 while worker pay, held for inflation, 12:37:17.6 has grown less than 1%. 16% growth in the economy, profits up, workers making -- gaining less than 1%. wrongheaded economic policies and job-killing trade agreements have fueled income disparity at 12:37:34.0 home and abroad. a few years ago, after the north american free trade agreement passed, several years after that, congress was considering another one of these job-killing trade agreements. i traveled to mcallen, texas, where i crossed the border into mexico, rent add car with a 12:37:50.4 couple of friends and went to visit some families in mexico, just the other side of the american border, maybe a couple of miles from the united states. i met a husband and wife who worked for general electric, mexico, they had -- they lived in a shack about 20 feet by 20 feet. 12:38:06.8 no running water, no electricity, dirt floors. when it rained hard, the floors turned to mud. they worked 10 hours a day, six days a week, each made less than $1 an hour. behind their little shack was a ditch, three feet wide, perhaps, full of who knows what -- human 12:38:26.3 industrial waste going through this ditch. the children playing in this ditch -- in fact, the american medical association said the area along the mexican-u.s. border is one of the most toxic places in the entire western hemisphere. we then went and visited an auto plant, a modern, high-tech auto 12:38:44.1 plant nearbivment the plant in mexico looked just like an auto plant in lordstown, ohio, or in avon lake, ohio, or in cincinnati. the were working hard, the floors were clean, the tech million to was up to date, the 12:38:58.0 productivity was very good, but there was one difference between the mexican auto plant and the auto plant you'd see in ohio. and that difference was the mexican auto plant did not have a parking lot. the mexican workers are not making enough to buy the dhars 12:39:14.1 they made. you can go halfway around the world to a motorola plant in mall lay shavment the workers aren't micking enough to buy the cell phones they make. or come halfway again around the world to costa rica. they don't make enough to buy 12:39:30.7 the toys for the children, that they maifnlg the workers in a nike plant aren't make enough to buy the shoes that they're making. these workers are simply not sharing in the wealth they create for their employer. that's why these trade 12:39:47.1 agreements, these job-killing trade agreements, don't work. only when workers share in the wealth they create will we know that our trade policy is working. in fact, when the poor in the developing world, those people who are working hard, working 56 hours -- 50 to 60 hours a week, 12:40:04.2 working with their hand, only when the poor in those countries are able to make -- able to buy the products that they're making for us will we know that our trade policy in the united states is actually working. during the fight against the central american free trade agreement two years ago ago, the 12:40:19.6 largest-ever bipartisan fairtrade group was formed, democrats and republicans, environmental groups, groups -- religious groups, labor organizations, business groups, united and together we changed forever the debate on trade. 12:40:34.9 that coalition is alive and well, not just in the house of representatives but also for the first time in the united states senate, already working to revamp our nation's trade policy, already working to establish a manufacturing policy. senators byron dorgan, lindsey 12:40:50.5 graham, and i -- a republican and a republican and i -- have introduced legislation that would ban imports from sweatshops. we've called for tougher world trade organization action to be taken against china, a country where at least in 2005, 5,000 political prisoners were 12:41:09.5 executed -- 5,000. the human rights violations 12:41:12.0 continue in china. the oppression of workers continues in china. the kinds of -- the kinds of values that we hold dear in this country are violated every day by that government, and every day by these companies doing business in china. 12:41:26.5 a country that manipulates its currency and continues to exploit its workers. our government must renegotiate these trade agreements -- the trade agreements so they lift up workers here and abroad, that reward u.s. businesses that stay here, reward u.s. businesses 12:41:42.5 that produce here, reward u.s. businesses that create jobs here. and that means doing away with current fast-track authority. that means doing away with the fundamentally flawed north american free trade agreement -- nafta model trade agreements. make no mistake, we want trade, 12:41:59.4 we want more of it. but we want fair trade. it is not a matter of if we real vamp u.s. trade policy, but when and who benefits from that trade policy. america is a nation of innovation. the future of our manufacturing policies firmly planted in the research and development of 12:42:15.9 alternative energy. today i spoke with several people from ohio, several business owners and plant managers, who were part of a group called the manufacturing extension partnership. it is a relatively small government program that helps small manufacturers, small businesses in ohio and across 12:42:31.8 the country, help them learn to compete better, help them learn to cut their health care costs, help them learn to be more energy-efficient, help them learn how to export some of their product. yet we have a long way to go. observer land college is home to 12:42:48.5 -- oberland college is home to the largest campus completely powered by solar energy. when they built this building, they had to buy the components, the solar panels from japan and germany because we don't make 12:43:02.8 enough of them in this country. the same when you talk about wind turbines. another company makes components for wind turbines in ohio. it is a great opportunity as all 12:43:20.6 of alternative energy production s it is a great opportunity for us as a nation to use that in part to help rebuild our manufacturing capabilities, to cut energy prices and to do the right thing for the environment. it works in every way. that's why, madam president, as 12:43:36.5 we in the next couple of months, as we move toward votes on trade promotion authority, we move forward perhaps on votes on bilateral trade agreements with colombia, with peru, with korea, and ultimately with panama and 12:43:52.9 perhaps other countries, it's time that we pass trade agreements in this country that lift workers up, that help our small manufacturers, that help to continue to preserve and expand our manufacturing base. it's american values to reward hard work. 12:44:09.4 this congress has a real opportunity not just to talk about a different trade regimen, but to go if a very different direction, to replace trade promotion authority with a trade promotion authority legislation model that will help to lift our workers up, help create jobs in this country, help in the 12:44:26.5 developing world lift their living standards up so that we can continue to -- so that we can reward work and continue to fight for our values as a nation. thank you, madam president. i suggest -- 12:44:44.2 a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. rhode island, excuse me. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, i would ask upon completion of my remarks that senator alexander of tennessee be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without 12:44:58.5 objection. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, the emergency appropriations bill passed by the senate this morning is urgently needed for our troops in iraq and afghanistan, for our wounded verts and for scores of americans facing natural disasters on the home front. and i want to commend chairman 12:45:15.7 byrd and senator cochran for their hard work and close collaboration and as the acting chairman of the military construction veterans afairs and related agencies subcommittee, i also want to thank senator hutchison and her able staff along with my staff for the help 12:45:32.0 that they gave in crafting portions of the supplemental which dealt with military construction and veterans affairs.ñ the total for military construction and veterans affairs in this supplemental is $6.548 billion. 12:45:47.9 it includes in title 1, $1.644 billion for military construction. also contained in this section is a proviso restricting the obligation of $280 million until the secretary of defense certifies that none of the funds 12:46:03.2 will be used for purpose of establishing permanent u.s. military bases in iraq. 12:46:11.3 and i think that's an important point to clarify. title 2 of the recommendation includes a total of $4.9 billion for military construction and also for activities at the department of veterans affairs. 12:46:24.0 this includes $3.137 billion to restore funding for brac, which is very important to reset our forces as they are returned from overseas and to help reconfigure all of the services. this fully funds the department of defense's request in fy 2007 12:46:42.4 for this account and will keep the brac process on track. because of the cost of the war are not associated strictly with activities on the battlefield, the recommendation includes $1.76 billion for the department 12:46:57.7 of veterans affairs. in crafting the v.a. portion of this bill, we targeted the funding specifically for purposes of building capacity to deal with the influx of o.e.f. and o.i.f. veterans. hiring claims adjudicators and leveraging technology to 12:47:15.3 expedite benefit claims in upgrading existing v.a. facilities. the v.a. health care system is one of the best in the world. it has specialties in a number of areas, including spinal cord injury and blind rehabilitation. because of these specialties, 12:47:31.9 the v.a. has become a great resource for the treatment of troops wounded in iraq and afghanistan. however, due to the nature of combat in iraq and afghanistan coupled with the advanceness battlefield medicine, both the d.o.d. health care system and 12:47:47.1 the v.a. health care system are treating more military personnel with complex and multiple wounds, and particularly traumatic brain injury wounds. in response to this, in 2005 the congress provided funding to the department of veterans affairs 12:48:03.5 to establish polly trauma -- poly trauma centers. the funding contained in this bill builds on the success of these centers by providing a total of over $163 million in polntrauma care for services ranging from establishing more 12:48:19.8 level 1 comprehensive poly trauma centers to creating poly trauma residential rehabilitation programs to upgrading the entire polytrauma network system. 12:48:35.4 the bill also adds $150 million for entitlements to readjustment counseling, substance abuse programs and mental health treatment capacity. these are specialty areas that the v.a. will need to continue to expand to deal with readjustment issues facing 12:48:50.6 veterans returning from the war zone. in order to begin making progress toward deficiencies identified by the v.a. facilities conditions assessment and to prevent a possible walter reed building 18 situation, the recommendation includes $550 12:49:08.0 million in nonrecurring maintenance and $356 million in minor construction. in addition to funding provided to the department, the supplemental also includes a general provision directing the national academy of public administration to conduct an 12:49:23.9 independent analysis of the management, structure and processes that are in place at the v.a. with regard to providing health care to active duty and veterans of the wars in afghanistan and iraq as well as the provisions of providing 12:49:39.8 benefits to veterans of these conflicts. this study will assist the v.a. and congress in identifying the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape that far too many of our soldiers go through in their transition to the v.a. 12:49:54.3 the bill also includes a provision requiring the congressional budget office to conduct a budget study of the current and future long-term budget impacts of o.e.f. and o.i.f. on the department of veterans administration. we know with the number of these young men and women who have 12:50:11.8 been severely injured, many with brain injuries, and the likely life spans of 50 or 60 more years, that we will have to provide for long-term, consistent robust funding. we should identify that number now and provide for that continuous support for the next 12:50:28.5 several decades. this supplemental marks the continuing high priority that the senate places on ensuring that yesterday, today and tomorrow soldiers are cared for in the highest manner once they have done their duty and once they have come home to america. let me make one other point. 12:50:45.5 i was somewhat disappointed in this bill because i was attempting to include an amendment to rehabilitate a levy system in winsocket, rhode island, to ensure it is up to federal standards. 12:51:00.5 this amendment would have provided $3.25 million for the city of winsocket to rehabilitate the levy, including 12:51:08.3 replacing important tkpwaeupt cables. the present cables are about 40 years oefpltd according to the army -- old. according to the army corps of engineers, failure of a cable can result in an uncontrolled discharge downstream of the dam. 12:51:23.7 winsocket is an old industrial city, densely populated. and these levies protect that city. the project was built between december 1963 and april 1967 by the army corps of engineers. the corps estimates cumulative flooding benefits for the 12:51:39.2 blackstone valley project on more than $82 million. this project in place protects at least $82 million worth of property. given the importance of in flood protection to winsocket and communities along the blackstone river, i believe that federal 12:51:54.3 assistance is warranted to protect life and property. these deficiencies were discovered as a direct result of katrina. we learned in katrina that there were projects, levies that were unsatisfactory. they failed. they closed -- caused billions of dollars in damages. 12:52:11.2 being forewarned we hoped was going to be forearmed, that having studied these problems, now we could come together in congress to provide the resources to help these local communities, many of which do not have the resources themselves to sustain this kind of immediate and rapid 12:52:28.6 expenditure. a recent assessment by the corps found that this project levees and dam did need repairs. the corps has been given the -- the city, rather, until february of 2008 to make these repairs. otherwise, the project may no 12:52:44.1 longer be eligible for federal construction funding through the army corps of engineers. in addition, if these repairs are not made, the federal emergency management agency may determine that the levees no longer offer adequate flood protection and could require 12:53:00.4 residents to buy flood insurance, which is a very expensive proposition. the city of winsocket is economically distressed. it needs federal assistance. there are other communities around the country that might be in similar condition. 12:53:14.9 i think they also should be assisted. the devastation brought by katrina in new orleans shows us what could happen. now we have the knowledge, the foreknowledge, and now we have to afpblgt and i'm disappoint -- to act. and i'm disappointed we did not act in this situation to protect this complex of levees. 12:53:31.9 i will continue to bring this issue to my colleagues again and again because i believe with this knowledge requires action, prompt appropriate action to ensure this community is protected. let me make a very final point because my colleague has been very patient and very 12:53:48.2 considerate in allowing me to go ahead. we have included in this supplemental language with respect to our policy in iraq, which i think is important, indeed perhaps historic. it recognizes that we should begin a phased redeployment of 12:54:03.7 our forces. it recognizes that we also must maintain certain missions in iraq. counterterrorism operations, training iraqi security forces, protecting our forces. but it does emphasize the fact that we should begin at a date 12:54:20.2 certain going forward to take out our forces at a pace, at a level decided by operational commanders. and there is a goal, not a fixed deadline but a goal that our combat forces, those not performing these residual 12:54:38.2 missions, should be out of iraq by march 31, 2008. this is a solution proposed essentially by the iraq study group. it has been recommended, endorsed by the public sentiment of the american people by a wide margin. 12:54:53.6 it allows us to continue missions that are critical to the safety, security of not only ourselves but of the region, but it does, we hope, disengage us from a potential and sometimes very real civil war in iraq. i hope that in the deliberations 12:55:10.6 with the house, we can come up with a measure that combines the best elements of both versions of the spending bill. i hope we can bring this to the president and discuss it with him. it does represent, i think, the 12:55:26.3 sentiment of the american people. it does represent not only the sentiment that we change course in iraq. but as this budget does, we fully fund our forces in iraq. so, i'm hopeful that we can make progress and that we can send to 12:55:41.4 the president a bill after discussing it with him that could be signed rather than vetoed. that is my hope at this moment. and at this point, i would yield the floor to my colleague from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president? 12:56:00.7 the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i believe i'm to be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: that is 12:56:06.9 correct. mr. alexander: mr. president, i'd like to make remarks about three matters of importance to the great american outdoors, all of which have been happening this week and which are important for our country. first, i would like to comment on a provision that the senate struck from the iraq 12:56:25.7 supplemental bill this morning when we were considering it. we struck it in a procedural move based upon a point of order that i raised. and it was a provision that put into the supplemental 12:56:43.8 appropriations bill a billboard amnesty proposal, a billboard amnesty proposal in the midst of legislation that was supposed to be in support of our troops. i called it a billboard amnesty 12:56:59.4 proposal because it suddenly treats as legal billboard sites that have been illegal for 40 years and effectively gutting the highway beautification act of 1965, which is one of the legacies of former first lady, 12:57:16.9 ladybird johnson. i think this deserves a little attention and a little explanation before we leave it, because it was a full-scale assault on one of the most important pieces of legislation 12:57:30.8 that helps keep our country beautiful at a time when we are growing and adding to it a lot of technological developments. there are three problems with this billboard amnesty proposal, as i saw it. 12:57:46.0 the first was the proposal does, or would have done for the billboard industry something that the law does not allow for churches, doesn't allow for schools, doesn't allow for businesses, doesn't allow for other structures. but since 1965 have been on 12:58:03.6 illegal or nonconforming sites. here's what was really happening. in 1965 at the urging of president johnson and mrs. johnson, the nation decided that it would restrict billboards both in terms of 12:58:19.9 their location and their size. as we often do with legislation, we looked ahead and said the billboards could not be some places, could be some places, had to be this size. and as the interstate system grew across the country, much of 12:58:36.3 it is relatively free of large billboards or has a limited number of billboards. the question then arose about what do we do about the billboards and signs that are already up prior to 1965? and the decision was made by the congress at that time to say 12:58:52.6 we'll leave those sites up. we'll grandfather them in. as long as they can stay there, they're fine. but when they fall down, they're gone. 12:59:06.2 in other words, we have been waiting for 40 years for those sites to die a natural death. that was the compromise in 1965. and many of these billboards are large billboards and are in places that we really don't want them; rural areas, scenic areas across the country. 12:59:24.1 but that was the decision we made. now the problem with this legislation as it came into the supplemental appropriations appl for troops was that it said in 13 states suddenly, all of the billboards that were in that state, that were on sites where 12:59:41.8 it would be illegal to put a new billboard were suddenly legal. in other words, it was instant amnesty, overnight amnesty for illegal billboards. now, there are a lot of billboards like this. in the state of tennessee, for 12:59:56.9 example, there are nearly 3,000 sites where there are now billboards, but when those billboards fall down they can't ever be put back up. we've known that for 40 years. in north carolina, probably 2,600 illegal sites in the sense
United States Senate 1200-1300
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will convene and resume consideration of H.R. 1591, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill. 12:16:17.5 quorum call: mr. coleman: madam president. 12:18:50.4 the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. coleman: i ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. coleman: i rise to talk about the reint imraition of our returning soldiers into their families and their communities. i begin by sending a letter to 12:19:07.0 the editor published in the st. paul pioneer press on saturday by army national guard champion lane john morris "it takes communities to bring all soldiers all the way home." without objection i would like to submit the letter for the 12:19:22.3 record. the major is a member of the minnesota -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coleman: major more vis a member of the national guard. there are 2,600 members of the minnesota national guard serving 12:19:38.9 in iraq as part of the brigade combat team deployed last march after spending six months in mississippi. i visited them in december in fallujah and they were excited to return home this month to see their families. 12:19:54.7 some of them are returning home for the first time since september of 2005. but they did not get it come home, madam president. on january 10 of this year it was announced the 134 th would be extended 125 days, hopefully returning home some time later this summer. 12:20:11.1 this additional deployment time, the 134 th will be in iraq 35 days longer than that of any other unit serving in iraq. it is a long time. it is interesting to talk to our national guard folks, they are not complaining. 12:20:27.6 they are doing their duty. but i know it weighs heavilily on my fellow minnesotans and their families and those who represent them in the congress. and the -- when the extension was announced i shared the 12:20:44.4 frustration that they would not be coming home as scheduled. we had deep concerned about the way it was noticed. the families heard about it before the folks in iraq heard about it, while watching a press conference. the army apologized. we have to do better on issues 12:21:00.7 like this. i strugglessed to find the best way forward. i visiting the troops and wondered what we could do to ease the burden. now, madam president, the initial shock and frustration of the extension has subsided it is 12:21:17.0 time to address the challenges they and their families have faced since their deployment and the challenges they will face when they return home. in the last few weeks many of my colleagues have taken to the floor and to the air to speak about the commitment we must 12:21:31.9 make to our returning heroes. there aren't many things we can agree, or to get much agree on in this body but all 100 of us agree that we need to support our troops when they come home, just as much as we support them 12:21:47.6 when they are defending our nation and our freedom abroad. we need to support our troops and their families before, during, and after their deployments. so the question is not, if we should maintain the strong 12:22:02.3 commitment to our returning warriors, but, rather, how. how do we provide the highest level of medical care to our soldiers, our veterans? how do we assist military families for readjusting to their loved one returning home -- a difficult readjust mat? 12:22:17.6 how do we streamline the bureaucratic challenges all soldiers face? how do we sustain our support over the long haul? these young men and women are returning home, some badly wounded, how do we sustain our support over the long haul. the chaplain states "if you are 12:22:36.6 a politician don't politicized 9 shortfalls in the v.a. or military medical system. we are pawns in an election cycle. we are your constituents and counting on you to fix the problems." energize the committee to do 12:22:51.7 right by us. we are not asking for showy programs or asking for tangible signs of support in terms of services offered. madam president, the challenges our heroes will face will not be solved by throwing more money at 12:23:06.8 the problem or be solved by finger-pointing or playing the blame game but will be solved through thoughtful efforts aimed at fixing the problems and we will do it one at a time. madam president, i have been seeking answers to the challenges by reaching out to leaders in my state on this 12:23:24.2 issue. and to the leadership of those involved in the v.a. health care system. having conversations with the directors of the v.a. hospitals in minneapolis, st. cloud, to see if there is anything we can do to deliver the highest level of care. 12:23:37.0 one of the good things that came out of the horrible stories we saw of what was happening in the outpatient facilities at walter reed is that my state, and i'm sure the committee chair's state, folks went back and did a room by room review to find out, are there failings? 12:23:54.2 are there things that needed to be fixed? how can we improve the quality of care? minnesota folks have, i think, a high degree of confidence in the care in our v.a. facilities. in minneapolis and in st. loud. and-st. cloud and we count fargo 12:24:13.0 as ours. i met with certains organizations including the v.f.w. and minnesota paralyzed veterans it hear their questions. most importantly i spent time touring my state to meet with military families of the i 12:24:27.4 talked to active duty soldiers, the national guard and veterans. many have a loved one stationed overseas while others have a loved one just returned. there are tremendous support groups in our state. they have a lot of -- families who really did not know each 12:24:47.7 other beforehand have become united with a special bond. one said, she hoped their husbands -- we did not know each other before the deployment, now we are friends. so you have new extended families. 12:25:01.6 the good lord gave us two ears and one mouth and it is amazing when we use them if that proportion. i take some time to talk about some of the many cerz i heard from folks across my state and how to better address them. madam president, more than anything, one thing is clear, 12:25:19.2 and education benefits for our soldiers continue to be of paramount importance. unfortunately, the national guard and army reserve are still operating under antiquated system of education benefits that does not reflect the additional and critical role 12:25:33.6 they are playing in the global war on terror. under current policy our national guard and reserve soldiers have to use their education benefits when they are in the national guard and reserve. i had the mother of a national guard soldier visit my office in washington to tell my staff and 12:25:49.5 me about her son's particular situation. her son had with the -- had beenin the national intx years. he has been deployed to bosnia and now iraq with uptraining time spent away from home within 12:26:06.0 the united states. because of his extension he will not be able to finish school before he enlistment ends and because national guard troops 12:26:15.5 cannot use their education benefits after separating from the service, we will leave him on his own to find a way to pay for the reminder of his studies and his graduate school, should he choose that path. after all this, after serving extended time on active duty 12:26:32.9 defending our country. there's a bill in the senate to correct this discrepancy. it is my honor to join senator lincoln in our total force enhancement and integration act. 12:26:48.3 it is important. this bill allows national guard and reserve troops to use their education benefits up to 10 years from the time they separate from their service. it alsos their benefits according to their time on active duty. 12:27:01.7 this is a good start it adjusting education benefits in a changing environment. another concern i heard during the listening session was the difficulty our troops have applying for college when overseas. many troops want to began their education but going through the college application process is 12:27:18.0 hard enough if you work on your home computer in your living room. it is harder if you are station onned 7,000 miles away from home with limited access to phone. mail, or free time, for that matter. we need to find a way to help the deployed soldiers use their 12:27:34.2 education benefits by helping them through the difficult application process. not only will this improve participation in the program but it will improve our soldiers' morale and their ability to reinti grate. a good thing i heard, some of the colleges are getting this. 12:27:49.9 some of the state system and now the private college system in minnesota is understanding some of their chags and -- their challenges and i applaud this partnership. a final note on education, is the lack of benefit structure 12:28:08.2 program for spouses. for spouses of members of those who are now in the armed forces. mr. president, with over 2,600 minnesotans stationed in iraq we have hundreds of military spouses working to keep their families together while their loved one is overseas. 12:28:23.6 many of them, by the way, were going to school but now their husband is overseas or the wife is overseas and they have to take a job and give up their education. they have less income and they have to take care of their families. one spouse told me that she had been both a single mom and a 12:28:39.9 military wife while trying to go to school and being a single mom was much easier. we need to look at ways to extend benefits to military spouses who are working at home to keep their families together while they try to continue their education. 12:28:55.2 we know the importance of investment education, why should we deny benefits to military spouses who have sacrifices so much? another critical issue i continue to hear of is health care for our returning soldiers and veterans. again, we were shocked to see the conditions revealed at 12:29:11.9 walter reed hospital at the end of february. i am pleased that those who are responsible are being held to account. while the conditions in the outpatient facilities at walter reed are being fixed, now is a good time to revisit the overall structure of health care for our troops and veterans. i share the concern that 12:29:28.4 chaplain morris states in the letter to the press that "we will fix the crisis but forget the problem." i will take a few minutes to discuss the particular challenges i have heard in regard to health care and what i hope can be done to fix them. madam president, i continue to 12:29:43.4 hear about the difficulty associated with tri-care. on my visits around the state i learned that only 40% of health care providers in minnesota are tri-care providers. this is an improvement from the past. but it is still unacceptable. from a health care providers we 12:29:59.0 hear the program is painful to work with and it costs them significant amounts in staff time and energy to navigate the paperwork. for our military families, especially those in rural areas, traveling to a provider that will take tri-care is often a 12:30:14.6 lengthy process that is simply not possible. we need to look at ways to stream line the tri-care system and, if necessary, further incentivize providers to accept tri-care. another problem i heard from my visits around the state is the inability of returning troops to have marriage counseling covered 12:30:31.0 by their benefit plans.? tricare does not cover the counseling that is often necessary when our warriors return to their homes and to their families. many of our troops have been deployed for extended periods of time and when they return home, 12:30:47.4 it's difficult to readjust. it's difficult to readjust. and, clearly, this is the kind -- maybe we didn't think about it before, but we better be thinking about it now. if a returning soldier wanted to receive marriage counseling, they must go to their family 12:31:03.6 doctor and get a referral for menial health issues caused by manchet then it becomes possible for a soldier to act on mental 12:31:15.1 health concerns and see a marriage and family therapist. we've got to do better for the our returning warriors than this, madam president. another major issue we confront with tricare is the lack of tri-chemical dependency treatment centers. because of the burdensome 12:31:29.6 certification process, we have 257 chemical dependency treatment centers that are certified by the state of minnesota but in the a single one is certified by tricare. so if any of our returning heroes come home and develops a problem with substance abuse, there is in the a single place 12:31:45.0 in minnesota that they can immediately go for for help. this is a critical oversight which must be corrected. another issue we need to be prepared to handle is post-traumatic stress disorder. we all no he that ptsd is going to be an issue we will face for 12:32:01.2 years to come as more and more of our soldiers come home from abroad. and if we are committed to dealing with it, as we should be, we need to be committed to the facilities and people who will be working to cure the disorder on a daily basis. one way we can do this is to 12:32:17.3 incentivize mental health care professionals to join our military hospitals system. i've learned in my outtreatment across the state that it is difficult to recruit these individuals to the v.a. and military hospitals in roorl 12:32:31.3 areas. i have always said that the quality of your health care should not depend on your zip code. this is especially true for our veterans and military families. we also need to make sure we have adequate facilities for the influx of participation in veterans' programs for the next 12:32:47.3 few years. while most veterans i've spoken with over the past few months have told me that the care they receive at the facilities in minnesota is nothing short of excellent, we need to plan for the strain an increasing number of veterans will have on our facilities that are operating at 12:33:02.9 near capacity. finally, madam president, i'd like to stress the importance of a comprehensive strategy for integrating our returning heroes into society. quite frankly, this is bigger than any one single issue confronting our veterans and military families but 12:33:19.4 encompasses everything i have talked about so far today. in my home state of minnesota, the national guard has developed an innovative program known as "beyond the yellow ribbon" to conduct reintegration academies for the families and their loved ones who are returning from 12:33:35.4 iraq. we have watched with great pleasure as this program has helped countless families deal with the everry day families that aren't touched by washington rhetoric. we are able to engage our returning heroes to ensure that 12:33:51.4 they are comfortably shifting back to life out of the combat zone. i will continue to work with our minnesota national guard, the families, communities, and veterans across the state so we can continue this program and use the experience we gain from it to benefit the entire nation. madam president, inscribed on 12:34:09.7 the base of the korean war memorial is the following: "our nation honors our sons and daughters who have answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met." these words ring as true today as many of our servicemen and 12:34:26.6 women are fighting terror overseas in this war on terror, and we need to make sure that the sacrifice they met is met by a commitment here to do all we can to ease the reentry and take care of their concerns as they 12:34:42.4 return. we need to provide support for the soldiers. we need to provide support for their families, and we need to do it before, during, and after they return home from abroad. it's not about rhetoric. it's not about politics. its a about a commitment to 12:34:58.5 listen and a commitment to get things done. and i look forward to working with my colleagues to this end during the coming months and years. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the 12:35:13.8 senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. last month at a senate agriculture committee hearing, rhonda stewart, a single mother from hamilton, ohio, in butler county, in the southwest part of my state, testified that despite working full-time, caring for 12:35:33.4 her 9-year-old son wyatt, even serving as president of the p.t.a., she and her son must rely on food stamps to survive. at the end of each month, she told you she must forego dinner so her son can eat because the food stamps, about $6 a day, 12:35:49.5 just don't go far enough. at the beginning of the month, she gefs wyatt pork chops and he knows he eats better at the beginning than at the end of the month when she's running out of money and at the end of the mont she often sits with him and 12:36:03.9 tells him she's not feeling well as her son eats because she wants him to have enough when she doesn't. on the same day that ms. stewart testified, u.s. treasury 12:36:14.1 secretary paulson told the senate banking committee -- this was about an hour later -- that the economy was doing well. repeated over and over again that g.d.p. was up 3% -- g.d.p. was 3u7% for the quarter. he kept insisting, senator, you 12:36:29.1 don't understand. things are good, things are going very well in this country. g.d.p. is up 3%. people are making money. companies are profitable. well, madam president, worker -- when you think about all of that here's the story. profits are up, the stok stock market is doing well, 12:36:43.9 millionaires are engaging exorbitant tax breaks and worker productivity is up but the workers aren't sharing in the profits, in the increasing profits that most corporations are making. workers across the country too often are losing their jobs. a single mother working 12:36:59.6 full-time can't afford to eat dinner, even with the $6 a day in food stamps. a "wall street journal" article reported this week that since 2001, the economy has grown by 16% -- by 16% since 2001 while worker pay, held for inflation, 12:37:17.6 has grown less than 1%. 16% growth in the economy, profits up, workers making -- gaining less than 1%. wrongheaded economic policies and job-killing trade agreements have fueled income disparity at 12:37:34.0 home and abroad. a few years ago, after the north american free trade agreement passed, several years after that, congress was considering another one of these job-killing trade agreements. i traveled to mcallen, texas, where i crossed the border into mexico, rent add car with a 12:37:50.4 couple of friends and went to visit some families in mexico, just the other side of the american border, maybe a couple of miles from the united states. i met a husband and wife who worked for general electric, mexico, they had -- they lived in a shack about 20 feet by 20 feet. 12:38:06.8 no running water, no electricity, dirt floors. when it rained hard, the floors turned to mud. they worked 10 hours a day, six days a week, each made less than $1 an hour. behind their little shack was a ditch, three feet wide, perhaps, full of who knows what -- human 12:38:26.3 industrial waste going through this ditch. the children playing in this ditch -- in fact, the american medical association said the area along the mexican-u.s. border is one of the most toxic places in the entire western hemisphere. we then went and visited an auto plant, a modern, high-tech auto 12:38:44.1 plant nearbivment the plant in mexico looked just like an auto plant in lordstown, ohio, or in avon lake, ohio, or in cincinnati. the were working hard, the floors were clean, the tech million to was up to date, the 12:38:58.0 productivity was very good, but there was one difference between the mexican auto plant and the auto plant you'd see in ohio. and that difference was the mexican auto plant did not have a parking lot. the mexican workers are not making enough to buy the dhars 12:39:14.1 they made. you can go halfway around the world to a motorola plant in mall lay shavment the workers aren't micking enough to buy the cell phones they make. or come halfway again around the world to costa rica. they don't make enough to buy 12:39:30.7 the toys for the children, that they maifnlg the workers in a nike plant aren't make enough to buy the shoes that they're making. these workers are simply not sharing in the wealth they create for their employer. that's why these trade 12:39:47.1 agreements, these job-killing trade agreements, don't work. only when workers share in the wealth they create will we know that our trade policy is working. in fact, when the poor in the developing world, those people who are working hard, working 56 hours -- 50 to 60 hours a week, 12:40:04.2 working with their hand, only when the poor in those countries are able to make -- able to buy the products that they're making for us will we know that our trade policy in the united states is actually working. during the fight against the central american free trade agreement two years ago ago, the 12:40:19.6 largest-ever bipartisan fairtrade group was formed, democrats and republicans, environmental groups, groups -- religious groups, labor organizations, business groups, united and together we changed forever the debate on trade. 12:40:34.9 that coalition is alive and well, not just in the house of representatives but also for the first time in the united states senate, already working to revamp our nation's trade policy, already working to establish a manufacturing policy. senators byron dorgan, lindsey 12:40:50.5 graham, and i -- a republican and a republican and i -- have introduced legislation that would ban imports from sweatshops. we've called for tougher world trade organization action to be taken against china, a country where at least in 2005, 5,000 political prisoners were 12:41:09.5 executed -- 5,000. the human rights violations 12:41:12.0 continue in china. the oppression of workers continues in china. the kinds of -- the kinds of values that we hold dear in this country are violated every day by that government, and every day by these companies doing business in china. 12:41:26.5 a country that manipulates its currency and continues to exploit its workers. our government must renegotiate these trade agreements -- the trade agreements so they lift up workers here and abroad, that reward u.s. businesses that stay here, reward u.s. businesses 12:41:42.5 that produce here, reward u.s. businesses that create jobs here. and that means doing away with current fast-track authority. that means doing away with the fundamentally flawed north american free trade agreement -- nafta model trade agreements. make no mistake, we want trade, 12:41:59.4 we want more of it. but we want fair trade. it is not a matter of if we real vamp u.s. trade policy, but when and who benefits from that trade policy. america is a nation of innovation. the future of our manufacturing policies firmly planted in the research and development of 12:42:15.9 alternative energy. today i spoke with several people from ohio, several business owners and plant managers, who were part of a group called the manufacturing extension partnership. it is a relatively small government program that helps small manufacturers, small businesses in ohio and across 12:42:31.8 the country, help them learn to compete better, help them learn to cut their health care costs, help them learn to be more energy-efficient, help them learn how to export some of their product. yet we have a long way to go. observer land college is home to 12:42:48.5 -- oberland college is home to the largest campus completely powered by solar energy. when they built this building, they had to buy the components, the solar panels from japan and germany because we don't make 12:43:02.8 enough of them in this country. the same when you talk about wind turbines. another company makes components for wind turbines in ohio. it is a great opportunity as all 12:43:20.6 of alternative energy production s it is a great opportunity for us as a nation to use that in part to help rebuild our manufacturing capabilities, to cut energy prices and to do the right thing for the environment. it works in every way. that's why, madam president, as 12:43:36.5 we in the next couple of months, as we move toward votes on trade promotion authority, we move forward perhaps on votes on bilateral trade agreements with colombia, with peru, with korea, and ultimately with panama and 12:43:52.9 perhaps other countries, it's time that we pass trade agreements in this country that lift workers up, that help our small manufacturers, that help to continue to preserve and expand our manufacturing base. it's american values to reward hard work. 12:44:09.4 this congress has a real opportunity not just to talk about a different trade regimen, but to go if a very different direction, to replace trade promotion authority with a trade promotion authority legislation model that will help to lift our workers up, help create jobs in this country, help in the 12:44:26.5 developing world lift their living standards up so that we can continue to -- so that we can reward work and continue to fight for our values as a nation. thank you, madam president. i suggest -- 12:44:44.2 a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. rhode island, excuse me. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, i would ask upon completion of my remarks that senator alexander of tennessee be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without 12:44:58.5 objection. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, the emergency appropriations bill passed by the senate this morning is urgently needed for our troops in iraq and afghanistan, for our wounded verts and for scores of americans facing natural disasters on the home front. and i want to commend chairman 12:45:15.7 byrd and senator cochran for their hard work and close collaboration and as the acting chairman of the military construction veterans afairs and related agencies subcommittee, i also want to thank senator hutchison and her able staff along with my staff for the help 12:45:32.0 that they gave in crafting portions of the supplemental which dealt with military construction and veterans affairs.? the total for military construction and veterans affairs in this supplemental is $6.548 billion. 12:45:47.9 it includes in title 1, $1.644 billion for military construction. also contained in this section is a proviso restricting the obligation of $280 million until the secretary of defense certifies that none of the funds 12:46:03.2 will be used for purpose of establishing permanent u.s. military bases in iraq. 12:46:11.3 and i think that's an important point to clarify. title 2 of the recommendation includes a total of $4.9 billion for military construction and also for activities at the department of veterans affairs. 12:46:24.0 this includes $3.137 billion to restore funding for brac, which is very important to reset our forces as they are returned from overseas and to help reconfigure all of the services. this fully funds the department of defense's request in fy 2007 12:46:42.4 for this account and will keep the brac process on track. because of the cost of the war are not associated strictly with activities on the battlefield, the recommendation includes $1.76 billion for the department 12:46:57.7 of veterans affairs. in crafting the v.a. portion of this bill, we targeted the funding specifically for purposes of building capacity to deal with the influx of o.e.f. and o.i.f. veterans. hiring claims adjudicators and leveraging technology to 12:47:15.3 expedite benefit claims in upgrading existing v.a. facilities. the v.a. health care system is one of the best in the world. it has specialties in a number of areas, including spinal cord injury and blind rehabilitation. because of these specialties, 12:47:31.9 the v.a. has become a great resource for the treatment of troops wounded in iraq and afghanistan. however, due to the nature of combat in iraq and afghanistan coupled with the advanceness battlefield medicine, both the d.o.d. health care system and 12:47:47.1 the v.a. health care system are treating more military personnel with complex and multiple wounds, and particularly traumatic brain injury wounds. in response to this, in 2005 the congress provided funding to the department of veterans affairs 12:48:03.5 to establish polly trauma -- poly trauma centers. the funding contained in this bill builds on the success of these centers by providing a total of over $163 million in polntrauma care for services ranging from establishing more 12:48:19.8 level 1 comprehensive poly trauma centers to creating poly trauma residential rehabilitation programs to upgrading the entire polytrauma network system. 12:48:35.4 the bill also adds $150 million for entitlements to readjustment counseling, substance abuse programs and mental health treatment capacity. these are specialty areas that the v.a. will need to continue to expand to deal with readjustment issues facing 12:48:50.6 veterans returning from the war zone. in order to begin making progress toward deficiencies identified by the v.a. facilities conditions assessment and to prevent a possible walter reed building 18 situation, the recommendation includes $550 12:49:08.0 million in nonrecurring maintenance and $356 million in minor construction. in addition to funding provided to the department, the supplemental also includes a general provision directing the national academy of public administration to conduct an 12:49:23.9 independent analysis of the management, structure and processes that are in place at the v.a. with regard to providing health care to active duty and veterans of the wars in afghanistan and iraq as well as the provisions of providing 12:49:39.8 benefits to veterans of these conflicts. this study will assist the v.a. and congress in identifying the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape that far too many of our soldiers go through in their transition to the v.a. 12:49:54.3 the bill also includes a provision requiring the congressional budget office to conduct a budget study of the current and future long-term budget impacts of o.e.f. and o.i.f. on the department of veterans administration. we know with the number of these young men and women who have 12:50:11.8 been severely injured, many with brain injuries, and the likely life spans of 50 or 60 more years, that we will have to provide for long-term, consistent robust funding. we should identify that number now and provide for that continuous support for the next 12:50:28.5 several decades. this supplemental marks the continuing high priority that the senate places on ensuring that yesterday, today and tomorrow soldiers are cared for in the highest manner once they have done their duty and once they have come home to america. let me make one other point. 12:50:45.5 i was somewhat disappointed in this bill because i was attempting to include an amendment to rehabilitate a levy system in winsocket, rhode island, to ensure it is up to federal standards. 12:51:00.5 this amendment would have provided $3.25 million for the city of winsocket to rehabilitate the levy, including 12:51:08.3 replacing important tkpwaeupt cables. the present cables are about 40 years oefpltd according to the army -- old. according to the army corps of engineers, failure of a cable can result in an uncontrolled discharge downstream of the dam. 12:51:23.7 winsocket is an old industrial city, densely populated. and these levies protect that city. the project was built between december 1963 and april 1967 by the army corps of engineers. the corps estimates cumulative flooding benefits for the 12:51:39.2 blackstone valley project on more than $82 million. this project in place protects at least $82 million worth of property. given the importance of in flood protection to winsocket and communities along the blackstone river, i believe that federal 12:51:54.3 assistance is warranted to protect life and property. these deficiencies were discovered as a direct result of katrina. we learned in katrina that there were projects, levies that were unsatisfactory. they failed. they closed -- caused billions of dollars in damages. 12:52:11.2 being forewarned we hoped was going to be forearmed, that having studied these problems, now we could come together in congress to provide the resources to help these local communities, many of which do not have the resources themselves to sustain this kind of immediate and rapid 12:52:28.6 expenditure. a recent assessment by the corps found that this project levees and dam did need repairs. the corps has been given the -- the city, rather, until february of 2008 to make these repairs. otherwise, the project may no 12:52:44.1 longer be eligible for federal construction funding through the army corps of engineers. in addition, if these repairs are not made, the federal emergency management agency may determine that the levees no longer offer adequate flood protection and could require 12:53:00.4 residents to buy flood insurance, which is a very expensive proposition. the city of winsocket is economically distressed. it needs federal assistance. there are other communities around the country that might be in similar condition. 12:53:14.9 i think they also should be assisted. the devastation brought by katrina in new orleans shows us what could happen. now we have the knowledge, the foreknowledge, and now we have to afpblgt and i'm disappoint -- to act. and i'm disappointed we did not act in this situation to protect this complex of levees. 12:53:31.9 i will continue to bring this issue to my colleagues again and again because i believe with this knowledge requires action, prompt appropriate action to ensure this community is protected. let me make a very final point because my colleague has been very patient and very 12:53:48.2 considerate in allowing me to go ahead. we have included in this supplemental language with respect to our policy in iraq, which i think is important, indeed perhaps historic. it recognizes that we should begin a phased redeployment of 12:54:03.7 our forces. it recognizes that we also must maintain certain missions in iraq. counterterrorism operations, training iraqi security forces, protecting our forces. but it does emphasize the fact that we should begin at a date 12:54:20.2 certain going forward to take out our forces at a pace, at a level decided by operational commanders. and there is a goal, not a fixed deadline but a goal that our combat forces, those not performing these residual 12:54:38.2 missions, should be out of iraq by march 31, 2008. this is a solution proposed essentially by the iraq study group. it has been recommended, endorsed by the public sentiment of the american people by a wide margin. 12:54:53.6 it allows us to continue missions that are critical to the safety, security of not only ourselves but of the region, but it does, we hope, disengage us from a potential and sometimes very real civil war in iraq. i hope that in the deliberations 12:55:10.6 with the house, we can come up with a measure that combines the best elements of both versions of the spending bill. i hope we can bring this to the president and discuss it with him. it does represent, i think, the 12:55:26.3 sentiment of the american people. it does represent not only the sentiment that we change course in iraq. but as this budget does, we fully fund our forces in iraq. so, i'm hopeful that we can make progress and that we can send to 12:55:41.4 the president a bill after discussing it with him that could be signed rather than vetoed. that is my hope at this moment. and at this point, i would yield the floor to my colleague from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president? 12:56:00.7 the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i believe i'm to be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: that is 12:56:06.9 correct. mr. alexander: mr. president, i'd like to make remarks about three matters of importance to the great american outdoors, all of which have been happening this week and which are important for our country. first, i would like to comment on a provision that the senate struck from the iraq 12:56:25.7 supplemental bill this morning when we were considering it. we struck it in a procedural move based upon a point of order that i raised. and it was a provision that put into the supplemental 12:56:43.8 appropriations bill a billboard amnesty proposal, a billboard amnesty proposal in the midst of legislation that was supposed to be in support of our troops. i called it a billboard amnesty 12:56:59.4 proposal because it suddenly treats as legal billboard sites that have been illegal for 40 years and effectively gutting the highway beautification act of 1965, which is one of the legacies of former first lady, 12:57:16.9 ladybird johnson. i think this deserves a little attention and a little explanation before we leave it, because it was a full-scale assault on one of the most important pieces of legislation 12:57:30.8 that helps keep our country beautiful at a time when we are growing and adding to it a lot of technological developments. there are three problems with this billboard amnesty proposal, as i saw it. 12:57:46.0 the first was the proposal does, or would have done for the billboard industry something that the law does not allow for churches, doesn't allow for schools, doesn't allow for businesses, doesn't allow for other structures. but since 1965 have been on 12:58:03.6 illegal or nonconforming sites. here's what was really happening. in 1965 at the urging of president johnson and mrs. johnson, the nation decided that it would restrict billboards both in terms of 12:58:19.9 their location and their size. as we often do with legislation, we looked ahead and said the billboards could not be some places, could be some places, had to be this size. and as the interstate system grew across the country, much of 12:58:36.3 it is relatively free of large billboards or has a limited number of billboards. the question then arose about what do we do about the billboards and signs that are already up prior to 1965? and the decision was made by the congress at that time to say 12:58:52.6 we'll leave those sites up. we'll grandfather them in. as long as they can stay there, they're fine. but when they fall down, they're gone. 12:59:06.2 in other words, we have been waiting for 40 years for those sites to die a natural death. that was the compromise in 1965. and many of these billboards are large billboards and are in places that we really don't want them; rural areas, scenic areas across the country. 12:59:24.1 but that was the decision we made. now the problem with this legislation as it came into the supplemental appropriations appl for troops was that it said in 13 states suddenly, all of the billboards that were in that state, that were on sites where 12:59:41.8 it would be illegal to put a new billboard were suddenly legal. in other words, it was instant amnesty, overnight amnesty for illegal billboards. now, there are a lot of billboards like this. in the state of tennessee, for 12:59:56.9 example, there are nearly 3,000 sites where there are now billboards, but when those billboards fall down they can't ever be put back up. we've known that for 40 years. in north carolina, probably 2,600 illegal sites in the sense
United States Senate 1200-1300
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will convene and resume consideration of H.R. 1591, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill. 12:16:17.5 quorum call: mr. coleman: madam president. 12:18:50.4 the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. coleman: i ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. coleman: i rise to talk about the reint imraition of our returning soldiers into their families and their communities. i begin by sending a letter to 12:19:07.0 the editor published in the st. paul pioneer press on saturday by army national guard champion lane john morris "it takes communities to bring all soldiers all the way home." without objection i would like to submit the letter for the 12:19:22.3 record. the major is a member of the minnesota -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coleman: major more vis a member of the national guard. there are 2,600 members of the minnesota national guard serving 12:19:38.9 in iraq as part of the brigade combat team deployed last march after spending six months in mississippi. i visited them in december in fallujah and they were excited to return home this month to see their families. 12:19:54.7 some of them are returning home for the first time since september of 2005. but they did not get it come home, madam president. on january 10 of this year it was announced the 134 th would be extended 125 days, hopefully returning home some time later this summer. 12:20:11.1 this additional deployment time, the 134 th will be in iraq 35 days longer than that of any other unit serving in iraq. it is a long time. it is interesting to talk to our national guard folks, they are not complaining. 12:20:27.6 they are doing their duty. but i know it weighs heavilily on my fellow minnesotans and their families and those who represent them in the congress. and the -- when the extension was announced i shared the 12:20:44.4 frustration that they would not be coming home as scheduled. we had deep concerned about the way it was noticed. the families heard about it before the folks in iraq heard about it, while watching a press conference. the army apologized. we have to do better on issues 12:21:00.7 like this. i strugglessed to find the best way forward. i visiting the troops and wondered what we could do to ease the burden. now, madam president, the initial shock and frustration of the extension has subsided it is 12:21:17.0 time to address the challenges they and their families have faced since their deployment and the challenges they will face when they return home. in the last few weeks many of my colleagues have taken to the floor and to the air to speak about the commitment we must 12:21:31.9 make to our returning heroes. there aren't many things we can agree, or to get much agree on in this body but all 100 of us agree that we need to support our troops when they come home, just as much as we support them 12:21:47.6 when they are defending our nation and our freedom abroad. we need to support our troops and their families before, during, and after their deployments. so the question is not, if we should maintain the strong 12:22:02.3 commitment to our returning warriors, but, rather, how. how do we provide the highest level of medical care to our soldiers, our veterans? how do we assist military families for readjusting to their loved one returning home -- a difficult readjust mat? 12:22:17.6 how do we streamline the bureaucratic challenges all soldiers face? how do we sustain our support over the long haul? these young men and women are returning home, some badly wounded, how do we sustain our support over the long haul. the chaplain states "if you are 12:22:36.6 a politician don't politicized 9 shortfalls in the v.a. or military medical system. we are pawns in an election cycle. we are your constituents and counting on you to fix the problems." energize the committee to do 12:22:51.7 right by us. we are not asking for showy programs or asking for tangible signs of support in terms of services offered. madam president, the challenges our heroes will face will not be solved by throwing more money at 12:23:06.8 the problem or be solved by finger-pointing or playing the blame game but will be solved through thoughtful efforts aimed at fixing the problems and we will do it one at a time. madam president, i have been seeking answers to the challenges by reaching out to leaders in my state on this 12:23:24.2 issue. and to the leadership of those involved in the v.a. health care system. having conversations with the directors of the v.a. hospitals in minneapolis, st. cloud, to see if there is anything we can do to deliver the highest level of care. 12:23:37.0 one of the good things that came out of the horrible stories we saw of what was happening in the outpatient facilities at walter reed is that my state, and i'm sure the committee chair's state, folks went back and did a room by room review to find out, are there failings? 12:23:54.2 are there things that needed to be fixed? how can we improve the quality of care? minnesota folks have, i think, a high degree of confidence in the care in our v.a. facilities. in minneapolis and in st. loud. and-st. cloud and we count fargo 12:24:13.0 as ours. i met with certains organizations including the v.f.w. and minnesota paralyzed veterans it hear their questions. most importantly i spent time touring my state to meet with military families of the i 12:24:27.4 talked to active duty soldiers, the national guard and veterans. many have a loved one stationed overseas while others have a loved one just returned. there are tremendous support groups in our state. they have a lot of -- families who really did not know each 12:24:47.7 other beforehand have become united with a special bond. one said, she hoped their husbands -- we did not know each other before the deployment, now we are friends. so you have new extended families. 12:25:01.6 the good lord gave us two ears and one mouth and it is amazing when we use them if that proportion. i take some time to talk about some of the many cerz i heard from folks across my state and how to better address them. madam president, more than anything, one thing is clear, 12:25:19.2 and education benefits for our soldiers continue to be of paramount importance. unfortunately, the national guard and army reserve are still operating under antiquated system of education benefits that does not reflect the additional and critical role 12:25:33.6 they are playing in the global war on terror. under current policy our national guard and reserve soldiers have to use their education benefits when they are in the national guard and reserve. i had the mother of a national guard soldier visit my office in washington to tell my staff and 12:25:49.5 me about her son's particular situation. her son had with the -- had beenin the national intx years. he has been deployed to bosnia and now iraq with uptraining time spent away from home within 12:26:06.0 the united states. because of his extension he will not be able to finish school before he enlistment ends and because national guard troops 12:26:15.5 cannot use their education benefits after separating from the service, we will leave him on his own to find a way to pay for the reminder of his studies and his graduate school, should he choose that path. after all this, after serving extended time on active duty 12:26:32.9 defending our country. there's a bill in the senate to correct this discrepancy. it is my honor to join senator lincoln in our total force enhancement and integration act. 12:26:48.3 it is important. this bill allows national guard and reserve troops to use their education benefits up to 10 years from the time they separate from their service. it alsos their benefits according to their time on active duty. 12:27:01.7 this is a good start it adjusting education benefits in a changing environment. another concern i heard during the listening session was the difficulty our troops have applying for college when overseas. many troops want to began their education but going through the college application process is 12:27:18.0 hard enough if you work on your home computer in your living room. it is harder if you are station onned 7,000 miles away from home with limited access to phone. mail, or free time, for that matter. we need to find a way to help the deployed soldiers use their 12:27:34.2 education benefits by helping them through the difficult application process. not only will this improve participation in the program but it will improve our soldiers' morale and their ability to reinti grate. a good thing i heard, some of the colleges are getting this. 12:27:49.9 some of the state system and now the private college system in minnesota is understanding some of their chags and -- their challenges and i applaud this partnership. a final note on education, is the lack of benefit structure 12:28:08.2 program for spouses. for spouses of members of those who are now in the armed forces. mr. president, with over 2,600 minnesotans stationed in iraq we have hundreds of military spouses working to keep their families together while their loved one is overseas. 12:28:23.6 many of them, by the way, were going to school but now their husband is overseas or the wife is overseas and they have to take a job and give up their education. they have less income and they have to take care of their families. one spouse told me that she had been both a single mom and a 12:28:39.9 military wife while trying to go to school and being a single mom was much easier. we need to look at ways to extend benefits to military spouses who are working at home to keep their families together while they try to continue their education. 12:28:55.2 we know the importance of investment education, why should we deny benefits to military spouses who have sacrifices so much? another critical issue i continue to hear of is health care for our returning soldiers and veterans. again, we were shocked to see the conditions revealed at 12:29:11.9 walter reed hospital at the end of february. i am pleased that those who are responsible are being held to account. while the conditions in the outpatient facilities at walter reed are being fixed, now is a good time to revisit the overall structure of health care for our troops and veterans. i share the concern that 12:29:28.4 chaplain morris states in the letter to the press that "we will fix the crisis but forget the problem." i will take a few minutes to discuss the particular challenges i have heard in regard to health care and what i hope can be done to fix them. madam president, i continue to 12:29:43.4 hear about the difficulty associated with tri-care. on my visits around the state i learned that only 40% of health care providers in minnesota are tri-care providers. this is an improvement from the past. but it is still unacceptable. from a health care providers we 12:29:59.0 hear the program is painful to work with and it costs them significant amounts in staff time and energy to navigate the paperwork. for our military families, especially those in rural areas, traveling to a provider that will take tri-care is often a 12:30:14.6 lengthy process that is simply not possible. we need to look at ways to stream line the tri-care system and, if necessary, further incentivize providers to accept tri-care. another problem i heard from my visits around the state is the inability of returning troops to have marriage counseling covered 12:30:31.0 by their benefit plans.n tricare does not cover the counseling that is often necessary when our warriors return to their homes and to their families. many of our troops have been deployed for extended periods of time and when they return home, 12:30:47.4 it's difficult to readjust. it's difficult to readjust. and, clearly, this is the kind -- maybe we didn't think about it before, but we better be thinking about it now. if a returning soldier wanted to receive marriage counseling, they must go to their family 12:31:03.6 doctor and get a referral for menial health issues caused by manchet then it becomes possible for a soldier to act on mental 12:31:15.1 health concerns and see a marriage and family therapist. we've got to do better for the our returning warriors than this, madam president. another major issue we confront with tricare is the lack of tri-chemical dependency treatment centers. because of the burdensome 12:31:29.6 certification process, we have 257 chemical dependency treatment centers that are certified by the state of minnesota but in the a single one is certified by tricare. so if any of our returning heroes come home and develops a problem with substance abuse, there is in the a single place 12:31:45.0 in minnesota that they can immediately go for for help. this is a critical oversight which must be corrected. another issue we need to be prepared to handle is post-traumatic stress disorder. we all no he that ptsd is going to be an issue we will face for 12:32:01.2 years to come as more and more of our soldiers come home from abroad. and if we are committed to dealing with it, as we should be, we need to be committed to the facilities and people who will be working to cure the disorder on a daily basis. one way we can do this is to 12:32:17.3 incentivize mental health care professionals to join our military hospitals system. i've learned in my outtreatment across the state that it is difficult to recruit these individuals to the v.a. and military hospitals in roorl 12:32:31.3 areas. i have always said that the quality of your health care should not depend on your zip code. this is especially true for our veterans and military families. we also need to make sure we have adequate facilities for the influx of participation in veterans' programs for the next 12:32:47.3 few years. while most veterans i've spoken with over the past few months have told me that the care they receive at the facilities in minnesota is nothing short of excellent, we need to plan for the strain an increasing number of veterans will have on our facilities that are operating at 12:33:02.9 near capacity. finally, madam president, i'd like to stress the importance of a comprehensive strategy for integrating our returning heroes into society. quite frankly, this is bigger than any one single issue confronting our veterans and military families but 12:33:19.4 encompasses everything i have talked about so far today. in my home state of minnesota, the national guard has developed an innovative program known as "beyond the yellow ribbon" to conduct reintegration academies for the families and their loved ones who are returning from 12:33:35.4 iraq. we have watched with great pleasure as this program has helped countless families deal with the everry day families that aren't touched by washington rhetoric. we are able to engage our returning heroes to ensure that 12:33:51.4 they are comfortably shifting back to life out of the combat zone. i will continue to work with our minnesota national guard, the families, communities, and veterans across the state so we can continue this program and use the experience we gain from it to benefit the entire nation. madam president, inscribed on 12:34:09.7 the base of the korean war memorial is the following: "our nation honors our sons and daughters who have answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met." these words ring as true today as many of our servicemen and 12:34:26.6 women are fighting terror overseas in this war on terror, and we need to make sure that the sacrifice they met is met by a commitment here to do all we can to ease the reentry and take care of their concerns as they 12:34:42.4 return. we need to provide support for the soldiers. we need to provide support for their families, and we need to do it before, during, and after they return home from abroad. it's not about rhetoric. it's not about politics. its a about a commitment to 12:34:58.5 listen and a commitment to get things done. and i look forward to working with my colleagues to this end during the coming months and years. with that, madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the 12:35:13.8 senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. last month at a senate agriculture committee hearing, rhonda stewart, a single mother from hamilton, ohio, in butler county, in the southwest part of my state, testified that despite working full-time, caring for 12:35:33.4 her 9-year-old son wyatt, even serving as president of the p.t.a., she and her son must rely on food stamps to survive. at the end of each month, she told you she must forego dinner so her son can eat because the food stamps, about $6 a day, 12:35:49.5 just don't go far enough. at the beginning of the month, she gefs wyatt pork chops and he knows he eats better at the beginning than at the end of the month when she's running out of money and at the end of the mont she often sits with him and 12:36:03.9 tells him she's not feeling well as her son eats because she wants him to have enough when she doesn't. on the same day that ms. stewart testified, u.s. treasury 12:36:14.1 secretary paulson told the senate banking committee -- this was about an hour later -- that the economy was doing well. repeated over and over again that g.d.p. was up 3% -- g.d.p. was 3u7% for the quarter. he kept insisting, senator, you 12:36:29.1 don't understand. things are good, things are going very well in this country. g.d.p. is up 3%. people are making money. companies are profitable. well, madam president, worker -- when you think about all of that here's the story. profits are up, the stok stock market is doing well, 12:36:43.9 millionaires are engaging exorbitant tax breaks and worker productivity is up but the workers aren't sharing in the profits, in the increasing profits that most corporations are making. workers across the country too often are losing their jobs. a single mother working 12:36:59.6 full-time can't afford to eat dinner, even with the $6 a day in food stamps. a "wall street journal" article reported this week that since 2001, the economy has grown by 16% -- by 16% since 2001 while worker pay, held for inflation, 12:37:17.6 has grown less than 1%. 16% growth in the economy, profits up, workers making -- gaining less than 1%. wrongheaded economic policies and job-killing trade agreements have fueled income disparity at 12:37:34.0 home and abroad. a few years ago, after the north american free trade agreement passed, several years after that, congress was considering another one of these job-killing trade agreements. i traveled to mcallen, texas, where i crossed the border into mexico, rent add car with a 12:37:50.4 couple of friends and went to visit some families in mexico, just the other side of the american border, maybe a couple of miles from the united states. i met a husband and wife who worked for general electric, mexico, they had -- they lived in a shack about 20 feet by 20 feet. 12:38:06.8 no running water, no electricity, dirt floors. when it rained hard, the floors turned to mud. they worked 10 hours a day, six days a week, each made less than $1 an hour. behind their little shack was a ditch, three feet wide, perhaps, full of who knows what -- human 12:38:26.3 industrial waste going through this ditch. the children playing in this ditch -- in fact, the american medical association said the area along the mexican-u.s. border is one of the most toxic places in the entire western hemisphere. we then went and visited an auto plant, a modern, high-tech auto 12:38:44.1 plant nearbivment the plant in mexico looked just like an auto plant in lordstown, ohio, or in avon lake, ohio, or in cincinnati. the were working hard, the floors were clean, the tech million to was up to date, the 12:38:58.0 productivity was very good, but there was one difference between the mexican auto plant and the auto plant you'd see in ohio. and that difference was the mexican auto plant did not have a parking lot. the mexican workers are not making enough to buy the dhars 12:39:14.1 they made. you can go halfway around the world to a motorola plant in mall lay shavment the workers aren't micking enough to buy the cell phones they make. or come halfway again around the world to costa rica. they don't make enough to buy 12:39:30.7 the toys for the children, that they maifnlg the workers in a nike plant aren't make enough to buy the shoes that they're making. these workers are simply not sharing in the wealth they create for their employer. that's why these trade 12:39:47.1 agreements, these job-killing trade agreements, don't work. only when workers share in the wealth they create will we know that our trade policy is working. in fact, when the poor in the developing world, those people who are working hard, working 56 hours -- 50 to 60 hours a week, 12:40:04.2 working with their hand, only when the poor in those countries are able to make -- able to buy the products that they're making for us will we know that our trade policy in the united states is actually working. during the fight against the central american free trade agreement two years ago ago, the 12:40:19.6 largest-ever bipartisan fairtrade group was formed, democrats and republicans, environmental groups, groups -- religious groups, labor organizations, business groups, united and together we changed forever the debate on trade. 12:40:34.9 that coalition is alive and well, not just in the house of representatives but also for the first time in the united states senate, already working to revamp our nation's trade policy, already working to establish a manufacturing policy. senators byron dorgan, lindsey 12:40:50.5 graham, and i -- a republican and a republican and i -- have introduced legislation that would ban imports from sweatshops. we've called for tougher world trade organization action to be taken against china, a country where at least in 2005, 5,000 political prisoners were 12:41:09.5 executed -- 5,000. the human rights violations 12:41:12.0 continue in china. the oppression of workers continues in china. the kinds of -- the kinds of values that we hold dear in this country are violated every day by that government, and every day by these companies doing business in china. 12:41:26.5 a country that manipulates its currency and continues to exploit its workers. our government must renegotiate these trade agreements -- the trade agreements so they lift up workers here and abroad, that reward u.s. businesses that stay here, reward u.s. businesses 12:41:42.5 that produce here, reward u.s. businesses that create jobs here. and that means doing away with current fast-track authority. that means doing away with the fundamentally flawed north american free trade agreement -- nafta model trade agreements. make no mistake, we want trade, 12:41:59.4 we want more of it. but we want fair trade. it is not a matter of if we real vamp u.s. trade policy, but when and who benefits from that trade policy. america is a nation of innovation. the future of our manufacturing policies firmly planted in the research and development of 12:42:15.9 alternative energy. today i spoke with several people from ohio, several business owners and plant managers, who were part of a group called the manufacturing extension partnership. it is a relatively small government program that helps small manufacturers, small businesses in ohio and across 12:42:31.8 the country, help them learn to compete better, help them learn to cut their health care costs, help them learn to be more energy-efficient, help them learn how to export some of their product. yet we have a long way to go. observer land college is home to 12:42:48.5 -- oberland college is home to the largest campus completely powered by solar energy. when they built this building, they had to buy the components, the solar panels from japan and germany because we don't make 12:43:02.8 enough of them in this country. the same when you talk about wind turbines. another company makes components for wind turbines in ohio. it is a great opportunity as all 12:43:20.6 of alternative energy production s it is a great opportunity for us as a nation to use that in part to help rebuild our manufacturing capabilities, to cut energy prices and to do the right thing for the environment. it works in every way. that's why, madam president, as 12:43:36.5 we in the next couple of months, as we move toward votes on trade promotion authority, we move forward perhaps on votes on bilateral trade agreements with colombia, with peru, with korea, and ultimately with panama and 12:43:52.9 perhaps other countries, it's time that we pass trade agreements in this country that lift workers up, that help our small manufacturers, that help to continue to preserve and expand our manufacturing base. it's american values to reward hard work. 12:44:09.4 this congress has a real opportunity not just to talk about a different trade regimen, but to go if a very different direction, to replace trade promotion authority with a trade promotion authority legislation model that will help to lift our workers up, help create jobs in this country, help in the 12:44:26.5 developing world lift their living standards up so that we can continue to -- so that we can reward work and continue to fight for our values as a nation. thank you, madam president. i suggest -- 12:44:44.2 a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. rhode island, excuse me. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, i would ask upon completion of my remarks that senator alexander of tennessee be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without 12:44:58.5 objection. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. madam president, the emergency appropriations bill passed by the senate this morning is urgently needed for our troops in iraq and afghanistan, for our wounded verts and for scores of americans facing natural disasters on the home front. and i want to commend chairman 12:45:15.7 byrd and senator cochran for their hard work and close collaboration and as the acting chairman of the military construction veterans afairs and related agencies subcommittee, i also want to thank senator hutchison and her able staff along with my staff for the help 12:45:32.0 that they gave in crafting portions of the supplemental which dealt with military construction and veterans affairs.n the total for military construction and veterans affairs in this supplemental is $6.548 billion. 12:45:47.9 it includes in title 1, $1.644 billion for military construction. also contained in this section is a proviso restricting the obligation of $280 million until the secretary of defense certifies that none of the funds 12:46:03.2 will be used for purpose of establishing permanent u.s. military bases in iraq. 12:46:11.3 and i think that's an important point to clarify. title 2 of the recommendation includes a total of $4.9 billion for military construction and also for activities at the department of veterans affairs. 12:46:24.0 this includes $3.137 billion to restore funding for brac, which is very important to reset our forces as they are returned from overseas and to help reconfigure all of the services. this fully funds the department of defense's request in fy 2007 12:46:42.4 for this account and will keep the brac process on track. because of the cost of the war are not associated strictly with activities on the battlefield, the recommendation includes $1.76 billion for the department 12:46:57.7 of veterans affairs. in crafting the v.a. portion of this bill, we targeted the funding specifically for purposes of building capacity to deal with the influx of o.e.f. and o.i.f. veterans. hiring claims adjudicators and leveraging technology to 12:47:15.3 expedite benefit claims in upgrading existing v.a. facilities. the v.a. health care system is one of the best in the world. it has specialties in a number of areas, including spinal cord injury and blind rehabilitation. because of these specialties, 12:47:31.9 the v.a. has become a great resource for the treatment of troops wounded in iraq and afghanistan. however, due to the nature of combat in iraq and afghanistan coupled with the advanceness battlefield medicine, both the d.o.d. health care system and 12:47:47.1 the v.a. health care system are treating more military personnel with complex and multiple wounds, and particularly traumatic brain injury wounds. in response to this, in 2005 the congress provided funding to the department of veterans affairs 12:48:03.5 to establish polly trauma -- poly trauma centers. the funding contained in this bill builds on the success of these centers by providing a total of over $163 million in polntrauma care for services ranging from establishing more 12:48:19.8 level 1 comprehensive poly trauma centers to creating poly trauma residential rehabilitation programs to upgrading the entire polytrauma network system. 12:48:35.4 the bill also adds $150 million for entitlements to readjustment counseling, substance abuse programs and mental health treatment capacity. these are specialty areas that the v.a. will need to continue to expand to deal with readjustment issues facing 12:48:50.6 veterans returning from the war zone. in order to begin making progress toward deficiencies identified by the v.a. facilities conditions assessment and to prevent a possible walter reed building 18 situation, the recommendation includes $550 12:49:08.0 million in nonrecurring maintenance and $356 million in minor construction. in addition to funding provided to the department, the supplemental also includes a general provision directing the national academy of public administration to conduct an 12:49:23.9 independent analysis of the management, structure and processes that are in place at the v.a. with regard to providing health care to active duty and veterans of the wars in afghanistan and iraq as well as the provisions of providing 12:49:39.8 benefits to veterans of these conflicts. this study will assist the v.a. and congress in identifying the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape that far too many of our soldiers go through in their transition to the v.a. 12:49:54.3 the bill also includes a provision requiring the congressional budget office to conduct a budget study of the current and future long-term budget impacts of o.e.f. and o.i.f. on the department of veterans administration. we know with the number of these young men and women who have 12:50:11.8 been severely injured, many with brain injuries, and the likely life spans of 50 or 60 more years, that we will have to provide for long-term, consistent robust funding. we should identify that number now and provide for that continuous support for the next 12:50:28.5 several decades. this supplemental marks the continuing high priority that the senate places on ensuring that yesterday, today and tomorrow soldiers are cared for in the highest manner once they have done their duty and once they have come home to america. let me make one other point. 12:50:45.5 i was somewhat disappointed in this bill because i was attempting to include an amendment to rehabilitate a levy system in winsocket, rhode island, to ensure it is up to federal standards. 12:51:00.5 this amendment would have provided $3.25 million for the city of winsocket to rehabilitate the levy, including 12:51:08.3 replacing important tkpwaeupt cables. the present cables are about 40 years oefpltd according to the army -- old. according to the army corps of engineers, failure of a cable can result in an uncontrolled discharge downstream of the dam. 12:51:23.7 winsocket is an old industrial city, densely populated. and these levies protect that city. the project was built between december 1963 and april 1967 by the army corps of engineers. the corps estimates cumulative flooding benefits for the 12:51:39.2 blackstone valley project on more than $82 million. this project in place protects at least $82 million worth of property. given the importance of in flood protection to winsocket and communities along the blackstone river, i believe that federal 12:51:54.3 assistance is warranted to protect life and property. these deficiencies were discovered as a direct result of katrina. we learned in katrina that there were projects, levies that were unsatisfactory. they failed. they closed -- caused billions of dollars in damages. 12:52:11.2 being forewarned we hoped was going to be forearmed, that having studied these problems, now we could come together in congress to provide the resources to help these local communities, many of which do not have the resources themselves to sustain this kind of immediate and rapid 12:52:28.6 expenditure. a recent assessment by the corps found that this project levees and dam did need repairs. the corps has been given the -- the city, rather, until february of 2008 to make these repairs. otherwise, the project may no 12:52:44.1 longer be eligible for federal construction funding through the army corps of engineers. in addition, if these repairs are not made, the federal emergency management agency may determine that the levees no longer offer adequate flood protection and could require 12:53:00.4 residents to buy flood insurance, which is a very expensive proposition. the city of winsocket is economically distressed. it needs federal assistance. there are other communities around the country that might be in similar condition. 12:53:14.9 i think they also should be assisted. the devastation brought by katrina in new orleans shows us what could happen. now we have the knowledge, the foreknowledge, and now we have to afpblgt and i'm disappoint -- to act. and i'm disappointed we did not act in this situation to protect this complex of levees. 12:53:31.9 i will continue to bring this issue to my colleagues again and again because i believe with this knowledge requires action, prompt appropriate action to ensure this community is protected. let me make a very final point because my colleague has been very patient and very 12:53:48.2 considerate in allowing me to go ahead. we have included in this supplemental language with respect to our policy in iraq, which i think is important, indeed perhaps historic. it recognizes that we should begin a phased redeployment of 12:54:03.7 our forces. it recognizes that we also must maintain certain missions in iraq. counterterrorism operations, training iraqi security forces, protecting our forces. but it does emphasize the fact that we should begin at a date 12:54:20.2 certain going forward to take out our forces at a pace, at a level decided by operational commanders. and there is a goal, not a fixed deadline but a goal that our combat forces, those not performing these residual 12:54:38.2 missions, should be out of iraq by march 31, 2008. this is a solution proposed essentially by the iraq study group. it has been recommended, endorsed by the public sentiment of the american people by a wide margin. 12:54:53.6 it allows us to continue missions that are critical to the safety, security of not only ourselves but of the region, but it does, we hope, disengage us from a potential and sometimes very real civil war in iraq. i hope that in the deliberations 12:55:10.6 with the house, we can come up with a measure that combines the best elements of both versions of the spending bill. i hope we can bring this to the president and discuss it with him. it does represent, i think, the 12:55:26.3 sentiment of the american people. it does represent not only the sentiment that we change course in iraq. but as this budget does, we fully fund our forces in iraq. so, i'm hopeful that we can make progress and that we can send to 12:55:41.4 the president a bill after discussing it with him that could be signed rather than vetoed. that is my hope at this moment. and at this point, i would yield the floor to my colleague from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president? 12:56:00.7 the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: mr. president, i believe i'm to be recognized for 20 minutes. the presiding officer: that is 12:56:06.9 correct. mr. alexander: mr. president, i'd like to make remarks about three matters of importance to the great american outdoors, all of which have been happening this week and which are important for our country. first, i would like to comment on a provision that the senate struck from the iraq 12:56:25.7 supplemental bill this morning when we were considering it. we struck it in a procedural move based upon a point of order that i raised. and it was a provision that put into the supplemental 12:56:43.8 appropriations bill a billboard amnesty proposal, a billboard amnesty proposal in the midst of legislation that was supposed to be in support of our troops. i called it a billboard amnesty 12:56:59.4 proposal because it suddenly treats as legal billboard sites that have been illegal for 40 years and effectively gutting the highway beautification act of 1965, which is one of the legacies of former first lady, 12:57:16.9 ladybird johnson. i think this deserves a little attention and a little explanation before we leave it, because it was a full-scale assault on one of the most important pieces of legislation 12:57:30.8 that helps keep our country beautiful at a time when we are growing and adding to it a lot of technological developments. there are three problems with this billboard amnesty proposal, as i saw it. 12:57:46.0 the first was the proposal does, or would have done for the billboard industry something that the law does not allow for churches, doesn't allow for schools, doesn't allow for businesses, doesn't allow for other structures. but since 1965 have been on 12:58:03.6 illegal or nonconforming sites. here's what was really happening. in 1965 at the urging of president johnson and mrs. johnson, the nation decided that it would restrict billboards both in terms of 12:58:19.9 their location and their size. as we often do with legislation, we looked ahead and said the billboards could not be some places, could be some places, had to be this size. and as the interstate system grew across the country, much of 12:58:36.3 it is relatively free of large billboards or has a limited number of billboards. the question then arose about what do we do about the billboards and signs that are already up prior to 1965? and the decision was made by the congress at that time to say 12:58:52.6 we'll leave those sites up. we'll grandfather them in. as long as they can stay there, they're fine. but when they fall down, they're gone. 12:59:06.2 in other words, we have been waiting for 40 years for those sites to die a natural death. that was the compromise in 1965. and many of these billboards are large billboards and are in places that we really don't want them; rural areas, scenic areas across the country. 12:59:24.1 but that was the decision we made. now the problem with this legislation as it came into the supplemental appropriations appl for troops was that it said in 13 states suddenly, all of the billboards that were in that state, that were on sites where 12:59:41.8 it would be illegal to put a new billboard were suddenly legal. in other words, it was instant amnesty, overnight amnesty for illegal billboards. now, there are a lot of billboards like this. in the state of tennessee, for 12:59:56.9 example, there are nearly 3,000 sites where there are now billboards, but when those billboards fall down they can't ever be put back up. we've known that for 40 years. in north carolina, probably 2,600 illegal sites in the sense
United States Senate 1000 - 1100
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will convene and proceed to consideration of the Conference Report to accompany H.R.4297, the Tax Relief Extension Reconciliation Act. 10:00:07.7 senate's hold harmless provision on alternative minimum tax. so i spand on -- expand on that motion for a moment and be somewhat repeating myself from my extemporaneous remarks but exactly five years ago today, 10:00:25.0 may 11, 2001, senator baucus and i announced the bipartisan bill that was historic for tax legislation and historic because taxes were as high as they have been in the history of the 10:00:42.0 country as a percent of gross national product. when newly elected, president bush released his budget for that first year in 2001. his tax relief plan did not contain a general hold harmless on the alternative minimum tax. 10:00:59.0 the house passed a bill that did not have hold harmless provisions for the alternative minimum tax. when senator baucus and i were negotiating the bipartisan plan, we agreed on that bedrock principle of hold harmless, the 10:01:15.4 hold harmless of a.m.t. so no new people would get hit with it. they got a tax increase over there. we shouldn't take them away over here. we agreed to make sure that the a.m.t. would not take tax relief 10:01:30.0 that we wfer pro-- were providing. this is how we came up with the concept that we referred to as hold harmless. to me it goes tie fundamental principle of transparency in government. 10:01:45.4 don't promise taxpayers relief that you know they are not going 10:01:48.2 to really get. some of my friends on this side of the aisle, meaning republicans, rightly complain about double talk on alternative minimum tax that we hear from members on the other side, or democratic members. 10:02:02.3 the senators from so-called blue states and you remember the blue, red map in presidential elections of 2000 and 2004. blue states generally went for democratic candidates for president. 10:02:18.3 red states go for republican candidates for president.n and i'm going to refer them to the blue states, which are those that generally vote democratic. now, senators from these stays are generally house -- states are generally hostile to the tax 10:02:34.3 relief that we have provided in 2001 and provided again in 2003 and seem to be sympathetic to tax hikes. they take this position despite the fact that their constituents in these blue states and 10:02:53.7 represented for the most part by democratic senators tend to bear the highest per capita federal tax burden. the hostility of these members seem to grow to a white-hot intensity when anybody above, 10:03:08.0 let's say $100,000 income, benefits from any tax relief package. it has always been a strange disconnect to those of us on this republican side of the aisle because that intensity and at times what appears to be 10:03:24.0 outright anger seems to grow as the states' shade of blue grows much darker. ironically, the per capita income, the living cost and the 10:03:39.4 federal tax burdens tend to rise as the shade of the state tends to get a darker blue. the implication appears to be that constituents in these blue states should be happy to bear this high tax burden as their senators fight against tax 10:03:55.8 relief for them. in fact, members from blue states seem to have no limit to the level of federal taxes that they believe the folks in their states should bear. taxes can never be too high goes the rational, as long as we keep 10:04:13.0 growing the public's dependence upon government. more federal programs. so when members on the republican side hear demagoguery on taxes emanating from members from blue states on a daily basis that we shouldn't have tax 10:04:30.0 cuts for high-income people, they ask, why do these folks then seem to change their mind when we're talking about the alternative minimum tax? as you tend to get as intense a 10:04:50.1 debate that we ought to be doing about the alternative minimum tax by the same senators complaining we're giving too much tax relief to high-income people in their various states. the a.m.t. happens to most 10:05:02.1 dramatically impact taxpayers between $100,000 and $500,000. how this is any different from other forms of tax relief -- how is this any different from other 10:05:17.9 forms of tax relief? so they're hot and heavy to have a.m.t. which helps their taxpayers in blue states, but they're not hot and heavy to have tax relief in the first instance when you vote to reduce tax rates. so if i go to some extent to talk about this contradiction, 10:05:36.3 it's a contradiction that affects and bothers a lot of people on the republican side of the aisle. it's an argument that we just don't understand. 10:05:50.8 frankly, it's a sentiment that i've had to overcome in my caucus, as i argue for the a.m.t., and for tax relief, and i've had to argue this contradiction particularly with 10:06:07.4 my house counterparts as we go to conference to negotiate differences between the house and senate and try to explain to them, you know, why we need to 10:06:22.1 do a whole harmless provision on a.m.t. because i had people from the other bodies that would say, well, you know, what's wrong 10:06:40.1 with having an alternative minimum tax hit people in blue states that are high income because their senators are arguing we shouldn't reduce the 10:06:47.9 tax rates in the first place. and, you know, it's a very difficult thing to argue that sort of contradiction. and so, you know, i think it would help me a lot if they'd get off this kick. but let's -- i'd like the take a 10:07:04.1 chart on the a.m.t. and explain some of what we're talking about. this chart will show how the alternative minimum tax hold harmless benefits that have always been the bedrock of our tax bill since '91 because it's 10:07:20.3 been something -- since 2001 since it's something that senator baucus agree on to be our tax policy, how the hold harmless benefits taxpayers everywhere but special important 10:07:35.6 in the blue states. we don't have a map with blue states versus red states, but the chart that you're looking at now, i need to explain, is based 10:07:53.4 upon 2003 return data because it's the most up-to-date data we have. but projecting out the numbers, we think that it would be entirely possible and 10:08:09.5 intellectually honest to just double the 2003 figures. so as a rule of thumb, i'm going to do that as i explain california being a blue state, two million taxpayers now. texas, not a blue state, a red 10:08:28.4 state, but one and two-tenths million. florida a blue state, 900,000 taxpayers affected if we don't do something with the alternative minimum tax as we have in this legislation. 10:08:43.0 illinois, a blue state, 848,000. new york, a blue state, 822,000. pennsylvania, 694,000. michigan, 640,000. 10:08:59.0 new jersey, 632,000. virginia, 568,000. massachusetts, 490,000. so i go to this length because i think senators, particularly on 10:09:16.5 the democratic side of the aisle that might think about voting against this bill that in all these states so many hundreds of thousands of people are going to be hit by the alternative minimum tax if you don't help us 10:09:34.5 get this bill passed, and that's -- that's people that were not hit in 2005 that will be hit when they file on 2006 income. so, madam president, the bottom 10:09:51.2 line is that blue states versus red states implication should decide this issue. as you can see, there are plenty of red states affected, as well as blue states. again, that shouldn't matter. we ought to do the right thing, and the right thing would be 10:10:07.6 passing this bill and continue the hold-harmless policy that senator baucus and i have led the senate through the 2001 and 2003 tax bills and also on the senate consideration of hold 10:10:25.4 harmless in this conference report. senator baucus and i understood that when we took resources in the finance committee package to make sure that at least five years -- for at least five years 10:10:40.4 the broad-based tax relief that we promised would not be undermined by the alternative minimum tax. now, moving on, this conference agreement also contains some loophole cloajers and tax -- 10:10:57.5 cloashers and tax-shelter revenue raisers. two reasons to raise revenue. the most important one is when we have tax shelters that allow people to cheat on their income tax and when we have loopholes that don't make sense, they 10:11:15.4 ought to be closed as a matter of fairness to all taxpayers, but they also raise some revenue, and we need some revenue in this bill to offset some provisions of this bill so we don't exceed the $70 billion reconciliation instructions of 10:11:34.6 the congress to us in the finance committee. the house bill, however, didn't contain any revenue raisers. so although we didn't come back with all the loophole closers, 10:11:49.2 especially clarification of something that needs to be done, economic substance doctrine defined and the house conferees very much oppose any change in that, we did make some headway on loophole closings and closing 10:12:06.3 tax shelter abuse. and let me go back to economic substance. my argument for it, it raises a lot of revenue, but we've had several courts that have 10:12:19.3 instructed congress, and courts can't make congress do anything we don't want to do, but they've instructed us that we ought to define economic substance. and by defining it, it brings in some revenue. and i don't understand why it 10:12:36.5 shouldn't be defined. i got my feeling that there's a lot of "k" street lobbyists and maybe a lot of lobbyists that aren't on "k" streets that 10:12:50.3 benefit from the loopholes that can come in stretching economic substance in the tax code. now, the two bills, the house and senate bill that went to conference, also shared some 10:13:06.3 similarities. both bills sought to extend and in some case modify certain provisions that expired at the end of 2005. provisions like research and development credit, increase small business expenses, cost 10:13:23.4 recovery for leasehold improvements, the saver's credit or better said the small saver's credit, the deduction for state and local sales tax in those states that don't have particularly valuable -- 10:13:39.2 particularly valuable to those states that don't have a state income tax. the qualified tuition deduction for college and teachers' classroom expense deduction, so your teachers that spend money out of their own pocket to bring 10:13:57.4 tools to the classroom can deduct this from their income tax. a true bicameral compromise would merge both bills in a way 10:14:10.5 that takes care of these common extenders just mentioned and many more that i didn't mention. secondly, it accommodates the centrepieces of each bill, which as i've explained so many times this morning, are the a.m.t. hold-harmless provisions on the one hand, and the extension of 10:14:27.4 the dividends and capital gains tax provisions as they now exist, not cutting capital gains and dividend taxes below what they are presently. and three, providing as much tax relief as possible by using 10:14:42.6 appropriate revenue-raising measures. we ended up with the cornerstones of each bill in this conference report and made progress on some of the revenue raisers, meaning loophole closings and tax shelter abuse 10:15:00.0 closings. the extenders for the most part, well, i guess almost entirely, will be addressed in another vehicle. they're not part of this conference report. now, congressman thomas and i 10:15:15.7 have agreed on that point. we also agreed to resolve key senate priorities in the extender vehicle. can i tell members exactly what's going to be in that vehicle? i can't because we are still negotiating. 10:15:30.8 what i can tell members is that we had good preliminary negotiations, and i feel that we have a solid foundation to make -- to come to a fair compromise on these issues. the final determination of those key senate priorities will be -- will depend upon the vehicle 10:15:49.3 that it would go with and other parts of the agreement when it is finalized. now, after laying out the basic structure of the conference agreement and the senate's key provisions, the alternative minimum tax hold harmless, i'd 10:16:05.8 like to talk about the parts of the agreement that the house needed. the dividend and capital gains provision in the house bill were met with strong opposition from the other side. a principle argument against 10:16:23.1 this policy made over and over again by the democrats is that it is simply a tax cut for high-income people, and so i use the word "tax cut," and that brings me to emphasize once again that if anybody says we're cutting taxes, we're maintaining 10:16:40.1 existing tax policy for an additional number of years, and 10:16:47.9 without doing that then, we would get an automatic increase in taxes basically undercutting what chairman greenspan has said about the goose that laid the 10:17:04.6 golden egg. this tax policy that we adopted in 2003 being responsible for the 18 quarters of economic growth that we've had. now, in support of their claim, democrats cite distorted 10:17:18.4 statistics that include taxpayers that don't receive dividends or capital gains. they fail to take into account the 0% rate for lower income taxpayers in 2008 and ignore the size of the overall income tax 10:17:35.3 liability that taxpayers bear.n by my under the previous order of 2005 data that i received from the joint committee on taxation, shows that lower-income taxpayers have more 10:17:51.2 at stake than higher-income taxpayers. let me explain because i used the term joint committee on taxation. this is not a republican or democrat operation. these are professional people that spend their lifetime -- 10:18:06.9 whatever time they're in public service -- on this committee becoming experts on the tax code, the economic implications of tax policy and whether it's good for bad -- good or bad for the economy, whether it brings 10:18:22.4 in more or less money for the federal treasury. these are not people speaking with a republican hat or democrat hat. i think them quite -- quoting their statistics ought to have a 10:18:39.2 great deal of credibility because they are professional people. i want to go back and say again this is 2005 data received from the joint committee on taxation showing that lower-income taxpayers actually have more at 10:18:53.9 stake than higher-income taxpayers. of course, i don't mean to say in absolute dollar amounts because i can't say that. but i can say in percentage advantage to various income classes that lower income 10:19:12.7 taxpayers have more at stake than higher income taxpayers. it's common sense then for me -- for my saying that because higher income taxpayers receive higher tax cuts measured in dollar terms quite simply 10:19:31.1 because they pay more taxes to begin with. but what i mean is that the extension of the lower rates on dividends and capital gains, not lowering them more but keeping them where they have been since 10:19:46.1 2003, will give lower income taxpayers greater tax saving as a percent of their total tax liability. it referred to a couple charts that summarize a tax saving as a 10:20:00.7 percentage of total income liability of average gross income levels. this is the chart here that we have up now. and that's the one i'm going to refer to. the chart illustrated the dividend tax saving as a 10:20:18.2 percentage of the total tax liability for those that benefit from the reduced rates. the savings percentages include 2008 savings when the tax rate for lower income taxpayers drops to 0% that we're going to 10:20:34.9 continue then for an additional period of time. that is the rate that we're talking about extending. based on my staff's analysis of the joint committee on taxation committa -- data, taxpayers will 10:20:51.8 adjusted gross income of less than $50,000 will seven 7.6% of their total income tax bill and seniors will say $17%. those making more than $200,000 10:21:06.5 will save a lot less of a percentage of their taxes paid at 2.2%. opponents of this policy want to persecute these taxpayers. and i would point to those over $200,000 and over by taking by 10:21:24.2 their 2.2% savings. but at the same time, they would punish these taxpayers, those under $50,000 at the lower-income level by taking 10:21:39.1 away their 7.6% savings. and they would punish these seniors in the same tax bracket 10:21:53.4 by taking away their 12.-- 17.1% savings. you can't help but wonder. we're all concerned about senior 10:22:03.9 citizens having a diseasent opportunity to have a good retirement when they worked and you have a chance to keep their tax saving what's they are right now, not raise them, not lower them anymore but raise their 10:22:19.4 taxes by 17.1%. this chart illustrated the relative savings from reduced -- from reduced capital gains, taxes across the alternative 10:22:35.4 minimum tax levels. now here again extending the lower tax rates will give a bigger percentage reduction in their tax bill to taxpayers making less than $50,000. opponents of this policy want to 10:22:53.6 persecute these taxpayers $200,000 and over by taking back their 7.6% savings. but that also has a negative impact upon lower income people, 10:23:11.6 people $50,000 and under by taking away their 2.2 -- 10.2% savings. and they would punish senior citizens by taking away their 10:23:28.4 13.2% savings. extending this tax policy, not cutting taxes, but extending existing tax policy will provide meaningful tax savings to taxpayers across the income 10:23:43.1 spectrum. lower income taxpayers will save more than higher income taxpayers when measured as a percentage of total tax liability. extending the lower rates will allow millions of americans to 10:23:57.5 keep more of their money to spend or add to their savings through reinvestment in the economy rather than give it to those of us in congress to spend for them. those on the other side describe the capital gains and the dividends provisions as applying 10:24:15.4 to only a few high-income taxpayers. the reality is reflected in the following chart that is now up there. the -- so take a look at capital gains. 10:24:30.8 i'm not going to go through every state but in the state of california, 829,616 families and individual taxpayers report capital gains. if you take a look at the dividend statistics in the state 10:24:50.2 of california 2,053,298 families of individual taxpayers report div denieds. 10:25:03.5 you know i'm not going to take time to go through every one of these but if you think that the economy growing at 4.8%, as chairman greenspan says, is because of the tax policies of 2003. 10:25:20.7 and we've got the economy growing, why would you want to hit these families with a big tax increase on capital gains in the millions. two million more families in 10:25:37.9 california is just one state to repeat. why would you want to hit them again? it seems to me in california would you want to keep the economy growing just like we want to keep the economy growing in aye. mr. president, we know that seven and a half million 10:25:53.5 families and individuals across the country with capital gains, and those are not all millionaires, obviously, we know 19 families and individuals across the country with 10:26:08.0 dividends are not millionaires. these numbers are based, again, on 2003 irs data. joint tax estimates over 2005 returns report dividend savings. 10:26:28.7 nearly six million of those returns will be filed by senior citizens and nearly 12 million will report capital gains tax savings with almost four million people who are seniors. these families and individuals 10:26:42.0 are not millionaires. yet, to listen to some on the 10:26:48.0 other side, all of these people are wealthy. that false assertion is going to be repeated time and time and time again. that false assertion in itself is their justification for 10:27:04.7 opposing this conference committee, putting in jeopardy what chairman greenspan said is the reason for economic recovery so putting in jeopardy economic recovery, and taxing all of 10:27:21.3 these people when this sunsets taxes will go up automatically because there won't be a vote of congress. it just doesn't make sense. to sum up my goal is to produce 10:27:39.2 a true bipartisan, bicameral compromise that would merge both bills. a true compromise of this nature should do three things ark come date the centerpiece of each bill, the a.m.t. relief in the 10:27:54.8 senate bill and the dividends and capital gains relief in the house bill. take care of common extenders and maximize tax relief by using appropriate revenue-raising measures. this bill contains the 10:28:10.0 cornerstone of each body's bill. this is conditioned upon an agreement between the ways and means and finance committee to process the extenders and other issues on later vehicles. i believe the conference agreement and collateral agreement on extenders is fair 10:28:27.3 outcome of the house and senate. and just to make everything relatively clear, i did not make up my mind to sign this conference report until six hours of negotiations with the house of representatives last friday. 10:28:42.2 even though we had an agreement on reconciliation, i wanted to make sure that there was some understanding on what we were going to have in the follow on bill that everything that couldn't be included in this conference report. 10:28:55.8 and as i said, it's somewhat under negotiation but i'm satisfied that we have enough of an agreement that i can come back and say that the things that the senate -- for the most part the things that the senate 10:29:13.7 are concerned about will be -- and that are very basic to our economic growth will be included in a bill that will come before the senate. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: who 10:29:32.3 yields time? the senator from montana. the senator from iowa. 10:29:51.3 mr. grassley: i have a unanimous consent request that ann freeman and elizabeth goff of the finance committee staff be given privileges of the floor for the duration of deliberation on h.r. 4297. 10:30:10.2 the presiding officer: without objection. mr. baucus: madam president, i ask consent that the following fellows, interns and details of staff of finance committee be allowed on the senate floor for the duration of the debate on the tax relief bill, h.r. 4297. mary baker, tom lutheran, 10:30:29.8 tiffany smith, robin burgess, crystal edwards, laura kelims, caroline olbrook, lauren hathaway. 10:30:46.5 the presiding officer: without objection. mr. baucus: i ask consent that the following deadline for second-degree amendments to s. 1955 occur at 3:00 p.m. today. the presiding officer: is there objection? without object. mr. baucus: madam president, i begin by commending my good 10:31:02.9 friend, the chairman of finance committee. he is a great american. people from iowa are very lucky to have him representing them. i know of no finer man in the senate and i know that senator 10:31:19.1 grassley sought to defend the senate's position in the finance committee. he is a proud man, too. he is going to do what is right in representing the senate's position. the conference before us today is much, much different from the 10:31:37.6 bill that passed the senate. so different i'm raises questions and may raise questions as to how much of the senate bill really got into the 10:31:46.2 conference. madam president, this past saturday lillian esplin died. she was the last american survivor of the 1912 sinking of the titanic. she was the last survivor with 10:32:01.7 actual memories of event. her life reminds us that people make choices and those choices can have significant consequences.n the bill before us today 10:32:15.8 reflects choices, and those choices will have significant consequences. shortly after midnight on that cold morning of april 15, 1912, passengers started evacuating that doomed ship. at first women and children went. 10:32:31.0 they were first. but it was not long were that rule gave way. soon it became career that the privileged went into the rescue boats first. about that time, the most extraordinary thing happened. some of those privileged and wealthy passengers decided to 10:32:48.9 give up their place in line. they decided to let others go first. benjamin guggenheim, the son of the closly wealthy magnate sipd brandy and smoked cigars on the deck of a chair while the ship 10:33:05.1 went down. today op this bill we see no such valor. we see no such sacrifice. rather in this bill ideological wants push their way to the front of the line ahead of america's needs. 10:33:23.0 at the end of last year, 16,000 american businesses lost their tax incentive to create high-paying research jobs for american-based workers. relief for them did not make it into this bill. at the end of last year, last 10:33:38.1 year, madam president, millions of schoolteachers lost a small but significant tax break for classroom supplies that they purchased out of pocket, but relief for them did not make it into this bill. ot the end of last year, 10:33:52.5 millions of middle-income american families with kids in college lost the ability to deduct tuition costs. relief for them did not make it into this bill. these provisions that some 10:34:09.1 people call popularly tax extenders were given second-class status. they did not make it into the lifeboat. and to what did these popular, already-expired tax provisions 10:34:25.0 give way? well, first-class passenger is a tax break for investors, for which one dollar will not be used until 2009. not one dollar will be used 10:34:46.4 until january 1, 2009, several years from now. but some will see this tax break for 2009 is desperately needed today. why, they say? well, to provide certainty. you the might just as well say that this tax bill does just 10:35:03.5 that, it just prevents the tax increases for nose wealthy -- for the most wealthy off in the future, 2009, because this bill chose to prevent a tax increase in 2009 rather than prevent tax increases in 2006. 10:35:17.9 for the millions of families, teachers and businesses and workers out there who lost their tax benefits on january 1 of this year, there is no tax increase prevention act. there is no tax increase prevention act for the so-called second-class citizens. 10:35:33.3 i don't call them second class at all. they're americans. they're teachers. they're people who work in research and development. they're families and kids trying to pay tuition costs. no, it's no relief for them. those provisions expired at the end of last year. 10:35:51.3 we're in 2006. they're not in this bill. middle-american provision aren't in this bill. no. rather what's in mill this bill is for 2009, a tax break for 2009 for the most wealthy. 10:36:04.8 some will also say, don't worry, other tax legislation may be, might be, should be coming soon. yes, and the check is in the mail. some will say that these 2009 cuts on capital gains and dividends benefit all americans. 10:36:23.6 you will see a blizzard of quotes to try substantiate that point, including the chart you recently saw from my good friend from iowa. that is not a joint tax committee chart. that's a chart based by the finance committee staff on joint tax committee statistics, and 10:36:38.3 that chart frankly, madam president, is -- it does not 10:36:44.6 accurately portray the facts. many commentators have pointed out the discrepancies in that chart. i'm not going to get in into a tit and at the, back and forth, and whose statistics are better, the other person's statistics. i'll just say this: it defies 10:37:01.8 common sense to argue that a tax break that takes effect in 2009 for the most wealthy americans somehow benefits middle-income and lower-income americans more than the most wealthy. that totally defies logic. if somebody can come up with a set of statistics to make that 10:37:17.0 point, but it's patently absurd. some will say these 2009 cuts benefit all americans, and you'll see statistics, but that's not the fact. i decided to go to the source. i represent montana and the more 10:37:34.9 than 900,000 residents of montana. i asked the department of revenue where the benefit of these tax cuts would go. of course, not everyone in montana has this type of investment income. so the department of revenue, my state in montana, told me that 10:37:54.9 just 400 households in montana will receive an average benefit of $14,000 from the capital gains tax cut in 2009. roughly 90% of the households in 10:38:07.6 montana would get almost zero benefit from the capital gains cut. 90% almost zero benefit. these numbers, it's very hard fur me to understand how this 2009 tax break is urgent while montana teachers and families with kids in college have lost 10:38:22.6 their tax break last december must wait for the next rescue boat, whenever it may or may not occur. of course, i'm very pleased that protection is in this bill for the alternative minimum tax. i am pleased that conferees 10:38:40.6 included the full senate-passed version. some may recall it was a struggle to get that in the senate-passed version last november. the original version and the version that came out of the committee was not a full hold harmless to the alternative minimum tax. 10:38:54.3 those verges would have left 600,000 families paying that tax. we fought to improve the senate bill to a true hold harmless, and we succeed in finally doing so before the bill left the senate. that version is retained today. this protection from alternative 10:39:11.6 minimum will protect almost 17 million families across our country, including 45,000 in montana. the montana tax collector tells me that the protection will help about a quarter of all households in montana with 10:39:26.4 incomes between $45,000 and $80,000. that group might otherwise have seen an average tax increase of $1,700. unfortunately, there is little else in this bill to be proud of. working families have been left behind. 10:39:40.3 congress has chosen ideological wants over americans' needs. the senate-passed bill did the tax business that congress needed to do this year. i'm proud of that bill. in contrast, the bill before us today leaves much work undone. as a result, the deficit will 10:39:58.1 probably be larger because the cron frees made the choices that they -- the conferees made the choices that they did. i'll have more to say about the fiscal effects of this bill, madam president. in the end, those effects may be the real iceberg. 10:40:11.7 the fiscal effects of this policy may be the real disaster. madam president, i urge my colleagues to reject the choices made by this conference. i urge my colleagues to vote against leaving those families and teachers and workers behind. i urge my colleagues to reject 10:40:27.3 this disastrous bill. one other point, madam president, is this: the conferees had a choice basically is while we do one thing we had to do -- i shouldn't say we because i wasn't on the conference. 10:40:42.3 i was not allowed to be a member of the conference, but while the conferees did do something that was good, that is make sure that taxpayers don't have to pay alternative minimum tax, they had another choice. the choice basically is this: do they enact a tax break that 10:41:01.5 doesn't take effect until 2009 for the most wealthy american taxpayers? , or -- or do they include provisions like a research and development tax credit, a work 10:41:15.2 opportunity tax credit, a child -- i mean the tuition tax deduction, the teachers' credit which expired last career? do they enact those and extend those for this year so people this year can still continue to 10:41:33.7 know that research and development is important? again, the choice is on the one hand enact a provision that doesn't take effect until 2009 for the most wealthy, or instead 10:41:45.7 of doing that because that can be postponed for a couple years, we're not yet until 2009, or extent provisions which expired last year where american business and industry and 10:41:59.0 innovators are desperately depending on the research and experimentation tax credit to help america be competitive in the world, and include provisions, parents paying for 10:42:14.7 college tuition count on, teachers count on for supplies and so forth, all these which expired last year. again the choice is 2009 break or help those -- help maintain those provisions which expired last year. that's basically all this comes 10:42:30.1 down to. this that is the choice there is before the conferees. and the conferees chose the former. they chose the 2009 extension that benefits the most wealthy 10:42:46.5 as the expense of american businesses, companies, universities so depending on the research and experimentation tax credit at the expense of teachers who so clearly today depend upon that extra help for classroom supplies. 10:43:03.2 at the expense of kids and families who so need that tuition deduction. that was the choice that was made and the choice, as i said, it was ideological wants of a few at the expense of america's 10:43:21.0 needs. that's basically what's before us today. that is why i think it makes sense not to pass this conference report. madam president, our country is in a battle. it's a competitive battle with the rest of the world, with 10:43:36.4 china, india, eastern european countries, so many countries that are so excited about their future. they're trying to increase their economic position. i take my hat off to them. they're trying very, very hard, and they're doing a great job. certainly businesses in china 10:43:51.8 and india are. we have to meet that challenge. we have to -- it's a great opportunity for us, madam president, but to meet that challenge, we have to start today thinking strategically, thinking longer term. what does that mean? that means much more attention 10:44:08.7 on education, a lot more attention on education. we have the best and the brightest in america that can design the products that we can utilize here, high-paying jobs here and export those products overseas. we also -- there's so much we have to do here. we have to stop thinking short 10:44:24.5 term in this country, in this congress, in this administration, and start laying the foundation for the long term. now, some will say, well, in 2009 we needed 2009 extended for two more years, the capital 10:44:39.3 gains tax cut because that's good for america, well, i might say, madam president, i have lots of arguments and statements by very reputable people that say that's not the case. let me just say a couple of them right here. let's take the federal reserve. 10:44:56.7 the truth is that the stock market -- talk about the stock market. let me say it this way, federal reserve economists recently compared key u.s. stocks which would benefit from the 2003 tax 10:45:11.4 cuts to other investments which would not. what did they conclude? what did federal reserve economists conclude? quote -- "question we failed to find much if any imprint of the dividend to the stock market." 10:45:28.4 that's the conclusion of the federal reserve economist. the congressional research service agrees. what do they say? quote -- "any stock market effects represent temporary ridfalls and are simply a manifest station of the tax cuts. 10:45:42.7 these wealth effects should not be considered an additional stimulus. recent studies find that dividends had increased substantially and have been used to a tax cut induces private savings. this evidence does not appear robust." there's just lots of comments, madam president, lots. 10:45:58.5 why is the economy doing pretty well today? the proponents of this bill, this conference report would like to say it's because of the tax cuts. madam president, the stock market went up dramatically more before those tax cuts went into effect, and since those tax cuts 10:46:15.2 went into effect, the stock market has not develop so well. i might also point out that the economy is doing well. why? read this morning's paper. read this morning's paper. there is a big long article asking why the economy is doing so well. what are the conclusions 10:46:30.2 basically? it's because of strong, arrogant demand. where? when, india, for commodity, for oil, for gas, for coal, for 10:46:45.4 uranium. that's what i think has kept basically demand strong. it's also frankly the major propellant for the economy today. 10:46:55.0 it's not the dividends capital gains tax cut. that's a ruse, madam president. i'm not going to go on on that point because i know subsequent speakers will have a blizzard of statistics that show that's the case. i'm not going to make those points here today, but it kind of gets to another point. 10:47:12.1 let me ask this: madam president, when the rooster crows, does that cause the sun to come up?n i don't think so. 10:47:31.5 does a cap gains cut cause the great economy we have? not necessarily. you have to ask yourself what is the real cause. i think the real cause is the underlying demand again from overseas, other countries which 10:47:45.9 are buying so many commodity and one reason why the price of oil is so high today. that's what causing the market to go up. that's what causing the economy to be strong. we have to ask ourselves, too, that's today. 10:48:00.6 what about tomorrow? what about two or three years from now? don't forget the tax breaks could blow a hole in the budget deficit and make the deficit much, much worse. we want to be strong tomorrow, madam president. 10:48:16.7 by tomorrow i mean next three months, next three years. we want job demand to be high and wages to be high. i say that will happen the more we today focus on the basics and the basics again are education, research and development so that 10:48:33.0 we start strategically to plan for our kids and grand kids. again, this conference report before us decides against that. this conference report says no, no forget the basics. forget teachers. 10:48:47.5 forget research and development even though those provisioned compared last year -- expired last year. we don't do anything about them this year. we're going to pass a provision that doesn't take effect for two years for the wealthy. that's not the choice, i think, 10:49:04.7 most americans want us to make. madam president, i yield the floor. before i yield the floor i notice senator bingaman, dodd to address the senate. i ask that whether they wish to 10:49:21.2 speak and if not, i'd yield ten minutes to senator bingaman to be followed by 15 minimums to -- minutes to senator dodd. i put in that request. the presiding officer: without objection. 10:49:35.5 mr. bingaman: thank you very much -- mr. baucus: madam president, just to minimize, ten minutes for singman followed by 15 minutes for senator dodd. 15, 1-5. the presiding officer: is there objection? 10:49:50.5 without objection. the senator from new mexico. mr. bingaman: thank you, madam president and thanks to my colleague, senator baucus for his statement and leadership and yielding me a few minutes to make a few points here. i know my colleague from connecticut is hear read to -- ready to make additional points. 10:50:08.3 i'll try to be brief with this. i want to point out some of the reasons i'm strongly opposed to this reconciliation bill. i don't think it's responsible for us to support another -- go forward with debt financing of 10:50:24.3 another tax cut for the wealthiest in the country while as i see it we are ignoring the need to reduce the deficit. we're ignoring many of the country's other needs, and we are not following through on earlier efforts we've made to 10:50:42.4 create an energy plan for the country. and i want to refer to that since i've been involved in some of the legislation that put that plan in place. a few weeks ago, maybe just a week ago now, time flies around 10:50:58.1 this place but the majority held a press conference announcing a variety of initiatives to deal with our energy problems. one of them, of course, was to have a $100 check to be sent to each taxpayer in the country. 10:51:13.2 the public reaction was pretty swift. it was pretty clear that the public thought it was a gimmick. they thought this was irresponsible particularly given the size of our deficit. and they essentially decided, the majority decided that that 10:51:29.7 was not part of their tax -- a part of their energy plan that they wanted to proceed with. now they are bringing to the floor, the senate floor, a tax 10:51:40.8 bill which ask virtually -- does virtually nothing for most of these people who previously were in line to get this $100 tax rebate. and i think that the question probably is coming back to some 10:51:56.8 of these people now that if we're really -- if we really can afford to give the kind of tax relief that is provided for in this bill to those who are better off in our country, those who are wealthier in our 10:52:12.8 country, maybe we should go ahead and send $100 to everyone, just sort of as a consolation prize so they too could participate in this tax-cutting effort. i think we ought to think of this in the context of what 10:52:30.0 we've been doing in the last few weekings around -- weeks around here. it's estimated in new mexico there are about 18% that will in fact receive any benefit at all from the reconciliation bill that we're considering here. if you look specifically at the 10:52:47.0 bottom 60% of working new mexico families, their average tax cut is $15. in contrast, the top 5% in my state would get 64% of this tax cut. 10:53:00.7 this is at a time when the price of gasoline is very high, when the price of educating a person -- a family's children is very high, when the price of health care is extremely high. and obviously there's a ring of unfairness about this -- the 10:53:19.2 allocation of these tax benefits which i think strikes everybody. i wanted to talk a minute about this -- these provisions related to energy. an important part of the emergency bill we -- energy bill we passed was to provide tax 10:53:36.8 incentives that would move us away from dependence on foreign oil. we pass aid variety of those. let -- passed a variety of those. let me put up a chart that lists them. 10:53:51.0 there's an r & d credit which has already expired. there's electricity from alternative fuels. there was an energy efficiency home tax credit where you get a credit if you wanted to put a solar heating system on your 10:54:10.2 house, for example, a credit for fuel cells, microturbines, clean renewable energy bonds, hybrid vehicle credit. we put a lot of those in the law. 10:54:23.3 unfortunately what we did because of the fiscal situation of the country we said they'll all expire at the end of the 2007. and that date is approaching. and frankly, the way we wrote it, we said you cannot get the tax credit that we are writing 10:54:43.2 here into law unless you have put your project, you built it and put it into service prior to the expiration of the tax credit. well the exieration of the tax credit is -- exieration of the -- exieration of the tax 10:55:01.4 credit -- we can't proceed with a windfarm. we can't proceed with the solar power installation because the tax credits are going way. we ought to be addressing that, madam president. instead, what we've done is we're sighing let's add a couple 10:55:16.2 years out to 2011 to these tax provisions that assist the most wealthy in our country. and i think that is misplaced pryers. 10:55:30.7 it's very important that this congress try to follow through on what we did last year. we have a very short attention span in the congress. two weeks ago everyone was rushing around holding press conferences about how we're going to solve our energy problems, but here we are now using up any ability that we've 10:55:49.7 got to extends the tax credits that were part of the solution to our energy problem down the road. so i think we need to think about that. i hope we do think about it. let me talk about one other 10:56:03.2 issue that i just think is so egregious it needs to be focused on before the vote on this bill. and that is a -- you know what brought this to my attention quite frankly was i was down get age cup of coffee this morning 10:56:19.6 on my way to the office and one of the people who works in one of our offices i said to her good morning. she said good morning, another beautiful day in the land of make believe. i thought that sounds right. and i started questioning as i 10:56:36.7 was going back to my office, 10:56:39.5 now, exactly why do we all agree that this is the land the mark believe this, congress, this capitol hill is the land of make believe. and then it came clear to me when i focused on this provision. 10:56:54.8 under current rules here in the senate, we can't consider this bill as a reconciliation bill under special procedures. if it in fact would make the deficit worse outside the budget window, that means after 2010, outside the five-year period, 10:57:14.2 it's clear to everyone who is willing to look at it that this bill does add to the deficit after 2022, but the folks who put this bill together have found a very ingenious offset which they claim will allow them 10:57:33.7 to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest in our country without in fact adding to that deficit outside the budget window. you say what is that ingenious offset. it's a provision that lieus couples with -- allows couples 10:57:50.9 with incomes over $160,000 to convert their individual retirement accounts from regular conventional accounts into roth i.r.a.'s and pay whatever tax is due in accomplishing that which 10:58:05.3 would be some tax. and, of course, once they have made that conversion from the i.r.a. to the roth i.r.a. then they have paid the taxes due and any future earnings that is 10:58:20.6 protected from any future obligations. that's why when we wrote the roth i.r.a. into law we made provisions saying we'll only give this tax benefit to people whose incomes are not too hoe. if a couple has over $160,000 in 10:58:37.6 income they are not he will ij yebl for a roth i.r.a. that was what we determined. we said you can't confor the a regular i.r.a. into a roth i.r.a. if your income is too 10:58:52.8 high. in this bill we're saying that's not the case. if you are bill gates or warren buffett, whoever you are, if you have a regular i.r.a., you are welcome to convert it into a roth i.r.a., pay the taxes due 10:59:08.2 and from then on there's no tax due. so the purpose of this. now, why would we stick this in? this is another tax break for the wealthiest in our country. why would we stick it in? because it results in some 10:59:24.4 additional revenue coming into the federal treasury over the first three years in effect. while people are making these conversions and paying the tax that they have to make to make those conversions, the interests treasury 10:59:40.4 is earning money and we can use that money to offset the large deficit incoke crease that otherwise -- increase that otherwise would be occurring after this budgetary window so to speak. of course, after the federal treasury receives that receive 10:59:58.5 influence for three years -- revenue for three years, it starts losing revenue as a result of this provision. as our vice president would say, it loses revenue big time after that. we would lose $4.5 billion in
PETE BUTTIGIEG ARNOLDS PARK IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI 2020/HD
TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG ARNOLDS PARK IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI 011620 2020 EMMETSBURG, IA - Pete Buttigieg is avoiding getting caught in the middle of the feud between Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders. "I'll leave it to the pundits to talk about horse race stuff," Buttigieg told reporters following a town hall this afternoon and pivoted to driving in the message of his campaign as the caucus gets closer. "What I'll say is that I think we've got a winning message. And I also think that, you know, this race is very fluid, which is why we've got to continue getting that message out all the way until the day of the caucuses. I imagine the competition will increase but the values of the message aren't going to change." ABC followed up, asking if Buttigieg thinks that sort of infighting weakens Democrats as they try to unseat President Trump. "Look, at the end of the day, we are one party and we share the overwhelming majority of values and ideas that are at stake right now. The nature of the primary process is that we're competing not just on our ideas, but on our different approaches. Naturally I think that I have something to offer that's different outside of Washington - with generational change and a different perspective from on the ground. But we've got to make sure even or especially as we're in the heat of competition, that at the end of the day, we are prepared to come back and rally around our nominee no matter whoever - who it is." [143242 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG EMMETSBURG IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI] Despite the passage of the USMCA deal in the Senate, Buttigieg says "at the end of the day, the President's trade policy has been disastrous for farmers." "I'm glad he's been able to take a step, one by the way that was made dramatically better by the intervention of Democrats who negotiated more labor protections, and more enforceability. But I just met a corn and soybean farmer on the ropeline here who's is talking about how, with the announcement of China corn's, actually down quite a bit today. I haven't had a chance to look at the numbers, but I think it shows that a lot of this is just putting out fires that he himself starting. He may claim credit for this, but frankly, we should be demanding much, much better with Washington when it comes to supporting our communities and our members." [143114 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG EMMETSBURG IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI] During a town hall in Arnolds Park this afternoon, a female voter who said she recently moved to Iowa to take over a family farm, said the USMCA deal seems to be on the right track, but they are still struggling. She asked Buttigieg for his plan. "The number of farm bankruptcies, and family farms folding is alarming right now and we got to turn it around. There's some good news in things like the, the USMCA, and this China package but honestly you look at the China package and a lot of what they're doing is putting out a fire this president started in the first place." [155706 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG ARNOLDS PARK IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI] Buttigieg said farmers, consumers and workers need to be the priority going forward and not "multinational corporations" looking for tax breaks. As Democrats try to win back Obama/Trump voters in Iowa, something Buttigieg has campaigned heavily on, he says those voters are focused on what's happening in Washington and take each election as its own. "I'm speaking to some of the same communities that the President claims to speak for and speak to. In fact, I come from the kind of community that he claims to speak for and speak to. And it has been striking, especially as we speak to I think some of the voters who have maybe been taking their time before really paying attention, but now they are, that they're not necessarily tribal partisans. They are taking each election on its own terms. And these are folks who may have voted for President Trump last time but that doesn't mean that they're committed to him." [142937 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG EMMETSBURG IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI] During a town hall in Algona this morning, a woman said she voted for Trump in 2016 because she thought he'd fix problems in this country. She said she watching Buttigieg during Tuesday's debate and thought he skirted a question on how he plans to defeat Trump on the issue of the economy. "So, the way I see it, the only economic promise that this president has kept is when he went and passed those big tax cuts for corporations and all that other stuff about the working man and the forgotten men and women and farmers and workers. We haven't seen a lot, come about there," Buttigieg told her. [120118 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG TOWN HALL ALGONA IA ABC UNI] "So now I think it's time to call him out on those promises and yeah putting me in is not sending a billionaire to deal with another billionaire, that's true, sending me in is actually sending the one person who's not a billionaire or a millionaire running for president to speak to and for our communities in our economies, with the policies they're blocking." [120323 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG TOWN HALL ALGONA IA ABC UNI] Another moment from this morning's town hall in Algona was when a high school student asked Buttigieg to explain his position on wanting to abolish the electoral college and how that would impact presidential candidates from campaigning in small cities. "It's a fair question. But, but here's why I don't think that'll happen. Think about, think about every other election we run in the country, whether it's for Congress, for mayor, county commissioner, for governor, for senator. We just give it to the person who got the most votes, right? Now, if somebody is running for governor of Iowa, they gotta go to the Des Moines, they got ta to Sioux City, they gotta go to Davenport. But they also better turn up in Algona and in Winterset and in Knoxville. You got to be everywhere." [120641 - TVU 20 PETE BUTTIGIEG TOWN HALL ALGONA IA ABC UNI] [15:37:45] Mike Allen, so much after meeting you, I'd want to vote for me. So that's exactly what we're counting on from volunteers. Thank you to Kirk. Thank you to everyone in our organization. BECK Let me ask anyone. Our organizers, our precinct leaders, volunteers, just give a quick wave so you know afterwards who to come up to if you want to be a little more involved there. They're all all around the room. And thanks to all of you. [15:38:08] Thanks for making me feel right at home with a classic subzero lakeside gathering says Midwestern as it gets. And for caring enough about where we're headed as a country to join us as part of the process of changing together some of those things that Ellen was talking about, because I get how exhausting it is to watch the news now. I mean, I'm living and breathing politics and I find it exhausting. To see what's going on in Washington. To see this sense that things are a foregone conclusion before they even get to the floor of the Senate. I think it creates a temptation to just turn it off and walk away. [15:38:52] And the fact that you're here means you see the alternative, which is not to switch it off, but to change it, to change the channel to a whole different show. And that's our opportunity. And Iowa, as you know, has a thumb on the scale in deciding how we're going to do that, we are just days away from the caucuses in which Iowans are going to come together and send that first message after a year of campaigning that began for us with four people on an exploratory committee. Nobody able to figure out how to say my name. [15:39:28] No money. Not a big mailing list. An office about the size of the space where I'm standing right now. And now we have come to this point and I'm asking you to caucus for me so that we can turn the page on where we are as a country. I'll be very brief in my remarks because I think we have just the right kind of room to have more of a conversation. But I want to share a little bit about the values and the vision that are propelling this whole thing. The vision is about the first day a day I want you to picture in as much detail as you can. Will be probably a cold day, might be iced over just like this, but it will be the first day that the sun comes up. And Donald Trump is no longer the president of the United States. [15:40:15] This campaign is about that day, and it's not just about bringing that day about. And I think if we want to make sure that that day comes sooner rather than later, we're going to have a nominee who is from outside Washington, who comes from the industrial Midwest, who's opening the door to a new generation, who can challenge this president on issues from the economy to the military to just the decency that we are missing in the White House. [15:40:39] But I'm also asking you to picture that day to think about what this election really is over, which is not just how to get there and not just how to defeat this president and change the course of the country. But then one thing about how it'll actually be how you actually feel on that day, we're going to be exhausted from fighting torn up over politics. We will be a divided nation on that day, needing a president who is focused on bringing us back together. We're also going to be a country dealing with some of the toughest issues we've ever faced. [15:41:13] And they're only going to be worse at that moment because they're not taking a vacation for the impeachment process or the election or the rest of it. We're still going to be in a climate that is this close to the point of no return. We are still going to be in a gun violence crisis that has kids learning active shooter drills before they're old enough to learn how to read. We're still going to be in an economy where the president wants us to think everything's going great because the stock market's looking good and meanwhile, so many communities and so many families are saying when it does any of that going to get to us, because even when pay does go up, it's not going as fast as the cost of health. [15:41:49] The cost of. Education, the cost of long term care, which barring some medical miracle miracle, each one of us gets one year closer to needing each passing year. We've got to be preparing for this. We've got to be acting on this and we've got to do it fast. That means we're going to need a president ready to unify us and undertake big actions at the same time to be energetic and original and vigorous and bold in order to solve those problems. And at the same time, I'm offering you a way to do it. That would have you when you are watching the news, actually start to feel your blood pressure go down a little bit stead of up to the roof. [15:42:26] That's what this is about. And if we follow the values that unify us as Americans in the direction that they can lead us, we're going to get just that if we pay attention, for example, to what love of country requires of us. But take it seriously. That's going to lead us forward. Now, when I say love a country, I'm not talking about a president throwing himself a military parade. That's not my version of patriotism. I'm talking about honoring our troops by seeing to it that they are never sent into harm's way when there is an alternative. That's how we make good on the way we feel about our country and our military. [15:43:05] Others I'm talking about a love of country that looks forward and looks around us and realizes that love of country starts right here at home. Our country consists of people who can't love a country if you hate half of the people in it. If we're serious about protecting this country, let's protect our country's future, let's protect our climate from reaching the point of no return and rise to meet that as a national security emergency. Let's protect each other from gun violence and not allow the Second Amendment to become an excuse for doing nothing at all. When most Americans get that, we need to take commonsense measures to prevent gun violence. These are questions of national security, and that's where the values of protecting our country and loving our country ought to lead us. That's how it will work in my White House. You will see the same values that are being used to divide Americans today. Instead used to unite us, even values like faith. We got a president out there trying to fit God into the boundaries of the Republican Party. What I'm offering is a White House that you wouldn't have to watch and scratch your head and ask yourself as they cut food stamps. [15:44:10] Whatever happened, I was hungry and you did not feed me or as they refused refugee resettlement in Texas. Whatever happened, I was a stranger and you welcomed me. I'm offering a different view to where these values can take us that we can do. And at the same time, lift up the principle that this country belongs to people of every religion and of no religion. Equally. Talking about the way we value work as a country, and if we really value work, let's make sure that we're not taxing work more than we tax wealth. Let's make sure that the biggest multinational corporations, the world aren't paying zero in taxes. When you and I have to pay on what we earn. I'm thinking about values like democracy, but really honoring the value of democracy means making sure that we don't have districts drawn where politicians get to pick out their voters or elections where money is able to outvote people. [15:45:03] And if the only way we can deal with Citizens United is constitutional reform, then that's exactly why the founders invented the process of amendment in the first place. Let's not be afraid to use it. These are our values, democracy, freedom. But but we're not free just from cutting every tax and regulation and program out there. That's not enough to make us free. Freedom means being able to live a life of our choosing. Sometimes that is about getting government out of the way. I'm for keeping government out of the business of dictating to women what the reproductive health care choices ought be. For example. [15:45:42] Other times, it means the public sector stepping up. We are made more free because we have roads and bridges and schools. Speaking of schools, how about a secretary of education who believes in public education and supports those schools and the teachers who work there? [15:45:57] And I think you're not free if you don't have health care. That's why I believe we've got to step up and create what we're calling Medicare for all who want it public program that anybody can get in on. But I respect your freedom to decide whether you want it, because if you'd rather be on some other plan, that's fine by me. The point is not for the government to be your health insurer. The point is to make sure there is no such thing as an uninsured American. [15:46:18] And that's what we're gonna do together. So you see on the urgent issues that this country faces where we can't wait any longer, from climate to gun violence to racial and economic inequality to mental health and addiction, there is a strong American majority ready to come together and get big things done. But we have to engage that majority. We've got to galvanize and not polarize that American majority to come together. And that is why this campaign is reaching out to Democrats. We are reaching out to independents. [15:46:51] We are seeing an awful lot of what I like to call future former Republicans who maybe aren't going to agree with me on everything, but can agree that we've got to change the course that this country is on. And this is our chance, our only chance to defeat this president, replace him and do it so big that Trump ism goes into the history books, too. And we can build a better future for all of us. That's what this campaign is about. Built on the idea that the presidency has a purpose and the purpose of the office. The purpose of the presidency is not to glorify the president. It is to unify and empower the American people to get big things done together. That's what I'm asking you to help us with. [15:47:31] That's why I'm asking you to caucus for. [15:47:36] So hopefully that gives you a sense of the values that motivate this campaign. But like I said, I want to be short on monologue and really have a conversation. So I think we might have folks with drab mike runners. Great. So, Michael, come to you and let's talk about whatever is on your mind. [15:47:55] Give me that shit I've got over the Midwest. But think like. [15:48:02] Nice to meet you. I've been waiting for an opportunity to hear you speak most of the time. It's during the day when I'm at work. So today I took the afternoon off during the trouble. Yeah. Yeah, I appreciate it. My question. I work for a small community financial institution. Obviously, you know, in the financial district, we don't like regulation. I understand that it has its place. We have to protect the consumer. One of the things that I'm not sure you're aware of is that community credit unions. No, they pay absolutely no federal income tax. That was built into their charter. Long time ago because they were serving. [15:48:48] A different set of community, they have gotten away from that. That mission. And they pay nothing in federal income tax. I pay more as a single mom with two kids than they do. What I would like to see is something built into your ear, your fiscal plan that would make them pay for the same amount that a regular financial institution pays for. Take that free ride away from them, especially if they're off their mission. I think that would free up some money for Medicare for those that want it. So wanted to just not really a question, but just to make you aware that that is an inequality within the financial institution area. So thanks. [15:49:40] Well, let me mention a couple of things that that makes me think of. The first is, are you. Is your institution a CFI or can you develop? There's a federal category of community development, financial institution. I'm not sure whether yours meets that definition or not, but they they provide a very important role. And I think we've got to get more capital to them. A lot of times they're making loans and they're making credit available in the very areas of communities that are the most underserved. And it's actually a pretty good deal. [15:50:12] They have a lower level of loss than a lot of routine commercial banking, but they're not getting nearly enough capital. And so part of what is in our plan would be a five times multiplier on your CRM credit. So I'm geeking out here on financial stuff I think is real port to get more of that capital into these institutions in the first place. And I do think without being ready to make any blanket statement about tax exemption, I do think we should make sure that any organization that Joy's a federal charter like these credit unions is hewing to the kind of mission and the kind of community benefit that explains why that category was created to begin with and also a level of transparency around making sure that lending is fair. [15:50:51] We want to create a unnecessary burden of paperwork, but we do need to make sure at a time when a lot of the institutions have not been able to demonstrate that they can flow funds to where they need to go. And you see so many thinking, especially about minority and women owned businesses with a great track record of creating opportunity for others, but a much harder time of getting the support that they need. And so we've got to act on that. Now, the other thing that that really fires me up about who's paying what taxes you and I also paid more taxes last year than Amazon did on billions of dollars in profit. [15:51:27] Chevron met. In fact, they paid negative taxes. I don't even know how that works, but I know that it's wrong because they made billions and billions of dollars of profit. And if we're serious about investing where we have been disinvesting schools, health care, infrastructure, roads and bridges, we've got structurally deficient roads and bridges all over this country. We were just in. We're just in a community where a couple of folks talking about how they can't even count on clean water from right. [15:51:58] Right here in Iowa. They don't have good water. And if we continue disinvesting in those things while creating loopholes, billions of dollars wide for some of the biggest countries companies in the world to walk through, it shows just how upside down our tax code is. And it's what we've got to fix. [15:52:17] Thanks for being here. [15:52:31] Two questions. I have two questions. First off, college kids getting out of college today have huge college debts and they have to consolidate those and they're paying 6 percent or more interest. I think that's wrong when you can't even get 1 percent interest at a bank or anything on your savings account. What do you have in mind for that? Second question is with your house health care plan, say you work for a company that has the Cadillac benefits, OK? And you have while you don't. You can choose them or something else. Well, what makes the companies say we're not going to do that anymore? Choose something else. Right. [15:53:15] So on the latter, what we've got to do is make sure that we set a floor, not a ceiling. [15:53:20] So the floor is that there's gonna be this plan that is good. That is strong. That's available to everybody. And then if a company wants to set themselves apart. If an employer either because a union negotiated for it or because they want that to be their competitive edge, then they will continue to go beyond that. That's actually how health insurance, as we know it got started. So during World War Two period, there were a lot of controls on wages. And companies were looking for other ways to appeal to workers. So they threw in health otherwise. I mean, you never we never would've invented the system we have now from scratch. It got here because of employers trying to differentiate themselves. [15:53:56] But then we got to a situation where if your employer didn't offer good health care coverage or if you're part timers, they call your contractor, even though you're really working full time, they just don't give you the credit for it, then you're stuck. The ACA got us part of the way toward dealing with that. But we're still seeing how many people are left without care. Now, the truth is, I think my plan will be so good that most people want it anyway that people will actually walk away from those private plans and come to ours. But I'm not willing to assume that's true. I'm going to let people decide for themselves. So I think our plan is great. I think anybody would want it. But if I'm wrong in anybody's individual case, I don't want to force it on you. And that's why we're going to make sure that optionality remains in the policy that you can choose. Instead of me saying by a certain date, everybody come over to our plan on the student loan thing that's kind of personal for us. [15:54:46] So I'm married to a teacher and have a whole other thing about teacher pay. You know, as a household now, we have six figure debt because he did the right thing and went through school and and became a teacher as a master's degree, I think got paid more working as a bartender, trying to earn the master's degree, then as a teacher when he had it. But again, leaving aside the issue, I think teachers ought to get paid more. I understand very personally. But we can agree on that, right? But I understand very personally that we can't go on with so many households living with six figure student debt. [15:55:24] So there are several things we got to do now. Part of it is on is on the back end. For example, loan forgiveness for different kinds of public service. Now it's on the books, but the program now is so hard to take advantage of that almost nobody actually, if anybody here has tried it, probably. All right. I see a head nodding here, the public service loan forgiveness program. It takes 10 years before you get any benefit. Most loan forms don't qualify. It's unbelievably complicated. We've got to make it more user friendly, more generous. And I would have it apply to things like being a medical provider in a rural area. Maybe you're not technically working for a government or a nonprofit. [15:55:55] But as far as I'm concerned, that's public service right now because we need more of it and we can connect loan forgiveness to that. We also got to make it more affordable on the front end. Now, our proposals would expand Pell Grants and would make public college tuition free for the first 80 percent or so of Americans. Because I don't want anyone to not go to college when they want to or when they seek to cause a cost. Now, if you're in that top bracket, I think you ought to pay your own tuition. I have nothing against you. Wish you well. I just think we could say those tax dollars for other things. [15:56:25] And I just think it's a commonsense position. So that's how we attack the problem of affordability and debt with moves like that that make sure that cost is never a barrier to getting higher education. But also, let's make sure that you can thrive in our economy, whether you went to college or not. So I think some folks are getting the message that if you didn't get a college degree, too bad the economy has got nothing to say to you. Now, where I live, three out of four people don't have a degree. And we've got to make sure that people can afford to thrive, to prosper, to be generous in their own communities and families, whether they have a college degree or not. That's why we've got to take so many more steps to make life affordable and to empower workers to earn more. [15:57:13] Hi feet. So my partner and I, we just moved from Washington state to take over a family farm. I am a micro business owner, a small business, and my partner is a federal employee. So this trade deal that just happened, I know I'm probably in a room with many people who are farmers in this trade deal, does seem to be on the right track. But we're struggling and. What's your plan, right? [15:57:42] I mean, the number of farm bankruptcies and family farms folding is alarming right now and we got to turn it around. There's some good news in things like the U.S. DMCA and this China package. But honestly, you look at the China package and a lot of what they're doing is putting out a fire. [15:58:02] This president started in the first place. And you've got farmers dealing with a effect. I haven't had a chance to look this up, but somebody at last event we were at mentioned that corn prices were getting worse on the on the China news. [15:58:14] And what was it? Down success today. [15:58:18] So. So, you know, clearly this is not exactly solve the problem or got us to the next level, right? I mean, even the MFP was just taking the edge off of a problem we didn't need to have. And I think didn't make most folks whole on the inside. So we've got to have an actual strategy here. And the closest thing to a strategy I've seen out of this president is poking other countries in the eye and seeing what will happen. Usually they poke back and then it comes down on our farmers. Right. Or consumers. Typical family paying six hundred bucks more last year just in the price of goods because of what's going on with trade. [15:58:51] And we've got to have a strategy that does several things. First of all, puts farmers, along with families and consumers and workers as the priority over the interests of multinational corporations trying to get out of paying taxes and any other accountability when it comes to how we frame up these trade deals. That's first. Second, make sure that we are enlisting farmers, especially family farmers, in the future of conservation oriented farming and fighting climate change. [15:59:21] Now, that's not just a matter of telling farmers what to do and saying, oh, you you ought to do more cover crops, but don't make your whole. Oh, you had to practice better soil management, but not nearly enough resources. It's why we to have a lot more going to things like the Conservation Stewardship Program and equip and new efforts to do the research and put the funding in to invite farmers to be leading the world on that. [15:59:43] The way I think of it is in the same way that America and Iowa take such pride in things like the Green Revolution, feeding millions based on things like the research that Norman Borlaug led right here in Iowa. We ought to be the country that leads the way on global farming as part of the answer to climate. And we ought to be willing to put the dollars into it. If we can find the money for taking the edge off of the trade war with the MFP, then we can find the money to actually pay farmers and not just encourage farmers to do this. And we also need to have a food policy in the country that has regard for American agriculture and health and how those two go together. We put all that together, and I think the way of life that you represent can be very much at the cutting edge of the future and where we need to head as a country and where we need to head globally. And I'm glad you're back. You're practicing that right now. [16:00:39] Just one more. Okay, last word. [16:00:49] I have a daughter in San Diego, she's a schoolteacher and she absolutely adores you could tell her thanks. I'm sure you won't have any problem. It's in California. But anyway, she her partner is also a school teacher. But she's she was born in Mexico. She migrated to the United States as a very young girl and she's a member of DACA. What can you do to make. These people feel more secure about their future in the United States. [16:01:19] I mean, first of all, let's recognize we're talking about especially with dreamers who came over at a young age. We're talking about people who are as American as we are. They just don't have the paperwork to show it. I've actually had the experience in South Bend from time to time of somebody that I know is a mayor as an important part of our community come out in effect and reveal to me that they are dreamers, that they're undocumented. [16:01:41] And it means that they have this pressure going through life, this fear of deportation, being at the mercy of a president or a court decision, not being able to participate fully in the economy, even though they're paying tax or paying sales taxes, property taxes and often payroll taxes and others. But not being. Right, and then there are the costs of trying to engage the system when you're doing the right thing. It's why it's not enough to protect dreamers, which we've got to do. It's why we have to settle this with the path to citizenship. And dreamers should be at the front of the line. Again, these are folks who are American. [16:02:14] They a lot of folks wouldn't know their way around a place like Mexico. This is often the only country that they know. And we need to recognize the contributions they are making. This is not about doing anybody a favor. This is about the fact that not only individuals impacted, but our communities and our country are stronger when they are free to fully participate in the blessings and the responsibilities of citizenship. So it's why it's why a pathway to citizenship is such an important part of the reform that we've got to undertake. Yes, we'll move on day one to reinforce DACA. But then we got to clear it up once and for all and make sure that there is citizenship there so that you don't have to live with this uncertainty all the time. Thank you. [16:02:58] All right, so I got the high sign that I guess we're about let's do one more to. [16:03:06] I'm cheating here, but. Thanks for joining. [16:03:26] OK, good. Good. Glad you asked. So here's where we are. African-American voters who know me best support me, whether that's in South Bend, where it's how I came to office and was returned office. And now we've got the most endorsements or whether it's in the Midwest now the South. We've got more work to do. [16:03:41] Competing with someone who has been known for decades. But what we're finding is when we engage and present the vision that we're offering, that's very well received. And the vision has to do with recognizing all of the work we've got to do to dismantle systemic racism in this country, because right now some of the numbers are and experiences of folks are heading in the wrong direction. Whether we are talking about the experience of homeownership was actually on decline for African-American families since the fair, you know, some of the worst level since Fair Housing Act was passed to what's happening in emergency rooms. A woman lost her life in Milwaukee after going into an E.R., basically because her symptoms were not taken seriously. [16:04:23] And this is happening over and over again around the country all the way through to changes we got to make in criminal justice and voter suppression, which is making it harder for a lot of black folks to have their voices heard in the political process. We're just hearing news out of Florida that has shown that a court decision that's going to make it harder disproportionately for voters of color there. And it's why we've got to be intentional about this. So we will continue to make sure that we're engaging voters with the support that we do have and growing it as we go toward building a coalition. That's got to have room for all of us, because all of us stand to lose if this presidency continues. [16:05:02] And this is a good note to end on, because this is our opportunity to build the most inclusive coalition that we have seen in modern times with ideological, racial and economic diversity and regional diversity is why I'm spending a lot of time in different parts of this state and different parts of the country. We have to recognize that without agreeing on everything. This is our chance to build together that strong American majority that wants to see a more decent White House and wants to see real reform to build an economy that works for us, to make health care available to everybody, to get on the right track with education and internationally to make sure this country is kept safe and is credible. [16:05:43] These are priorities that we share as Americans and we have so much on the line in this life or death decision. So I'm asking you to be part of this effort to become involved and to spread whatever sense of hope propelled you here on an exceptionally cold day to talk with me about these issues, because even though I know that hope went out of style a little bit in our political vocabulary because we're in such a bleak and difficult moment, I also think running for office is an act of hope. [16:06:12] I think that's the reason they call us candidates hopeful. You notice this. That calls the hopefuls candid, I guess, because running for office is an expression. Hope you only do it if you believe that it matters who's in charge and who has their hands on those pulleys and levers of government. And we need to make sure that we reach out to those in our lives who maybe are this close to switching off the whole thing and invite them to use the power that is placed in their hands in just a few weeks to be the answer to the exhausting spectacle of dysfunction that we see in Washington right now. I hope I can turn to you to do that. I hope you'll support us on the 3rd and I hope you reach out to those in your life who will be more responsive to a word from you than they will to an ad for me to make sure that we send a resounding message that allows us to look back on 2020 with pride. [16:07:01] Thank you so much for joining us today. I look forward to seeing you on the trail. Thank you.
CNN: STATE OF THE UNION 0900
CNN State of the Union. SLUGGED: 0900 CNN RS35 71 AR: 16X9 DISC# SPEAKERS: CANDY CROWLEY, HOST SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ. REP. DAVID R. OBEY, D-WIS. SEN. BYRON L. DORGAN, D-N.D. FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH FORMER FLORIDA GOVERNOR JEB BUSH (+) CROWLEY: Before it is in with the new, it is back to the old. The final weeks of the 111th Congress. After giving thanks, Democrats and Republicans return to show if there is give anywhere else. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Next week, I've invited the leadership of both parties to the White House for a real and honest discussion. The election is over. We've got to find places where we can agree. (END VIDEO CLIP) CROWLEY: The list of unfinished business is long and the expectations minimal. The premiere domestic item is what to do about tax cuts due to expire on every tax-payer at end of December. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) OBAMA: The only place where we disagree is whether we can afford to also borrow $700 billion to pay for an extra tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, for millionaires and billionaires. I don't think we can afford to right now. (END VIDEO CLIP) CROWLEY: This week, it may not feel like the election is over. Today, as the lame duck Congress takes on tough issues like tax cuts and "Don't Ask/Don't Tell, we are joined by Senator John McCain. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MCCAIN: The president should not make decisions where we're sending young men and women into harm's way based on political consideration. (END VIDEO CLIP) CROWLEY: And departing Democrats, Congressman David Obey and Senator Byron Dorgan. Then President George Bush and his brother, Jeb Bush, on family and the holidays. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GEORGE W. BUSH, 43RD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're a very close-knit group of people and it was fun to watch... CROWLEY: Do you talk politics in those family gatherings? G.W. BUSH: Not much. No, not really. I mean, by the time Christmas came around, I was looking for a break from politics. (END VIDEO CLIP) CROWLEY: I'm Candy Crowley, and this is STATE OF THE UNION. Joining me now here in Washington, Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, on your maiden voyage here on the show with me. So thanks for joining us. MCCAIN: Thank you, Candy. CROWLEY: Before we get to domestic policy, I want to talk to you about North Korea. Try to give our audience some perspective on how dangerous this is. And I ask because it seems to me we go through this periodically. All of the sudden North Korea, you know, tests a missile, fires into South Korean at least water territory. Is this any more dangerous than anything in the past? And what does that mean to the average American? 09:02:26 MCCAIN: Well, I think it's probably more dangerous in that the North Koreans have enhanced capability, both missile and nuclear capability. But it's also a lesson that continued appeasement of North Korea, which we've been doing basically under Republican and Democrat administrations since 1994, with the "agreed upon framework," we've given the North Koreans over $1 billion worth of aid and assistance in the last 15 years or so, and based on the premise that we would all get together and negotiate. It seems the purpose of everything is to get the North Koreans to the table. The North Koreans' only claim to their position on the world stage is their nuclear capability. And they have a terrible, most repressive, oppressive regime in the world. They have hundreds of thousands of people in slave labor camps. And all of that seems to be sacrificed in the altar of, quote, "negotiations." So long ago, we should have put a significant pressures on the North Koreans. Even in the Bush administration we freed up a $25 million bank account and took them off the terrorist list. CROWLEY: But they've been sort of immune to... 09:03:40 MCCAIN: So could I just finally say, the key to this, obviously, is China. And unfortunately China is not behaving as a responsible world power. It cannot be in China's long-term interest to see a renewed conflict on the Korean Peninsula. We've got to understand that China is not what we want it to be, but is not playing a responsible role on the world stage, much less in -- on the Korean Peninsula. They could bring the North Korean economy to its knees if they wanted to. And I cannot believe that the Chinese should, in a mature fashion, not find it in their interest to restrain North Korea. So far, they are not. CROWLEY: You have called it what North Korea has done as unacceptable. You have called on China to react strongly. They have said, let's get the group of six together, not for talks on nuclear -- on North Korea's nuclear capability, but about this, let's have an emergency meeting. Is that a good first step? 09:04:48 MCCAIN: I think it would be a fine first step. But does -- do we really think that there has been -- that this long history of confrontation that the North Koreans have practiced is going to come to a halt without significant penalties on North Korea? CROWLEY: From China. MCCAIN: I think it's time we -- yes. I think it's time we talked about regime change in North Korea, and I do not mean military action, but I do believe that this is a very unstable regime. They're now passing on to -- from the "dear leader" to what we call him the "sweet leader," whatever it is, 27-year-old four-star general. So, but, and we can, we can have a peaceful resolution to this issue. But the North Korean regime is not one that's going to abandon the nuclear power status. They are now seeking recognition from us that they are a nuclear nation. That's not in our interests. CROWLEY: I want to move on to Afghanistan, but to button this up, would you... MCCAIN: Just one other thing. The Chinese -- now the United States is engaged in military operations with South Korea in the Yellow Sea. The Chinese have claimed the Yellow Sea as a special economic zone. We have to understand that China is not behaving in a responsible fashion as a world power, and we have to make adjustments to our policies regarding China. CROWLEY: And just to button this up, are we on the verge -- is the Korean Peninsula on the verge of war or is this something that is more long-term problem? 09:06:10 MCCAIN: I think if past behavior holds true, the North Koreans will walk up to the edge and then step back and try to get more concessions and more money and more economic aid, and more jobs for North Koreans sponsored by South Korea. I'm not sure that the South Koreans are going to go along this time. CROWLEY: Let me ask you about Afghanistan. New report out, the one that they give twice a year, they called military and security gains "fragile." They said, "the efforts to reduce insurgency capacity in Pakistan has not produced measurable success." They said, "the Taliban has sufficient capability and support to pose a threat to the viability of the government, and if the security situation erodes," that quickly the security will erode -- "quickly the stability in the region will erode." We've been there nine years. At this point isn't it a legit question to say, you know, can we really do this? Because it seems to grow worse. MCCAIN: I think that's why we're going to have an assessment next month in December, as you know. I just came back with Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman. We have made significant military successes. In the clear and hold area, we have been making -- thanks to General Petraeus and the brave young men and women who are serving. We are making great... CROWLEY: Well, it doesn't sound like we're making progress. 09:07:20 MCCAIN: We are. I mean, I don't have any doubt that we are in that area. There are two major problems right now. One of them is corruption at the highest levels of government. They have a corrupt attorney general. This latest business about the elections is really unacceptable. And a sanctuary in Pakistan, the Pakistanis are still -- and the armed military with the ISI are still having businesses with the -- cooperating with the Haqqani network and other Taliban elements within Afghanistan. You cannot allow the enemy sanctuary. These are significant problems. And they need to be... CROWLEY: And they've been significant problems, though, for years. So you've got to kind of wonder, are we ever going to make a dent in this? And let me just ask as a last part of this, does a 2014 agreed upon deadline for the removal of combat troops by both NATO and the U.S. forces, is that helping? MCCAIN: It's a dramatic improvement over the 2011 date that the president had been sponsoring, which was an enormous impediment to progress because people were adjusting to us leaving in 2011. I'm very happy to see 2014. 09:08:30 Let me just say, if it wasn't a corrupt government, if we didn't have the trouble with Pakistan that we have, things would be a lot better in Afghanistan. And remember it has only been since the president announced at West Point that we would really increase the number of troops there, and General Petraeus's appointment, with all due respect to General McChrystal, that we have really started to make some improvements. We cannot afford for Afghanistan to return to being a base for attacks on the United States of America. And we should never forget that. And finally, could I just mention, Candy, the Taliban are not popular. The Taliban are hated by most of the people of Afghanistan. It's not as if they're a popular movement. CROWLEY: But they're scared of them, and so they don't totally... MCCAIN: Of course they're scared. They're scared to death of them. But to say that the Afghan people would welcome them with open arms is just, I mean -- and think of the women's rights issues and all of these other cruelties that the Taliban have inflicted upon the people of Afghanistan. CROWLEY: Let me ask you about "Don't Ask/Don't Tell." It's going to come up, you're going to have testimony before the Armed Services Committee. You have criticized what you believe will be in this upcoming report about how the military feels, saying, no, this was about how are we going to implement it, not about how the military feels. I know you have got a letter from Robert Gates, defense secretary, which said in part, to you: "I do not believe that military policy decisions should on this or any other subject be subject to referendum of service members." CROWLEY: In other words, you know, what the service members, how they would vote is sort of immaterial to what we're trying to do. Doesn't he have a point? MCCAIN: Well, I think he certainly has a point. I would also certainly say that we should remember where this all started. There was no uprising in the military. There were no problems in the military with don't ask, don't tell. It was a critical... CROWLEY: No, it (inaudible) who had a problem. (CROSSTALK) MCCAIN: No, it wasn't. Because it wasn't a problem because you didn't have -- it's called don't ask, don't tell. OK? If you don't ask them, you don't ask somebody, and they don't tell. (CROSSTALK) 09:10:00 MCCAIN: And it's an all-volunteer force. I understand your point of view, and I understand the point of view by the majority of the media, but the fact is, this was a political promise made by an inexperienced president or candidate for presidency of the United States. The military is at its highest point in recruitment and retention and professionalism and capability, so to somehow allege that this policy has been damaging the military is simply false. 09:11:00 So the fact is that this system is working, and I believe that we need to assess the effect on the morale and the battle effectiveness of those people that I -- those young Marines and Army people I met in forward operating bases that are putting their lives on the line every day. This is an all-volunteer force. And if we want to ensure morale and battle effectiveness is maintained, that's why people like the commandant of the Marine Corps has come out against repeal. Now, if you want to call him a racist and others, and sergeants and others that I have... CROWLEY: We should also point out that the defense secretary and the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff think it's a good idea. (CROSSTALK) MCCAIN: And they have said that, and the four service chiefs, the four service chiefs have all had reservations to one degree or another. Now I have great respect for the secretary of defense... CROWLEY: Isn't integration required... (CROSSTALK) MCCAIN: ... and I have great respect for the secretary -- for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I have great respect for the service chiefs and I have great respect to the men and women who are serving, particularly the sergeants and the chief petty officers, who are the ones that make the military work. CROWLEY: Integration of any sort has always come -- whether it's racial, whether it's gender -- doesn't it require leadership rather than followership? And in other words, does -- yes, it matters how the military feels, but don't you need to lead when it comes to a matter of integration, which definitely was difficult? MCCAIN: Look, we're in two wars. We're in two wars. I ran into a master sergeant in a forward operating base outside Kandahar, who had five tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said -- and a number of them came to me and said, look, we fight together, we sleep together, we eat together. I want to know the effect of our ability to win this conflict. That's what we're saying. I want to know the effect on battle effectiveness and morale, not on how best to implement a change in policy. I don't think that's a lot to ask when we have our young men and women out there serving and fighting, and tragically some of them dying. CROWLEY: I have less than 30 seconds here. But I have to ask you about Sarah Palin. New book out that you're going to read sooner or later. She's going to Iowa, she's going to South Carolina. The big game is, is she going to run for president, isn't she going to run for president. You know her probably better than any politician who does. How do you read what's going on? 09:13:10 MCCAIN: I read I think she's keeping her options open, and I think she should. I think she is an incredible force in the American political arena. CROWLEY: And a divisive force, would you agree? MCCAIN: I think that anybody who has the visibility that Sarah has is obviously going to have some divisiveness. I remember that a guy named Ronald Reagan used to be viewed by some as divisive. CROWLEY: So you sort of -- do you see her as a parallel? MCCAIN: No, I think she's doing a great job. I think she's doing a great job. I think she has motivated our base. I think she had a positive impact on the last election, and I'm proud of her. CROWLEY: Senator John McCain, there is never enough time. Thank you so much. MCCAIN: Thanks for having me on. CROWLEY: I appreciate it. Up next on this holiday weekend, an interview we did earlier with two lawmakers who are thankful to be leaving Washington for good. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) OBEY: The biggest rip-off of the middle class by the elite that I think I've ever seen. DORGAN: This country needs some really good decisions these days on tough issues. (END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: In another year, with another crop of newbie lawmakers saying they want to fix Washington, we wanted to talk with two men who have tried to do that for years and now say they've had enough. David Obey came to Congress from Wausauw, Wisconsin, when Richard Nixon was president. As the third longest serving member of the House, he has enormous clot. He has played the harmonica for years in a bluegrass band known as the Capital Offenses. Ronald Reagan was president when Byron Dorgan was elected to represent North Dakota. He rose to become a member of the Democratic leadership team. He has been a fierce critic of the financial community, one of only nine senators to vote against President Clinton's bank deregulation act. His latest book is "Reckless: How Debt, Deregulation and Dark Money Nearly Bankrupted America." Dorgan wants to teach. Two men with 70 years of service in Washington are headed home. A farewell interview with the senator and the congressman when we come back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: Most of the attention in this year's midterms has been on the new incoming lawmakers, most of them Republicans, who will shape policy over the next two years and maybe beyond. CROWLEY: But we are also intrigued by the outgoing lawmakers, the ones voluntarily walking away. This year, 12 senators and 26 congressmen decided not to run for re-election. Two of them join me here, Wisconsin Congressman David Obey and Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota. Gentlemen, thank you both. OBEY: Thank you. CROWLEY: I want to talk a couple of issues with you here. Because it's very rare that you get politicians on that you know they can -- they are free to speak. So feel free to chime in on these -- on these issues, because you're short-timers, as we say. The tax cuts: you all have a month and a half, not quite. What's going to happen? OBEY: I don't know what's going to happen. I know what I think should happen. We have had the greatest surge upward of wealth on the income scale in the history of the universe. You've had a huge amount of money transferred from the middle class to the top dogs. You've had the biggest rip-offs of the middle class by the elite that I think I've ever seen. And under those circumstances, I don't think we ought to be spending $750 billion in order to give people who make over 250,000 bucks another tax cut. CROWLEY: Although it will be keeping their tax cut, but nonetheless, when you look at the current state of play, what do you think is going to happen? 09:20:10 DORGAN: Well, those tax cuts were put in place -- I didn't vote for them, but they were put in place in order to return 10 years of surplus that was expected but never -- never materialized. There were no surpluses, only deficits. And my own view is that we should not have any permanent extensions. I would extend up to $250,000 for two years, only those folks, and then at two years, take a look at it and see what does the economy need now? More important than the question of who gets tax cuts during wartime is what do we do to fix this federal budget deficit and put the country back in shape so that we have a better future? CROWLEY: But given the state of play -- I mean, I know you both would like to keep the tax cuts in place for the middle class, which is defined as $250,000 and under. The Republicans are pushing hard for everyone to keep their tax cuts in place, at least temporarily. They'd like them permanent. What -- you -- you have sat in the Senate and you have sat in the House for a very long time. I just know you can look at this and know what's coming. OBEY: But -- but the fact is, people over $250,000 in income would still get a tax cut. They would just be capped so the size of their tax cut stops after you -- after they get to $250,000 income. CROWLEY: Right. DORGAN: What's likely to happen is there will be an extension of the tax cuts for everybody for a period of time. I don't know what that might be. But that's the wrong remedy for the country. I mean, to give someone who earns $1 million a year a $104,000 a year tax cut at a time when we have a $13 trillion debt, $1.3 trillion annual deficit and people at war, that's absurd. That makes no sense. CROWLEY: Let me -- let me turn you to the debt commission. We have a brand new debt commission -- you've seen a couple of them in your time, I think -- that are saying, listen, we've got to look at the three things that cost us the most, the Defense Department, federally funded health care of Medicare, Medicaid, that CHIPS program, as well as Social Security. This is another throw-away report? DORGAN: Well, I hope not. I mean, this... CROWLEY: But what do you think? 02:23:40 DORGAN: I don't even know whether it will get out of the commission. It needs 14 of 18 votes to come out to the Congress, but this is serious stuff. I mean, we -- we are on an unsustainable path for the long-term, and we have to find a way to address it. And that deals with spending. It deals with additional revenue and a whole series of things. But my hope is that the serious work that's done by this commission and others will result in this country finally finding its footing and putting itself on track for a better future. But at the moment, if we don't do that, we're in -- we're in long-term serious trouble. CROWLEY: What do you make of the earmark movement? That is, no longer will congressmen or senators be able to put into legislation things that are earmarked specifically for a library or a bridge or whatever -- whatever it is. Republicans say, let's just get rid of that. OBEY: Well, let me -- I find it interesting that the most conservative members of the Congress are those who want to have an absolute transfer of power to the executive branch of government. Having said that, as chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I don't care what happens to earmarks. I'll play that flat or round. You can keep them or -- or dump them. The fact is, they are inconsequential in comparison to the other problems we face, at less than half a percent of the budget. And we have made substantial reforms in the way they are handled. You can no longer ask for an earmark anonymously under the table. You have to take full, public credit for it. The committee has to have time to review it, but if the Congress is hell-bent on turning over that power to the president, they'll have -- they'll have to live with it. CROWLEY: And you agree with the same thing, right, that giving this up, sort of, cedes power to the president? DORGAN: It's a complete charade. You can get rid of every single earmark. It's not going to change one cent in federal spending. So it's just -- it's a charade trying to direct attention over here, when the big issue is an unsustainable fiscal policy, put in place largely by the 2001 tax cuts. Most of that benefit went to the wealthiest Americans, and here is where we are. But, you know, it is -- it is not honest to take a look at earmarks and say this is part of the fiscal policy. The problem -- it is not. It just isn't. There are plenty of problems that we have to confront, but that is not it. 09:25:56 And let me just mention as well, there's no preordained destiny for this country to always do well, to grow and to succeed. This country needs, it seems, some really good decisions these days on tough issues. And trying to direct attention to things that don't matter is not going to be helpful to this country. CROWLEY: I want to ask you both to stick with me. We're going to talk about your -- your swan songs to Congress. We'll be back in a minute. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: We are back with Democratic Congressman David Obey and Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan. I want to take a quick trip down memory lane and have you listen to this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. ALAN GRAYSON, D-FLA.: Die quickly. That's right, the Republicans want you to die quickly if you get sick. (END VIDEO CLIP) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. ANTHONY WEINER, D-N.Y.: It's Republicans wrapping their arms around Republicans rather than doing the right thing on behalf of the heroes. It is a shame, a shame! (END VIDEO CLIP) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. JOHN A. BOEHNER, R-OHIO, HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: Hell, no, you can't! Have you read the bill? Have you read the reconciliation bill? Have you read the manager's amendment? Hell, no, you haven't! (END VIDEO CLIP) CROWLEY: Going to miss it? OBEY: Not that. (LAUGHTER) CROWLEY: This is -- that's pretty remarkable. I mean, has it -- listen, you've been in Congress since Richard Nixon. Is it truly worse now than at any other time you can remember, in terms of the two parties? OBEY: I don't think so, because when I first became politically conscious, it was the era of Joe McCarthy, and nothing was as bad as the spate of McCarthyism that this country went through. CROWLEY: I ask because you seem so... OBEY: Nonetheless, it's... CROWLEY: ... discouraged about it in some of the things you've said. 09:30:18 OBEY: Well, I am discouraged about it because I think that money is rapidly taking over politics. When I got elected the first time in 1969, I spent $45,000. My opponent spent $65,000, and I won. Today you've got House seats that cost $4 million. That means instead of members being able to spend time learning these issues, learning to know about each other, they spend their time dialing for dollars. That's not a constructive change. And the Supreme Court has made it abominably worse. CROWLEY: Let me ask you, Senator, sort of along the same lines. This is -- I want to play you something that Congressman Obey said during his retirement press conference, and have you take a listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) OBEY: All I do know is that there has to be more to life than explaining the ridiculous accountability-destroying rules of the United States Senate... (LAUGHTER) OBEY: ... to confused and angry and frustrated constituents. (END VIDEO CLIP) CROWLEY: Senator, I think he's talking about you. (LAUGHTER) DORGAN: Yes, well, Congressman... CROWLEY: Are you... DORGAN: Congressman Obey has always been one of the more colorful members of Congress, actually. No, listen, we heard him loud and clear over on the Senate side. It's just that we didn't have enough votes to get things done. Because in the Senate, as Congressman Obey knows, regrettably everything these days takes a supermajority or 60 votes. But I fully understood the frustration and have heard it from him and others in the U.S. House. Look, I think all of us should want, and the American people should expect and deserve better from the Congress. CROWLEY: There's so much left undone, as you just talked about, Senator, and as you know in the economy, in sort of long-term debt reduction, that kind of thing. Why did you decide, each of you, not to stay and fight? DORGAN: Well, I have served in Congress 30 years. I've served in the state capital in elected position 10 years before that. I've been in statewide elective office continually since age 26. And I just -- I want to have another chapter in my life. You know, I'm not leaving because I'm upset, because I don't like the Congress. I have great respect for the Congress. It has been a gift to me to be able to serve, given to me by the people of North Dakota. An old guy called me, he was in the hospital after I announced, and he could barely talk, but he said, Dorgan what in the hell are you doing? Well, I said, you know, I'm just -- I want to do some other things in life. And having served 30 years, I just think for me it's time to move on. I want the Congress to succeed, however. This country needs the Congress to work well. CROWLEY: Congressmen Obey, you were a little more frustrated than Senator Dorgan is copping to, anyway. OBEY: Well, I've been here 42 years, and before that six years in state legislature. I think almost 50 years is quite enough, number one. Number two, as I said earlier, I detest what money is doing to politics. And I am frankly fed up with trying to convince people that we should do something to deal with the fact that we have the greatest maldistribution of income in the history of this country. People attack the Democratic Party for being redistributionist. In fact, you have had the largest redistribution of income up the income scale in the history of the country the last 30 years. And I think we simply -- it's time for new blood and fresh legs to take on that fight anew, because until we do that, we are not going to build the kind of country that can continue to lead the world. CROWLEY: And if you could fill in this short sentence for me, after I leave Congress, I am most looking forward to? OBEY: Playing more music and perhaps increasing my allotment of gin and tonics from time to time. CROWLEY: Sounds good, we'll come see you. DORGAN: I'll stay away from the gin and tonics. (LAUGHTER) DORGAN: I'm interested in a lot of things. But more time, more time to do interesting things. CROWLEY: Senator Dorgan, Congressmen Obey, thank you so much for being with us. Good luck. OBEY: Thank you. DORGAN: Thank you. CROWLEY: Up next, holidays with the Bush family. And Jeb Bush on whether he actually read his brother's book. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: Earlier this month, we interviewed President George W. Bush and his brother, Jeb, for a prime time special, coinciding with the release of the president's book "Decision Points." As we began to talk, Jeb Bush confessed he hadn't read his brother's book. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JEB BUSH (R), FORMER FLORIDA GOVERNOR: Well, I've bought 40 books, though, and I think that's far more important. CROWLEY: Seriously 40? J. BUSH: Forty. It's far more important to buy the book than to actually read it. (LAUGHTER) CROWLEY: And he a little bit lived it. G.W. BUSH: I support that, you know. (LAUGHTER) CROWLEY: You'd actually rather have him buy it than read it anyway. G.W. BUSH: No, I hope he -- he will read it. Look, he just got it. J. BUSH: Maybe. What I'll do is I'll go back in the index and see "Bush, Jeb," see if I make it. (LAUGHTER) CROWLEY: And read it. J. BUSH: Read that part. CROWLEY: You made the cut many, many times, I want you to know that. (END VIDEOTAPE) CROWLEY: When we come back, more of our conversation you haven't seen, the two brothers on values, family, and holidays. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: And now more of my conversation with former President George W. Bush and his brother, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CROWLEY: You are to us a political family, but the fact of the matter is you have brothers and a sister who are not totally involved in elective politics. G.W. BUSH: Sure. CROWLEY: So I wanted to read you something that actually came out of your dad's book, one of his "dear lads" letters that got me thinking. It said: "Dear lads, I shall stop with this gratuitous advice. Listen to your conscience. Don't be afraid not to join the mob, if you feel inside it's wrong. Don't confuse being soft with seeing the other guy's point of view. In judging your president, give him the enormous credit he's due for substantive achievements." He sometimes seems to me to be of such another era of politics. Do you think this kind of tone is at all possible now? G.W. BUSH: Yes. Sure it is. J. BUSH: It has to be. CROWLEY: Where? G.W. BUSH: That's called character. And he has got a lot of character. And there are people of character in public service. And I'm sitting next to one here, and... J. BUSH: So here, you know, George for eight years, I don't remember him ever saying anything about any of his opposition, personalizing the discourse ever. That didn't happen, it was a one- way street, you know, because on the other side, all sorts of things were said. But it doesn't have to be that way. There's enough to disagree on to -- you know, on principle, on ideology, on the future of the country. To have civil disagreement is fine, but we don't have the luxury any more of just being against things for being against things' purposes. CROWLEY: Outside of politics, is there something that you would say defines a Bush? Is there a Bush family ethos that you all got from your parents, passed along to your children? G.W. BUSH: I'd say love. I mean, you know, when people read my book they'll realize at times I was not a very lovable person because I was kind of pushing the envelope, at least from a parental point of view, and my parents always loved us. And loyalty to each other, we're loyal to each other. CROWLEY: Loyalty is huge in the Bush family, is it not? That's what you would have said. J. BUSH: Yes. CROWLEY: And that's why you don't talk publicly if you have a disagreement or let it be known that you disagree with the president or the president disagrees with the governor. G.W. BUSH: So the current vernacular is, "I have your back." And, you know, it's comforting to know that my brother had my back. CROWLEY: And does that filter down to others who aren't involved in politics, at least in the public way you are? Do you feel that way about your other brothers, your sister Doro... G.W. BUSH: Absolutely. CROWLEY: And something you pass along to your kids? J. BUSH: Yes. G.W. BUSH: Yes, just say something bad about Doro and we'll come flying across the table. CROWLEY: OK. I won't do that. (LAUGHTER) CROWLEY: Do you -- when you look at Thanksgiving, is there a tradition in the Bush family that goes down through the ages, do you all have your separate Thanksgivings? I mean, you seem to me like you might be a, hey, everybody, let's all run up to Kennebunkport, Thanksgiving. J. BUSH: I wouldn't volunteer to go to Kennebunkport on Thanksgiving just because it's 10 degrees. CROWLEY: Sorry. Maybe they can come to your place. G.W. BUSH: Here's what happened. When dad was the president, the family would gather for Christmas at Camp David. And when I was the president, Laura and I would have our family at Camp David as well for Christmas. And so for 12 years the family did get together and, you know, it was unbelievably fun. We're a very close-knit group of people. And it was fun to watch... CROWLEY: Do you talk politics in those family gatherings? J. BUSH: Not much. G.W. BUSH: No, not really. I mean, by the time Christmas came around, I was looking for a break from politics, and my dad understood that and Jeb understood that. And it's... J. BUSH: One Christmas, dad was deciding whether or not to send American troops to Kuwait to take out the Iraqis, and, I mean, there were somber times when he was president as well, you could see the weight of the world on their shoulders. But we talked about sports and normal stuff. CROWLEY: Traded Sammy Sosa, that kind of thing? (LAUGHTER) J. BUSH: Exactly. CROWLEY: Let me -- that's what I remember about sports, is that he was -- sorry, he traded Sammy Sosa. Another letter... J. BUSH: You're never living it down, are you? It's like 20 years ago and still on you for that. G.W. BUSH: Ah, what the heck? CROWLEY: Another letter from your dad, which I found interesting in light of tone: "Dear lads, civility will return to Washington eventually. Personalities will change and our system will have proved that it works more slowly than some would want, less efficiently than some would decree, but it works and gives us even in adversity great stability." 1974. G.W. BUSH: Interesting, yes. CROWLEY: So civility, as far as I can see, has not returned to Washington. And I guess what I wonder is, you have children. You have children. You may have grandchildren at some point if you stop pressuring her in public. (LAUGHTER) CROWLEY: And I'm wondering if from what you've seen, from what your father went through, what you went through, what you went through, if you see any of your children eager to join into this kind of elected politics? J. BUSH: I have three children, two of which I think are, if I'd bet, at least one of them will run for something. They're already actively involved and they do it with their eyes wide open. They know that it's not a perfect system. But your skin gets thickened when you see, you know, someone you love go through the difficulty. That's far harder than doing it yourself, so. CROWLEY: Are we talking about P. when you say you think at least one of them will run? J. BUSH: George and Jeb, my son, who is actively politically here. G.W. BUSH: No, I don't think our girls will run. CROWLEY: You don't think Jenna or Barbara will ever be doing that? G.W. BUSH: But the key thing though is they will be involved with helping improve people's lives. I mean, there's all kinds of ways to serve a community. And our little girls are young, professional women who are making positive contributions to our society. And I doubt they'll ever run for office, though. CROWLEY: (INAUDIBLE) grandchildren might? G.W. BUSH: Yes, well, I'm not going to of course over the air urge my daughter to have a child. CROWLEY: Yes. Well, you've already done it in print, so you might as well do it over the air, ensuring you won't have one for a while. Governors Bush -- both governors at one time -- at the same time, Governor Jeb Bush, thank you so much for joining us. J. BUSH: You bet. CROWLEY: I appreciate it. J. BUSH: Thank you. CROWLEY: Former President, thank you as well. G.W. BUSH: You bet. Thank you, Candy. (END VIDEOTAPE) CROWLEY: Up next, a check of today's top headlines. And then White House photographer Pete Sousa on capturing some of the iconic moments in American politics. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: Now time for a check of today's top stories. Returning now to the breaking developments in the Korean peninsula crisis, China is calling for an emergency consultation with members of the six-party talks, as the U.S. and South Korea conduct joint military exercises in the Yellow Sea. North Korea called the exercise as a pretext for war and warns that any intrusion into the country's territorial waters will result in a, quote, "merciless military counterattack." European finance ministers are meeting today to finalize an $85 billion rescue package for Ireland. The emergency aid is aimed to help the country cover bank debts and a massive budget deficit. In Dublin yesterday about 50,000 people took to the street to protest the Irish government's austerity plan. A Somali-born teenager accused of a bomb plot in Oregon faces up to life in prison and a quarter-million-dollar fine. Federal authorities say 19-year-old Mohamed Osman Mohamud was arrested in connection with a plan to detonate what he believed to be a car bomb at a Christmas tree lighting Friday night in Portland. Undercover agents managed to slip Mohamud a fake bomb. Those are your top stories, here on "State of the Union." Up next, images of the president you rarely see, behind the scenes with White House photographer Pete Souza. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) CROWLEY: Unless you are family, you can't get much closer to the life of a president than the photographer hired by the White House to snap history in pictures. Former Chicago Tribune photographer Pete Souza is the chief photographer for President Obama now. He also took pictures for President Reagan in the 80s. "Creating a good photographic archive for history is the most important part of my job," he says, "creating this archive that will live on." His work and that of many others is profiled in a few book, "The President's Photographer." I talked with Pete Souza earlier. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CROWLEY: That's his youngest daughter, Sasha. So what was happening here? You were with him and she arrived or vice versa? SOUZA: Yes, they just, kind of, ran into each other. She was on the way up to the residence in the elevator, and he just saw her, grabbed her, gave her a big hug. CROWLEY: This is the kind of thing you couldn't get as a Chicago Trib reporter -- or photographer. SOUZA: No, I mean, I think my -- my access to the president is much different and more intimate than a newspaper photographer. CROWLEY: And what's -- what's the place in history for pictures like these? SOUZA: I just think, you know, it gives a better, rounded view of the president as a human being than is depicted in newspapers and magazines. And, you know, in time there will be even more pictures released. You know, it's really fun to look back now at some of the pictures of the Kennedys, Johnsons, Fords, Bush 41, and so on and so forth. CROWLEY: Right. Let me -- let me move on to this next picture because I want to talk to you about the role of a White House photographer, because you were involved not just in taking this picture, but in almost making it happen. Explain that to us. SOUZA: Well, this was in Normandy. And as the -- after the president spoke at Normandy -- this was last year, I believe. I, sort of, lose track of time. And a bunch of the veterans were trying to get close to him to shake his hand, and this one gentleman was one of those who was trying to say hi to the president, and he was literally knocked down in the crowd. And I saw it happen, and I felt really bad. Here's this guy trying -- just trying to shake his hand, and he gets caught up in the crush. There were so many people there. And I had mentioned it to the White House trip director, Marvin Nicholson. I said, you know, if there's any way that -- this poor guy just got knocked down. He really wanted to just meet the president. And Marvin just made it happen. They wheeled him over. And look at that face. So I chose an angle to get his reaction to meeting the president. CROWLEY: And it -- it does tell a story. And also talk to me -- we mentioned that you've also worked as a newspaper photog. And the roles are very different, are they not? you would want have done... SOUZA: I would not have done that. And, clearly, I would not have done that. But in this instance, it seemed like the right thing to do as a human being. You know, I saw this guy. He got knocked down. I felt really bad, and so I expressed that emotion to Marvin Nicholson, and Marvin is the one who -- who made this happen. CROWLEY: I want to show you some pictures in, kind of, quick succession, just explain to our audience what they are, and then ask you a final question here. This is Lyndon Johnson meeting with his advisers. We're assuming this is late at night. And there's no other sort of explanation about it in the book. Then we have one of Gerald Ford. We're, kind of, moving chronologically upward. This is Gerald Ford. He is going to be president. Richard Nixon has resigned, but they're not ready for him yet at the White House. So David Kennerly, I think, took this picture of the Fords at their home in Virginia with Mrs. in her curlers. We're told she, in fact, made that dinner. He is now, sort of, officially the president of the United States. And then, finally, this is the Bush 41 family, dad of the latest President Bush, with their grandchildren up in Kennebunkport one morning, with the kids all coming in. And I looked at those -- all of those pictures, and I thought, can you see any modern presidency -- these are pretty darn intimate photos. I mean, this is the Bushes in their beds, Lyndon Johnson in his bed, Mrs. Ford in her curlers. Can that kind of picture happen again, do you think, for public view? SOUZA: Well, I do want to point out that the picture of Bush was shot when he was vice president. And I don't think there's anything of him as president that's like that. And the Kennerly photo -- it was a different era in that we had just gone through Watergate, and Ford was trying to project himself as being a regular guy, open, sort of... (CROSSTALK) SOUZA: And it's a great picture, and I think this was when they were still living in Alexandria after Nixon resigned, and they hadn't yet moved in -- into the White House. The one of Johnson is like, you know, a one of a kind figure. I don't know that you're ever going to see a president like him. I mean, I think that there will be a time, if there's a crisis in the middle of the night, where I'm called in and we'll photograph, you know, an intimate setting like this, but I don't know that you're ever going to see, you know, a president propped up in his bed like that. (END VIDEOTAPE) CROWLEY: Chief White House photographer Pete Souza. Thanks so much for watching "State of the Union." I'm Candy Crowley in Washington. END .ETX
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA NEWS CONFERENCE / ABC UNI CAM
President Barack Obama holds a news conference in the White House East Room. 11:39:03 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good morning, everybody. Have a seat, please. I just want to say a few words about the economy before I take your questions. There are a lot of folks out there who are still struggling with the effects of the recession. Many people are still looking for work or looking for a job that pays more. Families are wondering how they deal with a broken refrigerator or a busted transmission or how they're going to finance their kids' college education, and they're also worrying about the possibility of layoffs. The struggles of middle-class families were a big problem before the recession hit in 2007. They weren't created overnight, and the truth is our economic challenges are not going to be solved overnight. But there are more steps that we can take right now that would help businesses create jobs here in America. 11:40:04 Today, our administration is trying to take those steps, so we're reviewing government regulations so that we can fix any rules in place that are an unnecessary burden on businesses. We're working with the private sector, to get small businesses and start-ups the financing they need to grow and expand. And because of the partnership that we've launched with businesses and community colleges, 500,000 workers will be able to receive the right skills and training for manufacturing jobs in companies all across America, jobs that companies are looking to fill. In addition to the steps that my administration can take on our own, there are also things that Congress could do right now that will help create good jobs. Right now, Congress can send me a bill that would make it easier for entrepreneurs to patent a new product or idea, because we can't give innovators in other countries a big leg-up when it comes to opening new businesses and creating new jobs. That's something Congress could do right now. 11:41:04 Right now, Congress could send me a bill that puts construction workers back on the job rebuilding roads and bridges -- not by having government fund and pick every project, but by providing loans to private companies and states and local governments on the basis of merit, and not politics. That's pending in Congress right now. Right now, Congress can advance a set of trade agreements that would allow American businesses to sell more of their goods and services to countries in Asia and South America, agreements that would support tens of thousands of American jobs, while helping those adversely affected by trade. That's pending before Congress right now. And right now, we could give middle-class families the security of knowing that the tax cut I signed in December will be there for one more year. So there are a number of steps that my administration is taking, but there are also a number of steps that Congress could be taking right now on items that historically have had bipartisan support and that would help put more Americans back to work. 11:42:09 Many of these ideas have been tied up in Congress for some time, but as I said, all of them enjoy bipartisan support, and all of them could help grow the economy. So I urge Congress to act on these ideas now. Of course one of the most important and urgent things we can do for the economy is something that both parties are working on right now, and that's reducing our nation's deficit. Over the last few weeks the vice president has been leading negotiations with Democrats and Republicans on this issue, and they've made some real progress in narrowing down the differences. As of last week both parties had identified more than $1 trillion worth of spending cuts already. But everyone also knows that we'll need to do more to close the deficit. We can't get to the $4 trillion in savings that we need by just cutting the 12 percent of the budget that pays for things like medical research and education funding and food inspectors and the Weather Service. And we can't just do it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. 11:43:11 So we're going to need to look at the whole budget, as I said several months ago, and we've got to eliminate waste wherever we find it and make some tough decisions about worthy priorities. And that means trimming the defense budget while still meeting our security needs. It means we'll have to tackle entitlements, as long as we keep faith with seniors and children with disabilities by maintaining the fundamental security that Medicare and Medicaid provide. And yes, we're going to have to tackle spending in the tax code. There's been a lot of discussion about revenues and raising taxes in recent weeks, so I want to be clear about what we're proposing here. I spent the last two years cutting taxes for ordinary Americans. 11:44:08 And I want to extend those middle-class tax cuts. The tax cuts I'm proposing we get rid of are tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, tax breaks for oil companies and hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners. It would be nice if we could keep every tax break there is. But we've got to make some tough choices here if we want to reduce our deficit. And if we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, if we choose to keep a tax break for corporate jet owners, if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil and gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars, then that means we've got to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship. That means we've got to stop funding certain grants for medical research. That means that food safety may be compromised. That means that Medicare has to bear a greater part of the burden. Those are the choices we have to make. 11:45:09 So the bottom line is this: Any agreement to reduce our deficit is going to require tough decisions and balanced solutions. And before we ask our seniors to pay more for health care, before we cut our children's education, before we sacrifice our commitment to the research and innovation that will help create more jobs in the economy, I think it's only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well to give up that tax break that no other business enjoys. I don't think that's real radical. I think the majority of Americans agree with that. So the good news is, because of the work that's been done, I think we can actually bridge our differences. I think there's a conceptual framework that would allow us to make huge progress on our debt and deficit, and do so in a way that does not hurt our economy right here and right now. And it's not often that Washington sees both parties agree on the scale and the urgency of the challenge at hand. Nobody wants to put the creditworthiness of the United States in jeopardy. Nobody wants to see the United States default. So we've got to seize this moment, and we have to -- to seize it soon. The vice president and I will continue these negotiations with both leaders of -- of both parties in Congress for as long as it takes, and we will reach a deal that will require our government to live within its means and give our businesses confidence and get this economy moving. 11:46:50 So with that, I will take your questions. Let me grab my list here. Starting off with Ben Feller, Associated Press. Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'd like to follow up on the comments you just made as you try to reach a deal to raise the debt limit and cut the deficit. You keep saying that there needs to be this balanced approach of spending cuts and taxes. But Republicans say flatly they won't -- PRESIDENT OBAMA: That they don't want a balanced approach. Q: They don't want any -- they don't want any tax increases, as they -- as they put it. And the House speaker says not only that he doesn't support that, but that plan won't -- will not pass the House. So my question is, will you insist ultimately that a deal has to include those tax increases that you just laid out? Is that an absolute red line for you? And if it is, can you explain to us how that can possibly get through the Congress? 11:47:48 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Look, I think that what we've seen in negotiations, here in Washington, is a lot of people say a lot of things to satisfy their base or to get on cable news, but that, hopefully, leaders at a certain point rise to the occasion and they do the right thing for the American people. And that's what I expect to happen this time. Call me naive, but my expectation is that leaders are going to lead. Now I just want to be clear about what's at stake here. The Republicans say they want to reduce the deficit. Every single observer who's not an elected official, who's not a politician says we can't reduce our deficit in the scale and scope that we need to without having a balanced approach that looks at everything. 11:48:50 Democrats have to accept some painful spending cuts that hurt some of our constituencies and we may not like. And we've shown a willingness to do that for the greater good, to say: Look, there are some things that are good programs, that are nice to have; we can't afford them right now. I, as commander in chief, have to have difficult conversations with the Pentagon saying: You know what. There's fat here; we're going to have to trim it out. And Bob Gates has already done a good job identifying $400 billion in cuts. But we're going to do more. And I promise you, the preference of the Pentagon would be not to cut any more, because they feel like they've already given. So we're going to have to look at entitlements. And that's always difficult politically. But I've been willing to say we need to see where we can reduce the cost of health care spending and Medicare and Medicaid in the out years, not by shifting costs onto seniors, as some have proposed, but rather by actually reducing those costs. But even if we're doing it in a smart way, that's still tough politics, but it's the right thing to do. 11:50:03 So the question is, if everybody else is willing to take on their sacred cows and do tough things in order to achieve the goal of real deficit reduction, then I think it would be hard for the Republicans to stand there and say that the tax breaks for corporate jets is sufficiently important that we're not willing to come to the table and get a deal done, or we're so concerned about protecting oil and gas subsidies for oil companies that are making money hand over fist, that's the reason we're not going to come to a deal. 11:51:10 I don't think that's a sustainable position. And the truth of the matter is, if you talk to Republicans who are not currently in office, like Alan Simpson, who co-chaired my bipartisan commission, he doesn't think that's a sustainable position. Pete Domenici, Republican, co-chaired something with Alice Rivlin, the Democrat, says that's -- he doesn't think that's a sustainable position. You can't reduce the deficit to the levels that it needs to be reduced without having some revenue in the mix. And the revenue we're talking about isn't coming out of the pockets of middle-class families that are struggling; it's coming out of folks who are doing extraordinarily well and who are enjoying the lowest tax rates since before I was born. If you're a -- if you are a wealthy CEO or a (health ?) -- hedge fund manager in America right now, your taxes are lower than they have ever been. They're lower than they've been since the 1950s. And you can afford it. You'll still be able to ride on your corporate jet; you're just going to have to pay a little more. And if we -- I -- and I just want to emphasize what I said earlier. If we do not have revenues, that means there are a bunch of kids out there who are not getting college scholarships. If we do not have those revenues, then the kinds of cuts that would be required might compromise the National Weather Service. It means that we would not be funding critical medical research. It means that food inspection might be compromised. And -- and, you know, I've said to some of the Republican leaders: You go talk to your constituents, the Republican constituents, and ask them, are they willing to compromise their kids' safety so that some corporate-jet owner continues to get a tax break. And -- and I'm pretty sure what the answer would be. 11:53:08 So -- so -- so we're going to keep on having these conversations. And my belief is, is that the Republican leadership in Congress will, hopefully sooner rather than later, come to the conclusion that they need to make the right decisions for the country, that everybody else has been willing to move off their maximalist position and they need to do the same. Q: And you think they will get (done ?)? PRESIDENT OBAMA: My expectation is that they'll do the responsible thing. Chuck Todd. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. There have been a lot of questions about the constitutionality -- constitutional interpretations of a few decisions you've made, so I'll just simply ask: Do you believe the War Powers Act is constitutional? Do you believe that the debt limit is constitutional -- the idea that Congress can do this? And do you believe that marriage is a civil right? 11:54:11 PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Chuckles.) Well, that was a hodge-podge. (Laughter.) The -- Chuck, we're going to assign you to the Supreme Court, man. (Laughter.) I'm not a Supreme Court justice, so I'm not -- I'm not going to put my constitutional law professor hat on here. I -- let me focus on initially the issue of Libya. I want to talk about the substance of Libya, because there's been all kinds of noise about process and congressional consultation and so forth. Let's talk about, concretely, what's happened. Moammar Gadhafi, who prior to Osama bin Laden was responsible for more American deaths than just about anybody on the planet, was threatening to massacre his people. And as part of an international coalition under a U.N. mandate that is almost unprecedented, we went in and took out air-defense systems so that an international coalition could provide a no-fly zone, could protect -- provide humanitarian protection to the people on the ground. I spoke to the American people about what we would do. I said there would be no troops on the ground. I said that we would not be carrying the lion's share of this operation, but as members of NATO, we would be supportive of it, because it's in our national security interests and also because it's the right thing to do. We have done exactly what I said we would do. We have not put any boots on the ground. And our allies, who historically we've complained aren't willing to carry enough of the -- the load when it comes to NATO operations, have carried a big load when it comes to these NATO operations. 11:56:08 And as a consequence, we've protected thousands of people in Libya. We have not seen a single U.S. casualty. There's no risks of additional escalation. This operation is limited in time and in scope. So I said to the American people, here's our narrow mission. We have carried out that narrow mission in exemplary fashion. And throughout this process, we consulted with Congress. We've had 10 hearings on it. We've sent reams of information about what the operations are. I've had -- I've had all the members of Congress over to talk about it. So a lot of this fuss is politics. And if you look substantively at what we've done, we'd -- we have done exactly what we said to do under a U.N. mandate, and we have protected thousands of lives in the process. And as a consequence, a guy who was a state sponsor of terrorist operations against the United States of America is pinned down, and the noose is tightening around him. 11:57:13 Now, when you look at the history of the War Powers Resolution, it came up after the Vietnam War in which we had half a million soldiers there, tens of thousands of lives lost, hundreds of billions of dollars spent, and Congress said, you know what, we don't want something like that happening again. So if you're going to start getting us into those kinds of commitments, you've got to consult with Congress beforehand. And I think that such consultation is entirely appropriate. But do I think that our actions in any way violate the War Powers Resolution? The answer is no. So I don't even have to get to the constitutional question. There -- there -- there may -- there may -- Q: (Off mic.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: There may be a time -- there -- there -- Q: (Off mic.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: There may be a time in which there was a serious question as to whether or not the War Powers Resolution Act was constitutional. I don't have to get to the question. We have engaged in a limited operation to help a lot of people against one of the worst tyrants in the world, somebody who nobody should want to defend. And we should be sending out a unified message to this guy that he should step down and give his people a fair chance to live their lives without fear. And -- and this suddenly becomes the cause celebre for some folks in Congress? Come on. So you had what, a three-parter? Q: (Right ?). (Laughter.) (Off mic.) 11:59:09 PRESIDENT OBAMA: That -- what -- what -- what -- what are -- what are -- what are the other two? Q: There was some question about the constitutionality of the War Powers -- PRESIDENT OBAMA: I'm just saying I don't have to reach it. That's -- that's -- that's a good legal answer. Q: (Inaudible) -- marriage being a civil right. PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, let me start by saying that this administration, under my direction, has consistently said, we cannot discriminate, as a country, against people on the basis of sexual orientation. And we have done more in the two and a half years that I've been in here than the previous 43 presidents to uphold that principle, whether it's ending "don't ask, don't tell," making sure that gay and lesbian partners can visit each other in hospitals; making sure that federal benefits can be provided to same-sex couples across the board; hate crimes. 12:00:07 We have made sure that that is a central principle of this administration, because I think it's a central principle of America. Now, what we've also done is we've said that DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, is unconstitutional. And so we've said, we cannot defend the federal government poking its noise into what states are doing and putting the thumb on the scale against same-sex couples. What I've seen happen over the last several years and what happened in New York last week I think was a good thing, because what you saw was the people of New York having a debate, talking through these issues. It was contentious, it was emotional, but ultimately, they made a decision to recognize civil marriages. And I think that's exactly how things should work. Q: (Off mic.) 12:01:07 PRESIDENT OBAMA: And so -- so I -- I think it is -- I think it is important for -- (audio break) -- for us to work through these issues, because each community is going to be different and each state is going to be different, to work through them. In the meantime, we're -- you know, we filed a -- you know, we filed briefs before the Supreme Court that say, we think that any discrimination against gays, lesbians, transgenders is subject to heightened scrutiny, and we don't think that DOMA is unconstitutional. And so I think the combination of what states are doing, what the courts are doing, the actions that we're taking administratively all are how the process should work. Q: Are you at all uncomfortable that there could be different rules in different states, you know? And of course, some people make the argument that it's -- that's what we saw during the -- segregation. 12:02:13 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, Chuck, I think what you're seeing is a profound recognition on the part of the American people that gays and lesbians and transgender persons are our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our co-workers, and that they've got to be treated like every other American. And I think that principle will win out. It's not going to be perfectly smooth, and it turns out that the president, I've discovered since I've been in this office, can't dictate precisely how this process moves. But I think we're moving in a direction of greater equality, and -- and I think that's a good thing. Julianna. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. I only have a two-parter. (Chuckles.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thanks. Q: Are you concerned that the current debate over debt and deficits is preventing you from taking the kind of decisive and more balanced action needed to create jobs in this country, which is the number-one concern for Americans? And also, one of the impediments to job growth that the business community repeatedly cites is the regulatory environment. So do you think that the NLRB complaint against Boeing -- that that has created some of the -- is an example of the kinds of regulations that chill job growth and also that you yourself have called just plain dumb? PRESIDENT OBAMA: The -- I think it's important to understand that deficit reduction, debt reduction should be part of an overall package for job growth over the long term. 12:03:57 It's not the only part of it, but it's an important part of it. So as I -- as I mentioned at the top, I think it's important for us to look at rebuilding our transportation infrastructure in this country. That could put people back to work right now, construction workers back to work right now. And it would get done work that America needs to get done. And we used to have the best roads, the best bridges, the best airports. We don't anymore. And that's not good for our long-term competitiveness. So we could put people to work right now, and make sure that we're in a good position to win the future as well. I think -- Q: (Off mic) -- have to think of that as spending -- (off mic). PRESIDENT OBAMA: I -- I'm -- I'm going to get to it. Q: (Chuckles.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: The -- I think that it's important for us to look at the tax code and figure out, are there ways that we can simplify it and also build on the work that we've already done. For example, saying to small businesses or start-up businesses, you don't have to pay capital gains when you're in start-up mode because we want you to get out there and start a business -- that's important. Making sure that SBA is helping to get financing to small businesses -- that's important. So there are a whole range of things that we can be doing. 12:05:19 I think these trade deals will be important because right now, South Korea, frankly, has a better deal when it comes to our trading relationship than we do. Part of the reason I want to pass this trade deal is, you see a whole bunch of Korean cars here in the United States, and you don't see any American cars in Korea. So let's rebalance that trading relationship. That's why we should get this passed. So the range of things that we could be doing right now -- deficit and debt reduction should be seen as part of that overall process because I think if businesses feel confident that we've got our act together here in Washington, that not only is the government not going to default, but we're also preparing for a future in which the population's getting older and we're going to have more expenses on the Medicare side and Social Security, that businesses will feel more confident about investing here in the United States of America. 12:06:26 So I don't think they're contradictory. And as I've said before, certainly in my job but, I think, Congress as well, they've got to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. So we can focus on jobs at the same time as we're focusing on debt and deficit reduction. Now, one of the things that my administration has talked about is, is there, in fact, a bunch of -- a tangle of regulations out there that are preventing businesses from growing and expanding as quickly as they should? Keep in mind that, you know, the business community is always complaining about regulations. When unemployment's at 3 percent and they're making record profits, they're going to still complain about regulations because, frankly, they want to be able to do whatever they think is going to maximize their profits. I've got an obligation to make sure that we're upholding smart regulations that protect our air and protect our water and protect our food. You know, if you're flying on a plane, you want to make sure that there are some regulations in place to assure safety in air travel. Right? So there are some core regulations that we've got to maintain. 12:07:34 But what I have done -- and this is unprecedented, by the way; no administration's done this before -- is I've said to each agency, don't just look at current regulations -- or don't just look at future regulations, regulations that we're proposing, let's go backwards and look at regulations that are already on the books, and if they don't make sense, let's get rid of them. And we are in the process of doing that, and we've already identified changes that could potentially save billions of dollars for companies over the next several years. Now, you asked specifically about one decision that was made by the National Labor Relations Board, or the NLRB, and this relates to Boeing. Essentially, the NLRB made a -- a finding that Boeing had not followed the law in making a decision to move a plant. And, you know, it's an independent agency. It's going before a judge. So I don't want to get into the details of the case. I don't know all the facts. That's going to be up to a judge to decide. 12:08:38 What I do know is this: that as a general proposition, companies need to have the freedom to relocate -- they have to follow the law, but that's part of our system. And if they're choosing to relocate here in the United States, that's a good thing. And what it doesn't make -- what -- what I think defies common sense would be a notion that we would be shutting down a plant or laying off workers because labor and management can't come to a sensible agreement. So my hope is, is that even as this thing is working its way through, everybody steps back for a second and says: Look, if jobs are being created here in the United States, let's make sure that we're encouraging that. And we can't afford to have labor and management fighting all the time, at a time when we're competing against Germany and China and other countries that want to sell goods all around the world. And obviously, the air -- airplane industry is an area where we still have a huge advantage. I want to make sure that we keep it. OK. Mark Landler. Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Yesterday, Admiral McRaven testified before Congress that he was concerned that there wasn't a clear procedure to be followed if a terrorist were captured alive abroad. The administration has also been clear that it doesn't want to continue to send suspected terrorists to Guantanamo. What message do you have for American men and women in uniform who are undertaking missions like the very risky one to capture and kill bin Laden about what they should do in the event that they capture someone alive? And does the lack of these clear procedures raise the risk that forces might be more inclined to kill suspected terrorists in the field rather than capture them alive, thus depriving the U.S. of the intelligence that they could provide? 12:10:45 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, my top priority in each and every one of these situations is to make sure that we're apprehending those who would attack the United States, that we are getting all the intelligence that we can out of these individuals in a way that's consistent with due process of law, and that we try them, we prosecute them, in a way that's consistent with rule of law. And frankly, there are going to be different dispositions of the case depending on the situation. And there are going to be some times where a military commission may be appropriate. There are going to be some times where Article III courts are appropriate in terms of prosecution. And we do have a process to work through all the agencies -- the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, FBI, anybody else who might be involved in these kinds of operations -- to think through, on a case-by-case basis, how a particular individual should be dealt with. 12:12:06 And I think that when it comes to our men and women in uniform who might be carrying out these missions, the instructions are not going to be based on whether or not the lawyers can sort out how we detain them or how we can prosecute them. Their mission is to make sure that they apprehend the individual, they do so safely with minimum risk to American lives. And that's always going to be the priority, is just carrying out the mission. And that message is sent consistently to our men and women in uniform any time they start carrying out one of these missions. But -- but I think it's -- it's important to understand and the American people need to be assured that any time we initiate a mission like this, our top priorities are making sure this person is not able to carry out attacks against the United States and that we're able to obtain actionable intelligence from those individuals. And so that mitigates against this danger that you're suggesting that our main goal is going to be to -- to kill these individuals, as opposed to potentially capturing them. OK? Mike Emanuel, Fox. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Last week, when you gave your Afghanistan drawdown speech -- PRESIDENT OBAMA: Mm-hmm. Q: -- the word "victory" in terms of the overall war in Afghanistan was not in your speech. So I'm wondering, sir, if you can define for the 100,000 troops you have in harm's way in Afghanistan, victory in the war -- and for their families as well, sir. 12:13:40 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, you know, I didn't use "victory" in my West Point speech either. What I'd said was, we can be successful in our mission, which is narrowly drawn, and that is to make sure that al-Qaida cannot attack the United States of America or our allies or our interests overseas, and to make sure that we have an Afghan government that -- and an Afghan people -- that can provide for their own security. We are being successful in those missions. And the reason that we're in a position to draw down 10,000 troops this year and a total of 33,000 troops by the end of next summer is precisely because of the extraordinary work of our men and women in uniform. What they've been able to do is to severely cripple al-Qaida's capacities. Obviously bin Laden got the most attention, but even before the bin Laden operation, we had decimated the middle ranks and some of the upper ranks of al-Qaida. They are having a great deal of difficulty operating, a great deal of difficulty communicating and financing themselves, and we are going to keep the pressure on. And in part that's because of the extraordinary sacrifices that have been made by our men and women in uniform in Afghanistan. 12:15:03 What we've also been able to do is to ramp up the training of Afghan forces. So we've got an additional 100,000 Afghan troops, both army and police, that have been trained as a consequence of this search. And that is going to give the Afghans more capacity to defend themselves, because it is in our national interest to make sure that you did not have a collapse of Afghanistan in which extremist elements could flood the zone once again and over time al-Qaida might be in a position to rebuild itself. So what I laid out was a plan in which we are going to be drawing down our troops from Afghanistan after 10 very long years and enormous sacrifice by our troops, but we will draw them in a -- draw them down in a responsible way that will allow Afghanistan to defend itself and will give us the operational capacity to continue to put pressure on al-Qaida until that network is entirely defeated. Q: How troubling do you find the attack on the Inter-Continental Hotel yesterday, sir? Does that concern you, that Afghan forces may not be able to step up, if these guys were able to attack a high- profile target in the nation's capital? 12:16:15 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, keep in mind, the drawdown hasn't begun. So we understood that Afghanistan is a dangerous place, that the Taliban is still active, and that there is still going to be events like this on occasion. The question is, in terms of overall trend, is Afghan capacity increasing? Kabul, for example, which contains a huge proportion of the Afghan population as a whole, has been largely policed by Afghan forces for quite some time, and they've done a reasonably good job. Kabul is much safer than it was, and Afghan forces in Kabul are much more capable than they were. That doesn't mean that there are not going to be events like this potentially taking place. And that will probably go on for some time. Our work is not done. But as I said in my speech, the tide of war is receding. We have shifted to a transition phase. And much like we've seen in Iraq, where we have drawn down our troops -- the remainder of our troops will be coming out by the end of this year -- but Iraq has been able to maintain a democratic government and to tamp down violence there. We think a similar approach makes sense in Afghanistan. 12:17:36 But even in Iraq, you still see the occasional attack. These are still countries that are digging themselves out of a lot of war, a lot of conflict. They're dangerous places. And so they're not going to be perfectly safe, even if we were there. But we can improve the chances for the Afghan people to defend themselves. Jim Sciutto? Q: Thank you, Mr. President. You're aware that Senators Kerry and McCain have a proposal on the Senate floor to give you the leeway to continue operations in Libya for a further year. You've just said that this, from the beginning, has been an operation limited in time and scope. Initially, you said days, not weeks. Are you prepared -- are the American people prepared for this operation with American support to continue for a further year? And is there any other definition of success than Gadhafi being removed from power? 12:18:37 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, Jim, I -- I -- just -- just a slight correction. What I told the American people was, that the initial phase where Americans were in the lead would take days, if -- perhaps weeks. And that's exactly what happened. Right? I mean, after around two weeks, a little less than two weeks, we had transitioned where NATO had taken full control of the operation. So promise made, promise kept. Second, I think when you have the former Republican nominee for president, John McCain, and the former nominee for president on the Democratic side, John Kerry, coming together to support what we're doing in Libya, that should tell the American people that this is important. And I very much appreciate their efforts in that regard. 12:19:30 Third, when it comes to our definitions of success, the U.N. mandate has said that we are there to make sure that you do not see a massacre directed against Libyan civilians by the Libyan regime. The Libyan regime's capacity has been greatly reduced as a consequence of our operation. That's already been successful. What we've seen, both in the east and in the west, is that opposition forces have been able to mobilize themselves and start getting organized, and people are starting to see the possibility of a more peaceful future on the horizon. What is also true is, as long as Gadhafi is still presenting himself as the head of the Libyan government and as long as he still controls large numbers of troops, the Libyan people are going to be in danger of counteroffensives and of retribution. 12:20:31 So there is no doubt that Gadhafi stepping down from power is, from the international community's perspective, going to be the primary way that we can assure that the overall mission of Libya's people being protected is accomplished. And -- and I just want to point out, I know something you know: The International Criminal Court identified Gadhafi as having violated international law, having committed war crimes. What we've seen is reports of troops engaging in horrible acts, including potentially using rape as a -- as a weapon of war. And so when you have somebody like that in charge of large numbers of troops, I think it'd be hard for us to feel confident that the Libyan people are going to be protected unless he steps down. 12:21:32 Now, what that means, whether there's the possibility of Libyans arriving at some sort of political settlement -- you know, that, I think, is something that ultimately, the Libyan people are going to have to make a decision about, you know, because the international community is there in service of that broader goal of a peaceful Libya. Q: Would you accept a political settlement with him involved as success from the American perspective? PRESIDENT OBAMA: I would accept him stepping down so that he is not directing armed forces against the Libyan people. He needs to step down. He needs to go. Laura Meckler. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. In these debt talks, would you accept -- would you like to see some sort of tax breaks aimed at stimulating the economy, even though that would, of course, add to the deficit itself? And I'd also like to follow up on one of your earlier answers about same-sex marriage. You said that it's a positive step that so many states, including New York, are moving towards that. Does that mean that you personally now do support same-sex marriage? Putting aside what individual states decide, is that your personal view? PRESIDENT OBAMA: I'm not going to make news on that today. (Laughter.) Good try, though. Q: (Laughs.) One point. 12:22:48 PRESIDENT OBAMA: And the -- with respect to the debt -- the deficit and debt talks and where we need to go, I do think it's important, since we're looking at how do we reduce the debt and deficit both in a 10-year window as well as beyond a 10-year window, to understand that one of the most important things we can do for debt and deficit reduction is to grow the economy. And so if there are steps that in the short term may reduce the amount of cash in the treasury, but in the long term mean that we're growing at 3.5 percent instead of 2.5 percent, then those ideas are worth exploring. Obviously, that was what we did in December during the lame-duck session, when Democrats and Republicans came together and we said: You know what? A payroll tax cut makes sense in order to boost the economy. Unemployment insurance makes sense in order to boost the economy. All that stuff puts money in people's pockets at a time when they're still struggling to dig themselves out of this recession. And so the American people have an extra thousand dollars, on average, in their pockets because of the tax cuts that we initiated. And that has helped cushion some of the tough stuff that happened in the first six months of this year, including the effects on oil prices as a consequence of what happened in the Middle East as well as what happened in Japan. 12:24:26 I think that it makes perfect sense for us to take a look at can we extend the payroll tax, for example, an additional year, and other tax breaks for business investment that could make a big difference in terms of creating more jobs right now. What we need to do is to restore business confidence and the confidence of the American people that we're on track; that we're not going to get there right away, that this is a tough slog, but that we still are moving forward. And I think that it makes sense, as we're looking at an overall package, to see are there some things that we can do to sustain the recovery, so long as the overall package achieves our goals, the goals that I set out, which is $4 trillion within a 10(-year) to 12-year window, and making sure that we're bending the costs of things like health care over the long term. Q: I'm sorry, I know you don't want to say anything further on the same-sex marriage issue, but what you said before really led me to believe that that's what's in your personal mind, and I'm wondering what's the distinction -- (off mic)? 12:25:44 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Laura, I think this has been asked and answered. I'll just -- I'll keep on giving you the same answer until I give you a different one. All right? And that won't be today. (Laughter.) Q: That's going to need diplomacy. (We don't use a lot ?). PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, exactly. I thought you'd like that one. (Laughter.) Antonieta Cadiz? There you are. Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah. Q: First, if you receive a mandatory E-Verify bill only, without legalization, are you planning to veto that bill? And second, on Fast and Furious, members of Congress and the government of Mexico are still waiting for answers. Are you planning to replace ATF leadership? And when can we expect the results of the current investigation? 12:26:44 PRESIDENT OBAMA: On the second question, as you know, my attorney general has made clear that he certainly would not have ordered gun-running to be able to pass through into Mexico. The investigation is still pending. I'm not going to comment on a -- on a current investigation. I've made very clear my views that that would not be an appropriate step by the ATF, and we've got to find out how that happened. As soon as the investigation's completed, I think appropriate actions will be taken. With respect to E-Verify, we need comprehensive immigration reform. I've said it before; I will say it again; I will say it next week and I'll say it six months from now. We've got to have a system that makes sure that we uphold our tradition as a nation of laws, and that we also uphold our tradition as a nation of immigrants. And that means tough border security, going after employers that are illegally hiring and exploiting workers, making sure that we also have a pathway for legal status for those who are living in the shadows right now. 12:28:03 We may not be able to get everything that I would like to see in a package. But we have to have a balanced package. E-Verify can be an important enforcement tool if it's not riddled with errors, if U.S. citizens are protected, because what I don't want is a situation in which employers are forced to set up a system that they can't be certain works. And we don't want to expose employers to the risk where they end up rejecting a qualified candidate for a job because the list says that that person's an illegal immigrant and it turns out that the person isn't an illegal immigrant. That wouldn't be fair for the employee and would probably get the employer in trouble as well. So I think the goal right now is to let's continue to see if we can perfect the E-Verify system. Let's make sure that we have safeguards in place to prevent the kind of scenarios that I talked about. But let's also not lose sight of some of the other components to immigration reform. 12:29:12 For example, making sure that DREAM Act kids, kids who have grown up here in the United States, think of themselves as Americans, who are not legal through no fault of their own and who are ready to invest and give back to our country and go to school and fight in our military and start businesses here -- let's make sure that those kids can stay. We need to have a more balanced approach than just a verification system, OK? Q: (Off mic) -- timeline -- (off mic)? PRESIDENT OBAMA: I don't have an answer as to whether the investigation is completed yet, and it wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on the investigation if I don't -- if it's not yet completed. OK. Jessica Young. Congratulations. Q: Thank you. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Your -- your -- your first question here. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. PRESIDENT OBAMA: No pressure. You're going to do great. (Laughter.) Q: Yeah. Thank you. Your administration has laid out four different dates by which you've said that the debt ceiling must be raised or the U.S. would face potential dire consequences. Three of those dates have come and gone and we haven't faced financial calamity. Some of your critics have argued that these are then scare tactics to force a deal. So why should the American people believe that the August 2nd deadline is the final deadline by which a deal must be raised? And would you also spell out for us what you believe will happen if the debt ceiling is not raised by that date? PRESIDENT OBAMA: Jessica, let's be clear. We haven't given out four different dates. We have given out dates that -- that are markers for us getting into trouble. It's the equivalent of, you're driving down the street and the red -- the -- the yellow light starts flashing. 12:30:59 The yellow light is flashing. Now, it hasn't been a red light yet. So what Tim Geithner has said is, technically speaking, you know, we're in a position now where we're having to do a whole bunch of things to make sure that our bills are paid. By August 2nd, we run out of tools to make sure that all our bills are paid. So that is a hard deadline. And I want to -- I want everybody to understand that this is a jobs issue. This is not an abstraction. If the United States government, for the first time, cannot pay its bills, if it defaults, then the consequences for the U.S. economy will be significant and unpredictable. And that is not a good thing. 12:32:05 We don't know how capital markets will react. But if capital markets suddenly decide, you know what, the U.S. government doesn't pay its bills, so we're going to start pulling our money out, and the U.S. Treasury has to start to raise interest rates in order to attract more money to pay off our bills, that means higher interest rates for businesses; that means higher interest rates for consumers. So all the headwinds that we're already experiencing in terms of the recovery will get worse. That's not my opinion. I think that's a consensus opinion. And that means that job growth will be further -- further stymied; it will be further hampered as a consequence of that decision. So that's point number one. Point number two, I want to address what I've been hearing from some quarters, which is, well, maybe this debt limit thing is not really that serious; we can just pay interest on the debt. Their -- this idea has been floating around in -- in some Republican circles. 12:33:27 This is the equivalent of -- of me saying, you know what, I will choose to pay my mortgage, but I'm not going to pay my car note, or I'm going to pay my car note, but I'm not going to pay my student loan. Now, a lot of people in really tough situations are having to make those tough decisions. But for the U.S. government to start picking and choosing like that is not going to inspire a lot of confidence. Moreover, which bills are we going to decide to pay? These guys have said: Well, maybe we just pay the interest on -- for bondholders. So are we really going to start paying interest to Chinese who hold Treasurys and we're not going to pay folks their Social Security checks? Or we're not going to pay to -- veterans for their disability checks? I mean, which bills -- which obligations are we going to say we don't have to pay? 12:34:42 And last point I want to make about this: These are bills that Congress ran up. The money's been spent. The obligations have been made. So this isn't -- this isn't a situation -- I think the American people have to understand this -- this is not a situation where, you know, Congress is going to say: OK, we won't -- we won't buy this car or we won't take this vacation. They took the vacation, they bought the car, and now they're saying: Maybe we don't have to pay, or we don't have to pay as fast as we said we were going to or -- that's not how responsible families act, and we're the greatest nation on Earth, and we can't act that way. So this is urgent, and it needs to get settled. Q: May I ask -- so is August 2nd a yellow light or a red one? 12:35:36 PRESIDENT OBAMA: I -- I think people should think of -- look, I'm the president of the United States and I want to make sure that I am not engaging in scare tactics. And I've tried to be responsible and somewhat restrained so that folks don't get spooked. August 2nd is a very important date, and there's no reason why we can't get this done now. We know what the -- what the options are out there. This is not a technical problem any longer. This is a matter of Congress going ahead and biting the bullet and making some tough decisions, because we know what the decisions are. We've identified what spending cuts are possible. We've identified what defense cuts are possible. We've identified what health care cuts are possible. We've identified what loopholes in the tax code can be closed that would also raise revenue. We've identified what the options are. And the question now is, are we going to step up and get this done? And you know, Malia and Sasha generally finish their homework a day ahead of time. (Laughter.) Malia's 13, Sasha's 10. Q: Impressive. 12:36:59 PRESIDENT OBAMA: It is impressive. They don't wait until the night before. They're not pulling all-nighters. (Laughter.) They're 13 and 10. Q: (Inaudible.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, Congress can do the same thing. If you know you've got to do something, just do it. And -- and I've got to say, I'm very amused when I start hearing comments about, well, the president needs to show more leadership on this. Let me tell you something. After -- right after we finished dealing with the government shutdown, averting a government shutdown, I called the leaders here together. I said, we've got to get done -- get this done. I put Vice President Biden in charge of a process that, by the way, has made real progress. But these guys have met, worked through all of the issues. I met with every single caucus for an hour to an hour and a half each -- Republican Senators, Democratic Senators, Republican House, Democratic House. I've met with the leaders multiple times. 12:38:13 At a certain point, they need to do their job. You know? And -- and -- and so this thing, which is just not on the level where we have meetings and discussions and -- and we're working through process, and when they decide they're not happy with the fact that at some point, you've got to make a choice, they just all step back and say, well, you know, the president needs to get this done. They need to do their job. Now's the time to -- to go ahead and make the tough choices. That's why they're called leaders. And I've already shown that I'm willing to make some decisions that are very tough and will, you know, give my base of voters further reason to give me a hard time. But it's got to be done. And -- and -- so there's no point in procrastinating; there's no point in putting it off. You know, we -- we've got to get this done. 12:39:24 And -- and -- if -- if by the end of this week we have not seen substantial progress, then I think members of Congress need to understand we are going to, you know, start having to cancel things and stay here until we get it done. You know? They're -- they're -- they're in one week; they're out one week. And then, they're -- they're saying, Obama's got to step in it. You need to be here. (Laughter.) I've been here. (Laughter.) I've been doing Afghanistan and bin Laden and -- (laughter) -- the Greek crisis, and -- (laughter) -- you stay here. (Laughter.) Let's get it done. All right. I think you know my feelings about that. (Laughter.) Caren Bohan. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah. Q: You talked about the payroll tax holiday and possibly extending that. Are you worried, though, that by adding a discussion of short-term measures on the economy into these discussions about long-term deficit reductions, that that may complicate the conversation and make it harder to pass a debt limit? 12:40:26 PRESIDENT OBAMA: I will -- let -- let me -- let me put it this way. If we've got a good deal on debt and deficit reduction that focuses not just on the 10-year window but also the long term, we will get it done. And then we'll -- we can argue about some other things, because I think that's very important. I will say that, precisely because tough votes in Congress are often avoided, that it may make sense to also deal with something like a payroll tax cut at the same time, because it does have budget implications. And the American people need to know that we're focused on jobs and not just on deficit reduction, even though, as I said, deficit reduction helps to serve the job agenda. I think they want to have some confidence that we've got a plan that's helping right now. But I don't think it should be a complicating factor, because if -- if, you know, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner came to me and said, all right, I'm ready -- we're ready to make a deal; here's a balanced approach to debt and deficit reduction, but we want to argue about payroll tax cuts later -- they're not set to expire until the end of this year -- if that was a situation that they presented, then I think, you know, we would have a serious conversation about that. I would not discount that completely. I do think that the steps that I talked about to deal with job growth and economic growth right now are vitally important to deficit reduction. Just as deficit reduction's important to grow the economy and to create jobs, well, creating jobs and growing the economy also helps reduce the deficit. If we just increase the growth rate by one percentage point, that would drastically bring down the long-term projections of the deficit, because people are paying more into the coffers and fewer people are drawing unemployment insurance. It makes a huge difference. And this may be sort of a good place to wrap up. 12:42:47 You know, every day I get letters from folks all around the country who show incredible resilience, incredible determination, but they are having a very, very tough time. They're losing their homes, some have lost their businesses, some have lost work and have not been able to find jobs for months, maybe a year, maybe a year and a half, and they feel some desperation. And some folks who are working just are having a tough time paying the bills because they haven't seen their wages or incomes go up in 10 years and the costs of everything else have gone up. 12:43:51 And every day, that weighs on me, every minute of every day, that weighs on me, because I ran for president precisely to make sure that we righted the ship and we start once again creating a situation where middle-class families and people who aspire to be in the middle class, if they're working hard, then they're living a better life. Now, these structural changes in our economy that have been going on for a decade -- in some cases, longer -- they're not going to be solved overnight. But we know what to do. We know that if, you know, we are educating our kids well, then they're going to be more competitive. We know that if we are investing in things like infrastructure, it pays off. I was in Alcoa in Iowa, one of our most successful companies. They took a big hit during the recession, but they still invested $90 million in new equipment in a plant that makes airplane wings and parts for automobiles, and they've bounced back. They've hired back all their people and are increasing market share, because they made those investments. Well, just like a company like Alcoa, America's got to make some investments. We know that we've got to get control of our deficit. There are -- there are some things that aren't going to solve all our problems, but can make progress right now. And the question is whether or not Democrats and Republicans are willing to put aside the expedience of short-term politics in order to get it done. 12:45:03 And these folks are counting on us. They are -- they desperately want to believe that their leadership is thinking about them, and not playing games. And -- and -- and I think that if -- if all of the leadership here in Washington has the faces and -- and -- and the stories of those families in mind, then we will solve this debt limit issue, we will put in place steps like a payroll tax cut and infrastructure development, we'll continue to fund education, we'll hold true to our commitment to our seniors. These are solvable problems, but it does require us just getting out of the short term and, frankly, selfish approach that sometimes politics breeds. And we've got to think a bit long term. All right? Thank you very much, everybody. END.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA NEWS CONFERENCE / STIX
President Barack Obama holds a news conference in the White House East Room. 11:39:03 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good morning, everybody. Have a seat, please. I just want to say a few words about the economy before I take your questions. There are a lot of folks out there who are still struggling with the effects of the recession. Many people are still looking for work or looking for a job that pays more. Families are wondering how they deal with a broken refrigerator or a busted transmission or how they're going to finance their kids' college education, and they're also worrying about the possibility of layoffs. The struggles of middle-class families were a big problem before the recession hit in 2007. They weren't created overnight, and the truth is our economic challenges are not going to be solved overnight. But there are more steps that we can take right now that would help businesses create jobs here in America. 11:40:04 Today, our administration is trying to take those steps, so we're reviewing government regulations so that we can fix any rules in place that are an unnecessary burden on businesses. We're working with the private sector, to get small businesses and start-ups the financing they need to grow and expand. And because of the partnership that we've launched with businesses and community colleges, 500,000 workers will be able to receive the right skills and training for manufacturing jobs in companies all across America, jobs that companies are looking to fill. In addition to the steps that my administration can take on our own, there are also things that Congress could do right now that will help create good jobs. Right now, Congress can send me a bill that would make it easier for entrepreneurs to patent a new product or idea, because we can't give innovators in other countries a big leg-up when it comes to opening new businesses and creating new jobs. That's something Congress could do right now. 11:41:04 Right now, Congress could send me a bill that puts construction workers back on the job rebuilding roads and bridges -- not by having government fund and pick every project, but by providing loans to private companies and states and local governments on the basis of merit, and not politics. That's pending in Congress right now. Right now, Congress can advance a set of trade agreements that would allow American businesses to sell more of their goods and services to countries in Asia and South America, agreements that would support tens of thousands of American jobs, while helping those adversely affected by trade. That's pending before Congress right now. And right now, we could give middle-class families the security of knowing that the tax cut I signed in December will be there for one more year. So there are a number of steps that my administration is taking, but there are also a number of steps that Congress could be taking right now on items that historically have had bipartisan support and that would help put more Americans back to work. 11:42:09 Many of these ideas have been tied up in Congress for some time, but as I said, all of them enjoy bipartisan support, and all of them could help grow the economy. So I urge Congress to act on these ideas now. Of course one of the most important and urgent things we can do for the economy is something that both parties are working on right now, and that's reducing our nation's deficit. Over the last few weeks the vice president has been leading negotiations with Democrats and Republicans on this issue, and they've made some real progress in narrowing down the differences. As of last week both parties had identified more than $1 trillion worth of spending cuts already. But everyone also knows that we'll need to do more to close the deficit. We can't get to the $4 trillion in savings that we need by just cutting the 12 percent of the budget that pays for things like medical research and education funding and food inspectors and the Weather Service. And we can't just do it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. 11:43:11 So we're going to need to look at the whole budget, as I said several months ago, and we've got to eliminate waste wherever we find it and make some tough decisions about worthy priorities. And that means trimming the defense budget while still meeting our security needs. It means we'll have to tackle entitlements, as long as we keep faith with seniors and children with disabilities by maintaining the fundamental security that Medicare and Medicaid provide. And yes, we're going to have to tackle spending in the tax code. There's been a lot of discussion about revenues and raising taxes in recent weeks, so I want to be clear about what we're proposing here. I spent the last two years cutting taxes for ordinary Americans. 11:44:08 And I want to extend those middle-class tax cuts. The tax cuts I'm proposing we get rid of are tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, tax breaks for oil companies and hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners. It would be nice if we could keep every tax break there is. But we've got to make some tough choices here if we want to reduce our deficit. And if we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, if we choose to keep a tax break for corporate jet owners, if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil and gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars, then that means we've got to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship. That means we've got to stop funding certain grants for medical research. That means that food safety may be compromised. That means that Medicare has to bear a greater part of the burden. Those are the choices we have to make. 11:45:09 So the bottom line is this: Any agreement to reduce our deficit is going to require tough decisions and balanced solutions. And before we ask our seniors to pay more for health care, before we cut our children's education, before we sacrifice our commitment to the research and innovation that will help create more jobs in the economy, I think it's only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well to give up that tax break that no other business enjoys. I don't think that's real radical. I think the majority of Americans agree with that. So the good news is, because of the work that's been done, I think we can actually bridge our differences. I think there's a conceptual framework that would allow us to make huge progress on our debt and deficit, and do so in a way that does not hurt our economy right here and right now. And it's not often that Washington sees both parties agree on the scale and the urgency of the challenge at hand. Nobody wants to put the creditworthiness of the United States in jeopardy. Nobody wants to see the United States default. So we've got to seize this moment, and we have to -- to seize it soon. The vice president and I will continue these negotiations with both leaders of -- of both parties in Congress for as long as it takes, and we will reach a deal that will require our government to live within its means and give our businesses confidence and get this economy moving. 11:46:50 So with that, I will take your questions. Let me grab my list here. Starting off with Ben Feller, Associated Press. Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I'd like to follow up on the comments you just made as you try to reach a deal to raise the debt limit and cut the deficit. You keep saying that there needs to be this balanced approach of spending cuts and taxes. But Republicans say flatly they won't -- PRESIDENT OBAMA: That they don't want a balanced approach. Q: They don't want any -- they don't want any tax increases, as they -- as they put it. And the House speaker says not only that he doesn't support that, but that plan won't -- will not pass the House. So my question is, will you insist ultimately that a deal has to include those tax increases that you just laid out? Is that an absolute red line for you? And if it is, can you explain to us how that can possibly get through the Congress? 11:47:48 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Look, I think that what we've seen in negotiations, here in Washington, is a lot of people say a lot of things to satisfy their base or to get on cable news, but that, hopefully, leaders at a certain point rise to the occasion and they do the right thing for the American people. And that's what I expect to happen this time. Call me naive, but my expectation is that leaders are going to lead. Now I just want to be clear about what's at stake here. The Republicans say they want to reduce the deficit. Every single observer who's not an elected official, who's not a politician says we can't reduce our deficit in the scale and scope that we need to without having a balanced approach that looks at everything. 11:48:50 Democrats have to accept some painful spending cuts that hurt some of our constituencies and we may not like. And we've shown a willingness to do that for the greater good, to say: Look, there are some things that are good programs, that are nice to have; we can't afford them right now. I, as commander in chief, have to have difficult conversations with the Pentagon saying: You know what. There's fat here; we're going to have to trim it out. And Bob Gates has already done a good job identifying $400 billion in cuts. But we're going to do more. And I promise you, the preference of the Pentagon would be not to cut any more, because they feel like they've already given. So we're going to have to look at entitlements. And that's always difficult politically. But I've been willing to say we need to see where we can reduce the cost of health care spending and Medicare and Medicaid in the out years, not by shifting costs onto seniors, as some have proposed, but rather by actually reducing those costs. But even if we're doing it in a smart way, that's still tough politics, but it's the right thing to do. 11:50:03 So the question is, if everybody else is willing to take on their sacred cows and do tough things in order to achieve the goal of real deficit reduction, then I think it would be hard for the Republicans to stand there and say that the tax breaks for corporate jets is sufficiently important that we're not willing to come to the table and get a deal done, or we're so concerned about protecting oil and gas subsidies for oil companies that are making money hand over fist, that's the reason we're not going to come to a deal. 11:51:10 I don't think that's a sustainable position. And the truth of the matter is, if you talk to Republicans who are not currently in office, like Alan Simpson, who co-chaired my bipartisan commission, he doesn't think that's a sustainable position. Pete Domenici, Republican, co-chaired something with Alice Rivlin, the Democrat, says that's -- he doesn't think that's a sustainable position. You can't reduce the deficit to the levels that it needs to be reduced without having some revenue in the mix. And the revenue we're talking about isn't coming out of the pockets of middle-class families that are struggling; it's coming out of folks who are doing extraordinarily well and who are enjoying the lowest tax rates since before I was born. If you're a -- if you are a wealthy CEO or a (health ?) -- hedge fund manager in America right now, your taxes are lower than they have ever been. They're lower than they've been since the 1950s. And you can afford it. You'll still be able to ride on your corporate jet; you're just going to have to pay a little more. And if we -- I -- and I just want to emphasize what I said earlier. If we do not have revenues, that means there are a bunch of kids out there who are not getting college scholarships. If we do not have those revenues, then the kinds of cuts that would be required might compromise the National Weather Service. It means that we would not be funding critical medical research. It means that food inspection might be compromised. And -- and, you know, I've said to some of the Republican leaders: You go talk to your constituents, the Republican constituents, and ask them, are they willing to compromise their kids' safety so that some corporate-jet owner continues to get a tax break. And -- and I'm pretty sure what the answer would be. 11:53:08 So -- so -- so we're going to keep on having these conversations. And my belief is, is that the Republican leadership in Congress will, hopefully sooner rather than later, come to the conclusion that they need to make the right decisions for the country, that everybody else has been willing to move off their maximalist position and they need to do the same. Q: And you think they will get (done ?)? PRESIDENT OBAMA: My expectation is that they'll do the responsible thing. Chuck Todd. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. There have been a lot of questions about the constitutionality -- constitutional interpretations of a few decisions you've made, so I'll just simply ask: Do you believe the War Powers Act is constitutional? Do you believe that the debt limit is constitutional -- the idea that Congress can do this? And do you believe that marriage is a civil right? 11:54:11 PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Chuckles.) Well, that was a hodge-podge. (Laughter.) The -- Chuck, we're going to assign you to the Supreme Court, man. (Laughter.) I'm not a Supreme Court justice, so I'm not -- I'm not going to put my constitutional law professor hat on here. I -- let me focus on initially the issue of Libya. I want to talk about the substance of Libya, because there's been all kinds of noise about process and congressional consultation and so forth. Let's talk about, concretely, what's happened. Moammar Gadhafi, who prior to Osama bin Laden was responsible for more American deaths than just about anybody on the planet, was threatening to massacre his people. And as part of an international coalition under a U.N. mandate that is almost unprecedented, we went in and took out air-defense systems so that an international coalition could provide a no-fly zone, could protect -- provide humanitarian protection to the people on the ground. I spoke to the American people about what we would do. I said there would be no troops on the ground. I said that we would not be carrying the lion's share of this operation, but as members of NATO, we would be supportive of it, because it's in our national security interests and also because it's the right thing to do. We have done exactly what I said we would do. We have not put any boots on the ground. And our allies, who historically we've complained aren't willing to carry enough of the -- the load when it comes to NATO operations, have carried a big load when it comes to these NATO operations. 11:56:08 And as a consequence, we've protected thousands of people in Libya. We have not seen a single U.S. casualty. There's no risks of additional escalation. This operation is limited in time and in scope. So I said to the American people, here's our narrow mission. We have carried out that narrow mission in exemplary fashion. And throughout this process, we consulted with Congress. We've had 10 hearings on it. We've sent reams of information about what the operations are. I've had -- I've had all the members of Congress over to talk about it. So a lot of this fuss is politics. And if you look substantively at what we've done, we'd -- we have done exactly what we said to do under a U.N. mandate, and we have protected thousands of lives in the process. And as a consequence, a guy who was a state sponsor of terrorist operations against the United States of America is pinned down, and the noose is tightening around him. 11:57:13 Now, when you look at the history of the War Powers Resolution, it came up after the Vietnam War in which we had half a million soldiers there, tens of thousands of lives lost, hundreds of billions of dollars spent, and Congress said, you know what, we don't want something like that happening again. So if you're going to start getting us into those kinds of commitments, you've got to consult with Congress beforehand. And I think that such consultation is entirely appropriate. But do I think that our actions in any way violate the War Powers Resolution? The answer is no. So I don't even have to get to the constitutional question. There -- there -- there may -- there may -- Q: (Off mic.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: There may be a time -- there -- there -- Q: (Off mic.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: There may be a time in which there was a serious question as to whether or not the War Powers Resolution Act was constitutional. I don't have to get to the question. We have engaged in a limited operation to help a lot of people against one of the worst tyrants in the world, somebody who nobody should want to defend. And we should be sending out a unified message to this guy that he should step down and give his people a fair chance to live their lives without fear. And -- and this suddenly becomes the cause celebre for some folks in Congress? Come on. So you had what, a three-parter? Q: (Right ?). (Laughter.) (Off mic.) 11:59:09 PRESIDENT OBAMA: That -- what -- what -- what -- what are -- what are -- what are the other two? Q: There was some question about the constitutionality of the War Powers -- PRESIDENT OBAMA: I'm just saying I don't have to reach it. That's -- that's -- that's a good legal answer. Q: (Inaudible) -- marriage being a civil right. PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, let me start by saying that this administration, under my direction, has consistently said, we cannot discriminate, as a country, against people on the basis of sexual orientation. And we have done more in the two and a half years that I've been in here than the previous 43 presidents to uphold that principle, whether it's ending "don't ask, don't tell," making sure that gay and lesbian partners can visit each other in hospitals; making sure that federal benefits can be provided to same-sex couples across the board; hate crimes. 12:00:07 We have made sure that that is a central principle of this administration, because I think it's a central principle of America. Now, what we've also done is we've said that DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, is unconstitutional. And so we've said, we cannot defend the federal government poking its noise into what states are doing and putting the thumb on the scale against same-sex couples. What I've seen happen over the last several years and what happened in New York last week I think was a good thing, because what you saw was the people of New York having a debate, talking through these issues. It was contentious, it was emotional, but ultimately, they made a decision to recognize civil marriages. And I think that's exactly how things should work. Q: (Off mic.) 12:01:07 PRESIDENT OBAMA: And so -- so I -- I think it is -- I think it is important for -- (audio break) -- for us to work through these issues, because each community is going to be different and each state is going to be different, to work through them. In the meantime, we're -- you know, we filed a -- you know, we filed briefs before the Supreme Court that say, we think that any discrimination against gays, lesbians, transgenders is subject to heightened scrutiny, and we don't think that DOMA is unconstitutional. And so I think the combination of what states are doing, what the courts are doing, the actions that we're taking administratively all are how the process should work. Q: Are you at all uncomfortable that there could be different rules in different states, you know? And of course, some people make the argument that it's -- that's what we saw during the -- segregation. 12:02:13 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, Chuck, I think what you're seeing is a profound recognition on the part of the American people that gays and lesbians and transgender persons are our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our co-workers, and that they've got to be treated like every other American. And I think that principle will win out. It's not going to be perfectly smooth, and it turns out that the president, I've discovered since I've been in this office, can't dictate precisely how this process moves. But I think we're moving in a direction of greater equality, and -- and I think that's a good thing. Julianna. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. I only have a two-parter. (Chuckles.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thanks. Q: Are you concerned that the current debate over debt and deficits is preventing you from taking the kind of decisive and more balanced action needed to create jobs in this country, which is the number-one concern for Americans? And also, one of the impediments to job growth that the business community repeatedly cites is the regulatory environment. So do you think that the NLRB complaint against Boeing -- that that has created some of the -- is an example of the kinds of regulations that chill job growth and also that you yourself have called just plain dumb? PRESIDENT OBAMA: The -- I think it's important to understand that deficit reduction, debt reduction should be part of an overall package for job growth over the long term. 12:03:57 It's not the only part of it, but it's an important part of it. So as I -- as I mentioned at the top, I think it's important for us to look at rebuilding our transportation infrastructure in this country. That could put people back to work right now, construction workers back to work right now. And it would get done work that America needs to get done. And we used to have the best roads, the best bridges, the best airports. We don't anymore. And that's not good for our long-term competitiveness. So we could put people to work right now, and make sure that we're in a good position to win the future as well. I think -- Q: (Off mic) -- have to think of that as spending -- (off mic). PRESIDENT OBAMA: I -- I'm -- I'm going to get to it. Q: (Chuckles.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: The -- I think that it's important for us to look at the tax code and figure out, are there ways that we can simplify it and also build on the work that we've already done. For example, saying to small businesses or start-up businesses, you don't have to pay capital gains when you're in start-up mode because we want you to get out there and start a business -- that's important. Making sure that SBA is helping to get financing to small businesses -- that's important. So there are a whole range of things that we can be doing. 12:05:19 I think these trade deals will be important because right now, South Korea, frankly, has a better deal when it comes to our trading relationship than we do. Part of the reason I want to pass this trade deal is, you see a whole bunch of Korean cars here in the United States, and you don't see any American cars in Korea. So let's rebalance that trading relationship. That's why we should get this passed. So the range of things that we could be doing right now -- deficit and debt reduction should be seen as part of that overall process because I think if businesses feel confident that we've got our act together here in Washington, that not only is the government not going to default, but we're also preparing for a future in which the population's getting older and we're going to have more expenses on the Medicare side and Social Security, that businesses will feel more confident about investing here in the United States of America. 12:06:26 So I don't think they're contradictory. And as I've said before, certainly in my job but, I think, Congress as well, they've got to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. So we can focus on jobs at the same time as we're focusing on debt and deficit reduction. Now, one of the things that my administration has talked about is, is there, in fact, a bunch of -- a tangle of regulations out there that are preventing businesses from growing and expanding as quickly as they should? Keep in mind that, you know, the business community is always complaining about regulations. When unemployment's at 3 percent and they're making record profits, they're going to still complain about regulations because, frankly, they want to be able to do whatever they think is going to maximize their profits. I've got an obligation to make sure that we're upholding smart regulations that protect our air and protect our water and protect our food. You know, if you're flying on a plane, you want to make sure that there are some regulations in place to assure safety in air travel. Right? So there are some core regulations that we've got to maintain. 12:07:34 But what I have done -- and this is unprecedented, by the way; no administration's done this before -- is I've said to each agency, don't just look at current regulations -- or don't just look at future regulations, regulations that we're proposing, let's go backwards and look at regulations that are already on the books, and if they don't make sense, let's get rid of them. And we are in the process of doing that, and we've already identified changes that could potentially save billions of dollars for companies over the next several years. Now, you asked specifically about one decision that was made by the National Labor Relations Board, or the NLRB, and this relates to Boeing. Essentially, the NLRB made a -- a finding that Boeing had not followed the law in making a decision to move a plant. And, you know, it's an independent agency. It's going before a judge. So I don't want to get into the details of the case. I don't know all the facts. That's going to be up to a judge to decide. 12:08:38 What I do know is this: that as a general proposition, companies need to have the freedom to relocate -- they have to follow the law, but that's part of our system. And if they're choosing to relocate here in the United States, that's a good thing. And what it doesn't make -- what -- what I think defies common sense would be a notion that we would be shutting down a plant or laying off workers because labor and management can't come to a sensible agreement. So my hope is, is that even as this thing is working its way through, everybody steps back for a second and says: Look, if jobs are being created here in the United States, let's make sure that we're encouraging that. And we can't afford to have labor and management fighting all the time, at a time when we're competing against Germany and China and other countries that want to sell goods all around the world. And obviously, the air -- airplane industry is an area where we still have a huge advantage. I want to make sure that we keep it. OK. Mark Landler. Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Yesterday, Admiral McRaven testified before Congress that he was concerned that there wasn't a clear procedure to be followed if a terrorist were captured alive abroad. The administration has also been clear that it doesn't want to continue to send suspected terrorists to Guantanamo. What message do you have for American men and women in uniform who are undertaking missions like the very risky one to capture and kill bin Laden about what they should do in the event that they capture someone alive? And does the lack of these clear procedures raise the risk that forces might be more inclined to kill suspected terrorists in the field rather than capture them alive, thus depriving the U.S. of the intelligence that they could provide? 12:10:45 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, my top priority in each and every one of these situations is to make sure that we're apprehending those who would attack the United States, that we are getting all the intelligence that we can out of these individuals in a way that's consistent with due process of law, and that we try them, we prosecute them, in a way that's consistent with rule of law. And frankly, there are going to be different dispositions of the case depending on the situation. And there are going to be some times where a military commission may be appropriate. There are going to be some times where Article III courts are appropriate in terms of prosecution. And we do have a process to work through all the agencies -- the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, FBI, anybody else who might be involved in these kinds of operations -- to think through, on a case-by-case basis, how a particular individual should be dealt with. 12:12:06 And I think that when it comes to our men and women in uniform who might be carrying out these missions, the instructions are not going to be based on whether or not the lawyers can sort out how we detain them or how we can prosecute them. Their mission is to make sure that they apprehend the individual, they do so safely with minimum risk to American lives. And that's always going to be the priority, is just carrying out the mission. And that message is sent consistently to our men and women in uniform any time they start carrying out one of these missions. But -- but I think it's -- it's important to understand and the American people need to be assured that any time we initiate a mission like this, our top priorities are making sure this person is not able to carry out attacks against the United States and that we're able to obtain actionable intelligence from those individuals. And so that mitigates against this danger that you're suggesting that our main goal is going to be to -- to kill these individuals, as opposed to potentially capturing them. OK? Mike Emanuel, Fox. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Last week, when you gave your Afghanistan drawdown speech -- PRESIDENT OBAMA: Mm-hmm. Q: -- the word "victory" in terms of the overall war in Afghanistan was not in your speech. So I'm wondering, sir, if you can define for the 100,000 troops you have in harm's way in Afghanistan, victory in the war -- and for their families as well, sir. 12:13:40 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, you know, I didn't use "victory" in my West Point speech either. What I'd said was, we can be successful in our mission, which is narrowly drawn, and that is to make sure that al-Qaida cannot attack the United States of America or our allies or our interests overseas, and to make sure that we have an Afghan government that -- and an Afghan people -- that can provide for their own security. We are being successful in those missions. And the reason that we're in a position to draw down 10,000 troops this year and a total of 33,000 troops by the end of next summer is precisely because of the extraordinary work of our men and women in uniform. What they've been able to do is to severely cripple al-Qaida's capacities. Obviously bin Laden got the most attention, but even before the bin Laden operation, we had decimated the middle ranks and some of the upper ranks of al-Qaida. They are having a great deal of difficulty operating, a great deal of difficulty communicating and financing themselves, and we are going to keep the pressure on. And in part that's because of the extraordinary sacrifices that have been made by our men and women in uniform in Afghanistan. 12:15:03 What we've also been able to do is to ramp up the training of Afghan forces. So we've got an additional 100,000 Afghan troops, both army and police, that have been trained as a consequence of this search. And that is going to give the Afghans more capacity to defend themselves, because it is in our national interest to make sure that you did not have a collapse of Afghanistan in which extremist elements could flood the zone once again and over time al-Qaida might be in a position to rebuild itself. So what I laid out was a plan in which we are going to be drawing down our troops from Afghanistan after 10 very long years and enormous sacrifice by our troops, but we will draw them in a -- draw them down in a responsible way that will allow Afghanistan to defend itself and will give us the operational capacity to continue to put pressure on al-Qaida until that network is entirely defeated. Q: How troubling do you find the attack on the Inter-Continental Hotel yesterday, sir? Does that concern you, that Afghan forces may not be able to step up, if these guys were able to attack a high- profile target in the nation's capital? 12:16:15 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, keep in mind, the drawdown hasn't begun. So we understood that Afghanistan is a dangerous place, that the Taliban is still active, and that there is still going to be events like this on occasion. The question is, in terms of overall trend, is Afghan capacity increasing? Kabul, for example, which contains a huge proportion of the Afghan population as a whole, has been largely policed by Afghan forces for quite some time, and they've done a reasonably good job. Kabul is much safer than it was, and Afghan forces in Kabul are much more capable than they were. That doesn't mean that there are not going to be events like this potentially taking place. And that will probably go on for some time. Our work is not done. But as I said in my speech, the tide of war is receding. We have shifted to a transition phase. And much like we've seen in Iraq, where we have drawn down our troops -- the remainder of our troops will be coming out by the end of this year -- but Iraq has been able to maintain a democratic government and to tamp down violence there. We think a similar approach makes sense in Afghanistan. 12:17:36 But even in Iraq, you still see the occasional attack. These are still countries that are digging themselves out of a lot of war, a lot of conflict. They're dangerous places. And so they're not going to be perfectly safe, even if we were there. But we can improve the chances for the Afghan people to defend themselves. Jim Sciutto? Q: Thank you, Mr. President. You're aware that Senators Kerry and McCain have a proposal on the Senate floor to give you the leeway to continue operations in Libya for a further year. You've just said that this, from the beginning, has been an operation limited in time and scope. Initially, you said days, not weeks. Are you prepared -- are the American people prepared for this operation with American support to continue for a further year? And is there any other definition of success than Gadhafi being removed from power? 12:18:37 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, Jim, I -- I -- just -- just a slight correction. What I told the American people was, that the initial phase where Americans were in the lead would take days, if -- perhaps weeks. And that's exactly what happened. Right? I mean, after around two weeks, a little less than two weeks, we had transitioned where NATO had taken full control of the operation. So promise made, promise kept. Second, I think when you have the former Republican nominee for president, John McCain, and the former nominee for president on the Democratic side, John Kerry, coming together to support what we're doing in Libya, that should tell the American people that this is important. And I very much appreciate their efforts in that regard. 12:19:30 Third, when it comes to our definitions of success, the U.N. mandate has said that we are there to make sure that you do not see a massacre directed against Libyan civilians by the Libyan regime. The Libyan regime's capacity has been greatly reduced as a consequence of our operation. That's already been successful. What we've seen, both in the east and in the west, is that opposition forces have been able to mobilize themselves and start getting organized, and people are starting to see the possibility of a more peaceful future on the horizon. What is also true is, as long as Gadhafi is still presenting himself as the head of the Libyan government and as long as he still controls large numbers of troops, the Libyan people are going to be in danger of counteroffensives and of retribution. 12:20:31 So there is no doubt that Gadhafi stepping down from power is, from the international community's perspective, going to be the primary way that we can assure that the overall mission of Libya's people being protected is accomplished. And -- and I just want to point out, I know something you know: The International Criminal Court identified Gadhafi as having violated international law, having committed war crimes. What we've seen is reports of troops engaging in horrible acts, including potentially using rape as a -- as a weapon of war. And so when you have somebody like that in charge of large numbers of troops, I think it'd be hard for us to feel confident that the Libyan people are going to be protected unless he steps down. 12:21:32 Now, what that means, whether there's the possibility of Libyans arriving at some sort of political settlement -- you know, that, I think, is something that ultimately, the Libyan people are going to have to make a decision about, you know, because the international community is there in service of that broader goal of a peaceful Libya. Q: Would you accept a political settlement with him involved as success from the American perspective? PRESIDENT OBAMA: I would accept him stepping down so that he is not directing armed forces against the Libyan people. He needs to step down. He needs to go. Laura Meckler. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. In these debt talks, would you accept -- would you like to see some sort of tax breaks aimed at stimulating the economy, even though that would, of course, add to the deficit itself? And I'd also like to follow up on one of your earlier answers about same-sex marriage. You said that it's a positive step that so many states, including New York, are moving towards that. Does that mean that you personally now do support same-sex marriage? Putting aside what individual states decide, is that your personal view? PRESIDENT OBAMA: I'm not going to make news on that today. (Laughter.) Good try, though. Q: (Laughs.) One point. 12:22:48 PRESIDENT OBAMA: And the -- with respect to the debt -- the deficit and debt talks and where we need to go, I do think it's important, since we're looking at how do we reduce the debt and deficit both in a 10-year window as well as beyond a 10-year window, to understand that one of the most important things we can do for debt and deficit reduction is to grow the economy. And so if there are steps that in the short term may reduce the amount of cash in the treasury, but in the long term mean that we're growing at 3.5 percent instead of 2.5 percent, then those ideas are worth exploring. Obviously, that was what we did in December during the lame-duck session, when Democrats and Republicans came together and we said: You know what? A payroll tax cut makes sense in order to boost the economy. Unemployment insurance makes sense in order to boost the economy. All that stuff puts money in people's pockets at a time when they're still struggling to dig themselves out of this recession. And so the American people have an extra thousand dollars, on average, in their pockets because of the tax cuts that we initiated. And that has helped cushion some of the tough stuff that happened in the first six months of this year, including the effects on oil prices as a consequence of what happened in the Middle East as well as what happened in Japan. 12:24:26 I think that it makes perfect sense for us to take a look at can we extend the payroll tax, for example, an additional year, and other tax breaks for business investment that could make a big difference in terms of creating more jobs right now. What we need to do is to restore business confidence and the confidence of the American people that we're on track; that we're not going to get there right away, that this is a tough slog, but that we still are moving forward. And I think that it makes sense, as we're looking at an overall package, to see are there some things that we can do to sustain the recovery, so long as the overall package achieves our goals, the goals that I set out, which is $4 trillion within a 10(-year) to 12-year window, and making sure that we're bending the costs of things like health care over the long term. Q: I'm sorry, I know you don't want to say anything further on the same-sex marriage issue, but what you said before really led me to believe that that's what's in your personal mind, and I'm wondering what's the distinction -- (off mic)? 12:25:44 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Laura, I think this has been asked and answered. I'll just -- I'll keep on giving you the same answer until I give you a different one. All right? And that won't be today. (Laughter.) Q: That's going to need diplomacy. (We don't use a lot ?). PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, exactly. I thought you'd like that one. (Laughter.) Antonieta Cadiz? There you are. Q: Thank you very much, Mr. President. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah. Q: First, if you receive a mandatory E-Verify bill only, without legalization, are you planning to veto that bill? And second, on Fast and Furious, members of Congress and the government of Mexico are still waiting for answers. Are you planning to replace ATF leadership? And when can we expect the results of the current investigation? 12:26:44 PRESIDENT OBAMA: On the second question, as you know, my attorney general has made clear that he certainly would not have ordered gun-running to be able to pass through into Mexico. The investigation is still pending. I'm not going to comment on a -- on a current investigation. I've made very clear my views that that would not be an appropriate step by the ATF, and we've got to find out how that happened. As soon as the investigation's completed, I think appropriate actions will be taken. With respect to E-Verify, we need comprehensive immigration reform. I've said it before; I will say it again; I will say it next week and I'll say it six months from now. We've got to have a system that makes sure that we uphold our tradition as a nation of laws, and that we also uphold our tradition as a nation of immigrants. And that means tough border security, going after employers that are illegally hiring and exploiting workers, making sure that we also have a pathway for legal status for those who are living in the shadows right now. 12:28:03 We may not be able to get everything that I would like to see in a package. But we have to have a balanced package. E-Verify can be an important enforcement tool if it's not riddled with errors, if U.S. citizens are protected, because what I don't want is a situation in which employers are forced to set up a system that they can't be certain works. And we don't want to expose employers to the risk where they end up rejecting a qualified candidate for a job because the list says that that person's an illegal immigrant and it turns out that the person isn't an illegal immigrant. That wouldn't be fair for the employee and would probably get the employer in trouble as well. So I think the goal right now is to let's continue to see if we can perfect the E-Verify system. Let's make sure that we have safeguards in place to prevent the kind of scenarios that I talked about. But let's also not lose sight of some of the other components to immigration reform. 12:29:12 For example, making sure that DREAM Act kids, kids who have grown up here in the United States, think of themselves as Americans, who are not legal through no fault of their own and who are ready to invest and give back to our country and go to school and fight in our military and start businesses here -- let's make sure that those kids can stay. We need to have a more balanced approach than just a verification system, OK? Q: (Off mic) -- timeline -- (off mic)? PRESIDENT OBAMA: I don't have an answer as to whether the investigation is completed yet, and it wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on the investigation if I don't -- if it's not yet completed. OK. Jessica Young. Congratulations. Q: Thank you. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Your -- your -- your first question here. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. PRESIDENT OBAMA: No pressure. You're going to do great. (Laughter.) Q: Yeah. Thank you. Your administration has laid out four different dates by which you've said that the debt ceiling must be raised or the U.S. would face potential dire consequences. Three of those dates have come and gone and we haven't faced financial calamity. Some of your critics have argued that these are then scare tactics to force a deal. So why should the American people believe that the August 2nd deadline is the final deadline by which a deal must be raised? And would you also spell out for us what you believe will happen if the debt ceiling is not raised by that date? PRESIDENT OBAMA: Jessica, let's be clear. We haven't given out four different dates. We have given out dates that -- that are markers for us getting into trouble. It's the equivalent of, you're driving down the street and the red -- the -- the yellow light starts flashing. 12:30:59 The yellow light is flashing. Now, it hasn't been a red light yet. So what Tim Geithner has said is, technically speaking, you know, we're in a position now where we're having to do a whole bunch of things to make sure that our bills are paid. By August 2nd, we run out of tools to make sure that all our bills are paid. So that is a hard deadline. And I want to -- I want everybody to understand that this is a jobs issue. This is not an abstraction. If the United States government, for the first time, cannot pay its bills, if it defaults, then the consequences for the U.S. economy will be significant and unpredictable. And that is not a good thing. 12:32:05 We don't know how capital markets will react. But if capital markets suddenly decide, you know what, the U.S. government doesn't pay its bills, so we're going to start pulling our money out, and the U.S. Treasury has to start to raise interest rates in order to attract more money to pay off our bills, that means higher interest rates for businesses; that means higher interest rates for consumers. So all the headwinds that we're already experiencing in terms of the recovery will get worse. That's not my opinion. I think that's a consensus opinion. And that means that job growth will be further -- further stymied; it will be further hampered as a consequence of that decision. So that's point number one. Point number two, I want to address what I've been hearing from some quarters, which is, well, maybe this debt limit thing is not really that serious; we can just pay interest on the debt. Their -- this idea has been floating around in -- in some Republican circles. 12:33:27 This is the equivalent of -- of me saying, you know what, I will choose to pay my mortgage, but I'm not going to pay my car note, or I'm going to pay my car note, but I'm not going to pay my student loan. Now, a lot of people in really tough situations are having to make those tough decisions. But for the U.S. government to start picking and choosing like that is not going to inspire a lot of confidence. Moreover, which bills are we going to decide to pay? These guys have said: Well, maybe we just pay the interest on -- for bondholders. So are we really going to start paying interest to Chinese who hold Treasurys and we're not going to pay folks their Social Security checks? Or we're not going to pay to -- veterans for their disability checks? I mean, which bills -- which obligations are we going to say we don't have to pay? 12:34:42 And last point I want to make about this: These are bills that Congress ran up. The money's been spent. The obligations have been made. So this isn't -- this isn't a situation -- I think the American people have to understand this -- this is not a situation where, you know, Congress is going to say: OK, we won't -- we won't buy this car or we won't take this vacation. They took the vacation, they bought the car, and now they're saying: Maybe we don't have to pay, or we don't have to pay as fast as we said we were going to or -- that's not how responsible families act, and we're the greatest nation on Earth, and we can't act that way. So this is urgent, and it needs to get settled. Q: May I ask -- so is August 2nd a yellow light or a red one? 12:35:36 PRESIDENT OBAMA: I -- I think people should think of -- look, I'm the president of the United States and I want to make sure that I am not engaging in scare tactics. And I've tried to be responsible and somewhat restrained so that folks don't get spooked. August 2nd is a very important date, and there's no reason why we can't get this done now. We know what the -- what the options are out there. This is not a technical problem any longer. This is a matter of Congress going ahead and biting the bullet and making some tough decisions, because we know what the decisions are. We've identified what spending cuts are possible. We've identified what defense cuts are possible. We've identified what health care cuts are possible. We've identified what loopholes in the tax code can be closed that would also raise revenue. We've identified what the options are. And the question now is, are we going to step up and get this done? And you know, Malia and Sasha generally finish their homework a day ahead of time. (Laughter.) Malia's 13, Sasha's 10. Q: Impressive. 12:36:59 PRESIDENT OBAMA: It is impressive. They don't wait until the night before. They're not pulling all-nighters. (Laughter.) They're 13 and 10. Q: (Inaudible.) PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, Congress can do the same thing. If you know you've got to do something, just do it. And -- and I've got to say, I'm very amused when I start hearing comments about, well, the president needs to show more leadership on this. Let me tell you something. After -- right after we finished dealing with the government shutdown, averting a government shutdown, I called the leaders here together. I said, we've got to get done -- get this done. I put Vice President Biden in charge of a process that, by the way, has made real progress. But these guys have met, worked through all of the issues. I met with every single caucus for an hour to an hour and a half each -- Republican Senators, Democratic Senators, Republican House, Democratic House. I've met with the leaders multiple times. 12:38:13 At a certain point, they need to do their job. You know? And -- and -- and so this thing, which is just not on the level where we have meetings and discussions and -- and we're working through process, and when they decide they're not happy with the fact that at some point, you've got to make a choice, they just all step back and say, well, you know, the president needs to get this done. They need to do their job. Now's the time to -- to go ahead and make the tough choices. That's why they're called leaders. And I've already shown that I'm willing to make some decisions that are very tough and will, you know, give my base of voters further reason to give me a hard time. But it's got to be done. And -- and -- so there's no point in procrastinating; there's no point in putting it off. You know, we -- we've got to get this done. 12:39:24 And -- and -- if -- if by the end of this week we have not seen substantial progress, then I think members of Congress need to understand we are going to, you know, start having to cancel things and stay here until we get it done. You know? They're -- they're -- they're in one week; they're out one week. And then, they're -- they're saying, Obama's got to step in it. You need to be here. (Laughter.) I've been here. (Laughter.) I've been doing Afghanistan and bin Laden and -- (laughter) -- the Greek crisis, and -- (laughter) -- you stay here. (Laughter.) Let's get it done. All right. I think you know my feelings about that. (Laughter.) Caren Bohan. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah. Q: You talked about the payroll tax holiday and possibly extending that. Are you worried, though, that by adding a discussion of short-term measures on the economy into these discussions about long-term deficit reductions, that that may complicate the conversation and make it harder to pass a debt limit? 12:40:26 PRESIDENT OBAMA: I will -- let -- let me -- let me put it this way. If we've got a good deal on debt and deficit reduction that focuses not just on the 10-year window but also the long term, we will get it done. And then we'll -- we can argue about some other things, because I think that's very important. I will say that, precisely because tough votes in Congress are often avoided, that it may make sense to also deal with something like a payroll tax cut at the same time, because it does have budget implications. And the American people need to know that we're focused on jobs and not just on deficit reduction, even though, as I said, deficit reduction helps to serve the job agenda. I think they want to have some confidence that we've got a plan that's helping right now. But I don't think it should be a complicating factor, because if -- if, you know, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner came to me and said, all right, I'm ready -- we're ready to make a deal; here's a balanced approach to debt and deficit reduction, but we want to argue about payroll tax cuts later -- they're not set to expire until the end of this year -- if that was a situation that they presented, then I think, you know, we would have a serious conversation about that. I would not discount that completely. I do think that the steps that I talked about to deal with job growth and economic growth right now are vitally important to deficit reduction. Just as deficit reduction's important to grow the economy and to create jobs, well, creating jobs and growing the economy also helps reduce the deficit. If we just increase the growth rate by one percentage point, that would drastically bring down the long-term projections of the deficit, because people are paying more into the coffers and fewer people are drawing unemployment insurance. It makes a huge difference. And this may be sort of a good place to wrap up. 12:42:47 You know, every day I get letters from folks all around the country who show incredible resilience, incredible determination, but they are having a very, very tough time. They're losing their homes, some have lost their businesses, some have lost work and have not been able to find jobs for months, maybe a year, maybe a year and a half, and they feel some desperation. And some folks who are working just are having a tough time paying the bills because they haven't seen their wages or incomes go up in 10 years and the costs of everything else have gone up. 12:43:51 And every day, that weighs on me, every minute of every day, that weighs on me, because I ran for president precisely to make sure that we righted the ship and we start once again creating a situation where middle-class families and people who aspire to be in the middle class, if they're working hard, then they're living a better life. Now, these structural changes in our economy that have been going on for a decade -- in some cases, longer -- they're not going to be solved overnight. But we know what to do. We know that if, you know, we are educating our kids well, then they're going to be more competitive. We know that if we are investing in things like infrastructure, it pays off. I was in Alcoa in Iowa, one of our most successful companies. They took a big hit during the recession, but they still invested $90 million in new equipment in a plant that makes airplane wings and parts for automobiles, and they've bounced back. They've hired back all their people and are increasing market share, because they made those investments. Well, just like a company like Alcoa, America's got to make some investments. We know that we've got to get control of our deficit. There are -- there are some things that aren't going to solve all our problems, but can make progress right now. And the question is whether or not Democrats and Republicans are willing to put aside the expedience of short-term politics in order to get it done. 12:45:03 And these folks are counting on us. They are -- they desperately want to believe that their leadership is thinking about them, and not playing games. And -- and -- and I think that if -- if all of the leadership here in Washington has the faces and -- and -- and the stories of those families in mind, then we will solve this debt limit issue, we will put in place steps like a payroll tax cut and infrastructure development, we'll continue to fund education, we'll hold true to our commitment to our seniors. These are solvable problems, but it does require us just getting out of the short term and, frankly, selfish approach that sometimes politics breeds. And we've got to think a bit long term. All right? Thank you very much, everybody. END.
PETE BUTTIGIEG WASHINGTON IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI 2020/HD
TVU 21 PETE BUTTIGIEG WASHINGTON IA TOWN HALL ABC UNI120819 2020 GAGGLE 134803 You've been taking some heat from your rivals but what do you say to voters who are concerned about the transparency of your campaign? 134808 BUTG>> Well, I'd say that we are leading in many ways on this, including making sure that I've put out the tax records covering my entire time in the private sector, that even though that was my first job out of school, I have released information about the type, the location and the kinds of clients that I work with during my two, two and a half years as a consultant. And that I stand on my record, in particular when it comes to competing with President Trump, in terms of my public and private sector career. 134836 Matter of fact, given the destruction of his time in business, even though I spent a lot less time in business. Even on that front, I'd be happy compared to the current president. 134847 Q>> Mr Mayor yesterday you spoke to the Teamsters along with several other candidates and Joe Biden from the stage said, I have a better record than anybody here, that you're going to be talking to Bernie Sanders said I've been on more picket lines of striking workers and I suspect any or that all of my opponents combined. Is there any point at which you before this campaign, or on a picket line or are there any other instances in which you were on the front lines? 134909 PETE>> Oh you bet. Yeah, we had a lockout at Honeywell with UAW workers back home in South Bend. Again I started my career standing up for the UAW and running my campaign out of the basement of building trades Hall in South Bend, and of course during this campaign we've continued that, standing with Grocery workers, and with the not yet organized from Los Angeles to Charleston. So I'm very proud of my record. Certainly don't have the same longevity as someone of my competitors, but I would stack up the quality of my support for labor with anybody else. 134936 Q>> Can you talk about some of the early years like in 2010 and sort of sort of the sum of those efforts for folks that weren't there. PETE>>Yeah i mean i spent most of 2010 traveling around to different UAW halls, including ones that only had a retiree chapter because the plant had closed. But working with them to defend President Obama's policy of bringing back the auto industry because we knew what that meant. Not only to union members but to communities across my home state. 134958 Organized labor has always been there to stand for the very people that the President claims to be speaking for but invariably disappoints. And I think that's going to be a very important battlefield in the coming election to make sure that we demonstrate to everyone in organized labor that we're the ones who are serious about having their back. Q>> I don't think anyone thinks you're shy around the press I think at this point we spent approximately 10 days on a bus with you. To Rachel's question about transparency, what's the thought process behind not opening fundraisers up to press up until this point if you choose to do so? 135028 PETE>> So as you know, it is very rare for presidential candidates to do it, but I think it's a step that deserves to be taken seriously and we're looking into it. Q>> Oxford University, how did that shape you as a person and as a politician. 135042 BUTG>> Well, one of the things I learned was the rigor over there that if I ever put even one word wrong in an essay or on an exam that somebody would be there to question it and tear it up, and it learned me to be---taught me to be very mindful of precision, which I think is important right now because language matters and when you got a president abusing the English language in ways that lead to an abuse the values of the American people, it's something really important. 135107 I learned a lot about economics. I learned a lot about philosophy and I learned a lot about myself during my time in England. It was actually while I was there that I really found myself drawn to the Church of England and the Anglican Community that I'm now part of in Episcopal Church back home. Q: Lawrence O'donnell said you are pushing republican talking points that democrats don't care about the deficit. What is your response? 135126 BUTG>> Well, I've never said that Democrats are bad at managing the deficit. My point i, precisely because we're better at it than Republicans, we got to own the issue. Now I do think that it matters because sometimes folks say "well, you shouldn't even care about"---especially on Twitter, not so much democrats in office, but sometimes the Twitter left says that we should never even mentioned deficits. The reason I think that it matters is because if we allow them to grow, they wind up cutting out the lifeblood, the resources that go into programs that we believe in for everything from infrastructure to helping those in need to health. 135200 It doesn't mean that we should be absolutist about it, it does mean that, since the republican party has demonstrated, time and time again that they will not act to make deficits better, the Democratic Party ought to own this issue. And when I'm president we will. Q>> Mayor did Mayor Lightfoot's comments about transparency leave an impression on you, especially the way she phrased it in context with President Trump? 135221 I have enormous respect for Mayor Lightfoot. what I'll say is that President Trump is somebody who does not care about keeping his word. I'm somebody who does, and that's part of what's guiding my decisions to find a way to put out information about my private sector career, without violating my own word. Q: --the Pensacola shooting-- 135242 Well it's it's disturbing we're still waiting for more details to come out but to have two attacks impacting military facilities, and the Pearl Harbor one as well as we mark this anniversary of Pearl Harbor, thinking about the dangers that and loss of life that happened there today because we're not willing to face up to a gun violence epidemic that claims more lives every year than even the attack on Pearl Harbor shows you how we've got to improve our priorities when it comes to gun safety in the United States. Thanks, everyone. ### TOWN HALL [12:53:37] Thank you so much, first of all, thank you, Terry, for organizing veterans in the Democratic Party and reminding us that the flag of the United States America belongs to no political party. We love our country. [12:53:51] And part of that is doing right by those who have served during and after their service to this country. [12:54:01] I want to thank Mayor Rosie and fellow Midwestern millennial mayor, because obviously I happen to believe that's a good source of leadership right now. And I want to thank all of you for joining us on this Sunday. Perfectly good Sunday in hunting season and in this hall is full. That means a lot to me. I appreciate it. [12:54:22] And I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you about the road ahead and what our country is going to need for those who are supporting my campaign to urge you to continue reaching out and growing our base of support all the way to the caucuses. For those of you still making up your mind to ask you for your support in the caucuses, to share how I hope to earn it. I want to begin by asking you to visualize in as much detail as you can. [12:54:54] A day that lies in our future are not too distant future, a day that is going to come one way or the other. And I hope sooner rather than later. And that's the day that for the first time, the sun will come up over our country. And Donald Trump will no longer be the president of the United States. [12:55:23] A lot of us are ready to get to that day. Right. The sooner the better. [12:55:29] But part of why I'm asking you to picture that day is not only for us to think about what it will take to bring that about, to make sure we have a nominee who can build a coalition to engage the American people for change. [12:55:44] But also to ask you to think about what our country's really going to need on that day. Our problems don't end on that day. Far from it. Think about what it's really going to feel like on that day. First of all, our country will be divided, even more divided than we are now polarized, torn up over politics, worn out from fighting and in need of being healed and brought together. [12:56:10] And at the same time, it will also be true that our country will face enormous challenges. Emergencies really that have been with us for quite a while and are not going to take a vacation just for the impeachment process. Haven't taken a vacation during this presidency at all. The sun will be coming up in a climate where we are having more severe weather emergencies every year. And that is just a few years away from the point of no return. [12:56:39] Sun's gonna come up over an economy where the numbers on a page look good and it's nice to see the stock market growing. [12:56:47] But more and more Americans find it impossible to hold on to what they've got, let alone get ahead. [12:56:53] Because even when your income does grow, it doesn't do it fast enough compared to the cost of retirement. The cost to health. The costs of prescription drugs. And the cost of housing in this country. [12:57:03] So he's gonna be coming up over a country where kids are getting active shooter drills before they are old enough to learn how to read. These issues cry out for urgent action. And so the job of the next president. We'll be to resolve these issues, to step up and deliver bold, meaningful, real big reforms and to do it in a way that's actually going to leave our country more unified instead of further polarized as we work our way through those issues. And that is a tall order. But I believe that's what our presidency is for. For undertaking that level of work to guide this nation again, not only to bring an end to the era we're living through right now, but to launch the beginning of the era that has to come next. [12:57:52] That's why I'm running to be president. That's why I'm asking for your support. [12:58:00] So as we pick up the pieces, the good news is there is a very clear roadmap for what it's going to take to get there, and the way points that guide posts on that roadmap are the values that belong to us as Americans. [12:58:15] Values that don't belong to one political party or the other. And that guide us in a very specific direction when we pay attention to. Well, we need a president who can unite Americans around those values where right now we've got a divider in chief. I'm thinking about values like the way we feel when we see the American flag. Patriotism and love of country. [12:58:38] But I'm not talking about the small, cheap nationalism of a president who thinks all you got to do to be patriotic and in respect to Flag is is to hug it literally sometimes on your way to the stage or president who thinks it's somehow pro military to overthrow military justice and pardon war crimes as if there is no difference between an honorable soldier and war fighter and somebody who goes out there and dishonors the American people and the American flag. [12:59:09] That's not the kind of patriotism I'm talking about. [12:59:20] I'm talking about the love of country that motivated so many people. [12:59:24] I have seen people in this room and people I served with to raise their right hand and serve this nation, which begins with a love of country that recognizes our country is made of people who cannot love a country if you hate half of the people who are in. That's part of what's got to change right now. I'm talking about love of country. That means we uphold American values. We uphold America's honor. [12:59:50] As an American, I never again want to see the American president being laughed at by the leaders of the world. America will be respected when I am your commander in chief. But protecting our country also means we gotta do some stuff right here at home. It's got to start right here. [13:00:13] That is why, for example, if we're serious about protecting our country, serious about protecting each other, we've got to make sure that we don't allow the Second Amendment to be used as an excuse to get us off the hook when it comes to protecting our schools and our neighborhoods with background checks and red flag laws and other common sense gun measures that most Americans support. [13:00:40] And if we're serious about national security, we've got to be serious about protecting our country's future. That is why we must rise up here at home and lead the rest of the world in confronting climate change as the global security threat of our time. Our safety depends on it. And when we do, it'll be a good way to restore the credibility of the United States of America in the eyes of the world, because the world can't do it without it. So let us lead on that issue of global security and get something done. [13:01:14] So you see how that value patriotism can actually help us move forward if we take it seriously. [13:01:19] Problem is, they're they're carving us up and pitting us against each other across the very values that are supposed to unite us as Americans. That's how I feel about faith to. You know, first of all, this the country was built on the idea that our Constitution belongs to all of us, people of every religion and of no religion deserve equal protection under the laws of this land. It's also the case that those of us who are guided by the teachings of faith have a lot of questions for Washington today. [13:01:50] And for a White House that sometimes when it's convenient, cloaks itself in the language of religion to then turn around and cut food stamps for people in need has a lot of us wondering whatever happened to I was hungry and you fed me? When we see children being torn out the arms of their parents, I think it has a lot of us wondering what ever happened. I was a stranger and you welcomed me when I am your president. I will serve people of all traditions equally, but I can also promise that people of faith will not have to scratch their heads when they turn on the news and wonder whatever happened to the least of these. That is my promise to you. [13:02:29] When it comes to the moral bearing of our administration. [13:02:40] Something about values like democracy. Democracy isn't just a system. [13:02:44] Its value is the belief that it matters that the people are empowered, that the government works for the people and not the other way around. [13:02:54] It's why we have elections. But is it really a democracy when many of those elections take place in districts where the lines were drawn to where the politicians got to pick out their voters instead of voters picking out their politicians, we've got to fix that. If we're serious about being a democracy. [13:03:14] We're not really a democracy so long as Citizens United tells us that dollars count just as much as thoughts and that it's OK to try to buy an election that is not a democracy, we need to fix that system. [13:03:28] And if that means constitutional reform, that is why the founders, in their wisdom, gave us the option of constitutional reform. Let's do something real to get money out of politics and make sure that we have a true democracy in this country. [13:03:48] I think a lot about the American value of freedom, but not not the way it's sometimes been shrunken in today's Washington by those who think that all there is to freedom is cutting out every rule and every tax and every program you can find that doesn't make us free. I believe that it's true that sometimes freedom requires that we ensure that government get out of the way. [13:04:15] I believe, for example, that we must get government out of the business of dictating to women what their reproductive health care choices ought to be. [13:04:29] Other times, part of how we secure our freedom is by asking the public sector to step up. [13:04:36] That's why our local governments are expected to deliver clean, safe drinking water and pave the roads and plow the snow. It makes us more free when they do. They worry about that. So everybody else doesn't have to. We expect the public sector to step up and deliver quality schools. [13:04:52] Which is why in Washington we need a secretary of education who believes in public education and supports the work that's going on on the ground here. [13:05:08] It's why the time has come to insist that the public sector step up and deliver some solutions on health care. Because you're not free if you don't have health care, you can't live out a life of your choosing in this country if you don't know how you're gonna get treatments paid for when your lives depend on. [13:05:26] So it is in the name of enhancing our freedom to live well that the time has come to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable and ensure that they can't jack up prices on folks just because they can't. And yes, it means making sure there's no such thing as an uninsured American. And that's why I proposed Medicare for all who want it would take a version of Medicare, a public plan. We make it available for everybody. We enroll anybody who's uninsured. So there is no such thing as somebody being uninsured. [13:06:00] But I say for all who want it, because I trust you to decide whether you want it. And if you'd rather be on some private plan that you've got, that's fine by me. The important thing is that everybody be covered one way or the other. And I respect your freedom to decide how that best works for you. [13:06:22] These are the values, freedom, democracy that guide our country in governing in the name of those freedoms, we can galvanize and not polarize an American majority that is ready to deliver big reforms, big ideas. Things we haven't thought possible in decades. [13:06:39] If we can hold that majority together and not divide it and polarize it, let it get blown up. That's the opportunity right here. That's why we can't get so caught up in fighting that fighting is all we've got. Sure. We got to fight sometimes for what we believe in. We've got to have it out. Tug of war. [13:06:56] Get something done. But I will never let us get so caught up that we start to confuse the fight for the point. The point is what's on the other side of the fight where we come together and have a better answer for one another and live better in this country. That's what leadership can deliver. And we need that right now. [13:07:19] Because we can't wait any longer on the issues that we face as a country. It can't wait 10 years. It can't wait for years. Climate can't wait. We are this close to the tipping point. [13:07:30] Gun violence can't wait. We're losing far too many people. We cannot wait. To save a million lives in this country over the course of this next decade from deaths, from despair. [13:07:42] By ensuring that at long last we treat addiction and mental health with as much urgency and openness as we do physical health and other medical conditions, that time has come and we can't wait. [13:07:58] We can't wait to do something about racial disparities in this country that are pulling down the entire American project that harm everybody. Which is why I'm going to talk about him in a majority white room, just as I will when we're sitting down with African-American leaders. We have got to act with as much intention as we brought into the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe. This time, we've got to do it right here at home with the Frederick Douglass plan to tear down systemic inequalities so that in this country, your race has nothing to do with your health, your wealth or your relationship with law enforcement. We can't wait to deliver those solutions. [13:08:40] And we can't wait to take steps that will bring this country together. This is why, for example, I believe in the power of service and I'm proposing that we create a million paid voluntary national service opportunities a year. [13:08:54] Because when I was deployed, I learned to trust my life to people who were so different from me. [13:09:01] Different stories from different parts of the country, very different politics. But we learn to trust each other, even though we had nothing in common besides a flag on our shoulder. [13:09:10] I want every American to have that experience without having to go to war in order to get it. [13:09:16] And I also know that there are so many Americans ready to serve. Ready to help on projects from weatherizing the homes of senior citizens with low income, to help with climate and to help with poverty to a community health corps that would help with issues of addiction and recovery to whatever communities feel they need most. And not all of the policy designs and answers have to come from Washington. But more of the funding should because we got to support communities doing the right thing and lifting one another up. That's the vision for national service that I have and it will help us bind together Americans who don't have nearly enough income. [13:09:49] We have got to build up a better sense of belonging in this country where people are being told that that they don't fit because of what you look like or your religion or disability or what you do for a living. Race, gender, you name it. There are so many ways people are being told they don't fit. And yet we are a nation whose very creed is that out of many, we are one. We need a president who understands. The matter of fact, I believe what's the that's what the presidency is for. [13:10:20] But the purpose of the office is not the glorification of the president. It is the empowerment and the unification of the American people. And that's why I'm asking for your support to run for president. So many things we can talk about, but I don't want this to be a monologue. I'd like for us to have a conversation. So there are some folks run around with mikes still hold the mike up to you and come to you at your convenience and just go ahead and stick your hand up and look forward to speaking about whatever's on your mind. Yes, sir. [13:11:00] What I'm. Interested in most of anything else right now, we're sending lots of ammunition over to Saudi Arabia. They in turn are blowing up. People right and left in Yemen. I know that if you blow up a school bus of elementary children and kill all those people. You have heard of Morocco deeply. We are on the verge of another race for arms, for new killer. What will you do about that sort of stuff? Thank you. Thank you. [13:11:36] So here's the thing we're seeing with the disappearance of American moral authority. Not only do we see our adversaries acting in ways that shock the conscience from Russia, throwing their weight around to China, rounding people up and putting them into camps because their religion. [13:11:53] Not to mention what's happening in Hong Kong with those who are speaking up for democracy, but also the countries that we have thought of as our allies. Also continue to behave in ways and more and more are behaving more in ways that are totally incompatible with American values and with human shared human values and human rights. We see our allies and our adversaries taking advantage of the disappearance of American moral leadership, and we are directly implicated because of the use of American taxpayer dollars to work with the Saudis. [13:12:26] So we need to hold our for in particular the countries we think of as our friends accountable. [13:12:32] And yes, that means what goes on in Yemen, not to mention things like the killing of an American resident and other policies by the Saudi regime have to be part of what we take into consideration when we're deciding whether to send military equipment, let let alone send troops over there. [13:12:51] You know, if you add it all up, there are actually more American troops now in the Middle East area as a whole than there were before under a president who claims that he's going to end endless war. When I am president, we will no longer pretend that there is any way to serve American interests by selling out American values. [13:13:12] The reality is our interests are based on our values. Whenever we try to separate the two. Sooner or later, it catches up to us. And I will see to it that our foreign policy is based on those shared human values that America at our best has always led with, including in what's going on with the war in Yemen. [13:13:35] Under the last two Republican presidents, the federal deficit has increased. What can you do as president to control the federal deficit and make sure that future generations aren't crippled by public debt? [13:13:46] Thank you. Such an important question. And you're right. In fact, I'm pretty sure every presidency in my lifetime, every Democratic presidency, we've seen a deficit fall and every Republican presidency, we've seen it go up. Which is funny because even at my tender age, I'm old enough to remember when Republicans said they cared about deficits. And often invoke the debt and the deficit as an excuse not to invest in things like roads and schools and health in this country. [13:14:17] And yet, as we've seen, when they take power, especially right now, where there is a trillion dollar deficit that's been opened up, mostly created not because of a disaster, a depression. [13:14:29] But a giant tax cut for corporations and the wealthy, you didn't need it to begin with. And then the next time we try to invest in something, they're going to say, we can't do that, it'll increase the deficit. So here's what we've got to do. First of all, deficits do matter. It's not an absolute kind of thing, but we've got to make sure they don't get too high. And so we have to take steps to make sure that the debt and the deficit remains under control. [13:14:54] And again, if our party's not on top of it, nobody will be, because the other party has shown that they don't actually care. And we've been the only ones who have really done much about it. Which is why we should own this issue. [13:15:05] But also in my campaign, you're going to see us every time we propose something that costs money. [13:15:10] Would explain where the money is going to come from to whether it's the health care plan. I was just sharing or over a trillion dollars over the next decade that we need to invest in education or what we've got to do around infrastructure or housing in order to support millions of families and beat back homelessness and increase housing affordability. And by the way, we can afford to do all of these things if we're willing to make sure that everybody's paying their fair share. It's still a lower tax level than there used to be. [13:15:41] But it does have to be different than it is now, because if Amazon. Can make billions of dollars in profits and pay zero in federal taxes. Something is wrong with our system. [13:15:53] We need better enforcement. We need to close the loopholes. We need to raise those corporate rates that were rolled back by Trump. And we need to ask individuals, the wealthiest individuals, to do more of their share, too. I promise they will still be just fine. They will still be very, very wealthy. But we need their help to make sure that this country is moving forward. [13:16:10] And so we are going to raise the revenue to cover everything that I proposed so that the net effect of all the things I've said we ought to do will be that the deficit at worst will stay the same. And ultimately, we'll start to shrink. [13:16:31] Hi, Pete. Thank you for your service. I'm a nurse and I work for the Department of Veterans Affairs in Iowa City. I've worked there for 14 years. And so I am of the mindset that we are the best ones to take care of veterans. And under the current administration, there have been taught, there has been talk of privatization, which we're obviously not for. And so what's your plan for the V.A. if you become president? [13:16:57] Well, first of all, thank you for taking care of our veterans. And there's definitely a lot that we got to do to shore up our system of providing medical care for veterans. [13:17:07] Privatizing the system is not one of them. It's not going to help. [13:17:11] Just ask folks in Iowa dealing with the Medicaid situation how much good privatization does. [13:17:19] So here's what does need to happen. First of all, clinical pay needs to keep up so that we have an easier time recruiting providers, nurses, physicians. And by the way, we also have a particularly acute shortage on the mental health side. So we got to position ourselves to recruit more folks by making sure the pay is competitive. We can take out some of the red tape in the hiring process. [13:17:44] I'm not sure how was for you. But it takes a long time to get somebody on board in a lot of these positions. We need to make sure that we're doing more to get people enrolled. Terry mentioned this absolutely unacceptable figure that 20 veterans are lost to suicide every day. [13:18:00] One of the biggest signs that we might lose somebody to suicide is if they never got connected up to the V.A. in the first place. Actually, we just make that one step. Their chances of making it get a lot better. So in addition to the things we've got to do in the V.A. to improve it, there's a lot we got to do to make sure that we never leave a veteran behind or let them go without access. [13:18:19] And we've also got to make sure that we're recognizing why we have a V.A.. [13:18:24] This is not about doing anybody a favor. This is keeping a promise. You put your right hand up. You made a promise to the United States of America. That promise goes both ways. [13:18:35] And the V.A. is part of how we do that. And because we know that different wars have different wounds, it is because of what the V.A. does that we as a country know as much as we now do about things from Agent Orange that impacted the Vietnam generation so horribly to traumatic brain injury and PTSD that we know a lot about. More from my generation of post 9/11 vets. That's why there's. There's a reason that it's specialized, that it's there. And I promise that we will protect it and make sure that this push to privatization to benefit a few business buddies of those now in power is is replaced by one that actually focuses on caring for our veterans. [13:19:11] One more thing, just what's on my mind, because I know there are quite a few folks here who serve. I am mindful of the fact, as Terry said, that attitudes towards military shift over time that go through their ups and downs and. When I came home, there were balloons and folks clapping and streamers and flags, and I know that there was a generation of veterans, some who volunteered, some who were drafted, who did not come home to that kind of reception. [13:19:43] Came home at a time when our country struggled to separate our feelings about a policy. That sent people to war from the way it treated the troops who were ordered to go carried out. And so to anybody who didn't get the right kind of welcome back then even though it's coming late, I just want to say thank you and welcome home. [13:20:18] Happy welcome to Washington. I just want to say I've been following your campaign since you did your interview with Preet Bharara. Oh, and I'm a huge fan of Buddy Instrument on Twitter. But my question for you is there's been a lot of conversation about health insurance and what that looks like. I'm a public health professional. I am not hearing any conversation really in this dialog about how what are we going to do to focus on prevention and what are we going to do to increase access, especially in rural areas. We lost our birthing center here a year and a half ago and we are losing another 130 miles to the south. So what are you going to do to improve access, not just get an insurance card in people's pocket? [13:20:55] Thanks. I'm so glad you raised that. You know, I think the insurance thing gets extra attention because they can kind of pit us against each other on that and get good television. And don't get me wrong. I think the disagreements are meaningful. They're important. And we got to we've got to have it out. [13:21:07] But they're talking about like it's the only part of health care that matters. And there's way less being said about veterans health care, about mental health care, about prescription drugs, about affordability and care, as you say, just access, especially in rural areas. You know, when I was born, there was basically no difference in life expectancy between folks lived in a city and folks lived in a rural area. Now, that gap is the biggest that it's been in nearly a half century. And a lot of it is because of what you're talking about, this crisis of closure and loss of providers, especially the berthing facilities you're talking about, we saw it happen in Marshalltown. [13:21:43] It's happened in this area. And that puts lives at risk. So we need to recognize that providing health care in an underserved area is a public service. [13:21:54] And I believe that ought to count toward the kind of public service, loan forgiveness that we want folks to be eligible for when it comes to getting student debt taken care of. That's one thing we know we can do. Another other thing that we got to do is make sure that we support transportation options, because a lot of times it's about being able to get to a place where you get care. And if we couple transportation support with making sure we have enough providers in these areas to begin with. [13:22:18] Plus making sure that we do more with telemedicine not to replace in-person care, but to make sure that, for example, with stroke patients and a lot of psychiatry, too, we can't save somebody and their family having to drive an hour or two for inpatient care when they could get it inpatient in a clinic closer to home. So we got to invest in that. But to get that, we've got to get serious with broadband access. And I have a plan to make sure every American, whether it's wireless or whether it's fiber, gets broadband access. [13:22:45] It'll cost 80 billion dollars. It's worth every penny to make sure that we have that kind of equality across the country. You mentioned working in public health and there are a lot of departments, especially local and county departments. It's it's heroic that they can even keep up with restaurant inspections and flu shots. Given the resources they've got and we need, as you say, to be doing prevention, whether it's lead exposure, getting ahead of mental health issues, all of the things that decide whether somebody is going to be healthy before they even go through the doors of an E.R. or a doctor's office. [13:23:17] And that is why I'm proposing as part of our health equity plan that we use federal funds to bridge the gap, empowering local health departments to be the chief strategist for health where they are, but also making sure that they have the resources to do it with. So thanks for your work in that field to meet them. [13:23:44] Hi. So I applaud the courage it takes to be an openly gay man running for president. So with that being said, I would like to talk about the Trump administration's all out assault on gay rights from the repeal of HRC as more protections and health care to just the overall degradation of the LGBT community. So would you commit to ensuring that there's protections, whether it be under the current civil rights protections or just protections in general for LGBT people so that every four years our livelihoods isn't put on the market during whatever election is coming up? Yes. [13:24:20] Yes, I will. And I'm glad you raised that because. We've made a lot of progress. [13:24:30] I mean, the fact that I'm standing here represents a lot of progress. [13:24:35] And by the way, thank you, Iowa, for leading the way on marriage equality, because that obviously means a lot. [13:24:47] But I think some folks feel like because we got a marriage equality problem solved, and the reality is a lot of folks don't know that to this day in very many parts of the country, including parts of my home state, you'd still be fired just because of who you are. [13:25:00] Which is why, yes, we need to recognize what the current civil rights law encompasses. But frankly, no matter what the court decides on the current civil rights law, we need a federal equality act to determine once and for all that because of sexual orientation and gender identity, you cannot be discriminated against. The United States, America. [13:25:21] As in, it matters what guidance goes out to our departments, education, health, making sure people are treated fairly. We've got a war on transgender Americans and military service led by a president who avoided serving when it was his turn. And he's gonna come in and try to ruin the career of somebody who's doing a good job. [13:25:41] The military I served and cares about whether you are good at what you're doing and whether you can be trusted. And anybody who has earned that trust will have the support of the commander in chief when I'm the president. [13:25:55] A Marine in the back. I've been asked every year to question morning. All right. To question. If you're able to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, how will you stop inflation that would negatively hurt people on fixed income like Social Security? [13:26:15] Yes. So here's where we are right now. On the minimum wage. First thing we got to think about is that when you look at inflation, it's worth considerably less than it was a generation ago. [13:26:28] Anybody in minimum wage is taking a haircut. Not only that. There is not one county in the United States of America where someone working full time at minimum wage could afford a two bedroom apartment and in most counties couldn't even afford a one bedroom apartment. So we know we got to do some. [13:26:48] Now, I support the approach that the House of Representatives took, it took a path that is reasonable because it'll take some time to adjust, especially for small business owners. But we got to move pretty quickly to get it to 15 with regional differences. Now, there have been some efforts to kind of push back on that, saying it's going to be inflated away and it could put some upward pressure on prices. But the good news is this is not what happens when you raise minimum wage isn't a mystery because we've been doing it for 50 years. And the jury is in. If you look at the numbers, it never leads to inflation greater than what the wage itself did. [13:27:29] Because what happens is you've got a lot of money right now sloshing around in the economy that if it were in the pocket of someone like the McDonald's workers that I was with in Charleston recently who were trying to get a minimum wage, it goes immediately into their needs to take care of loved ones. Not only that, I'm talking about Tijuana in particular, one of the McDonald's workers I was with. She's trying to take care of her kid. Her kids on Medicaid and has a health condition, which means the American taxpayer is basically subsidizing McDonald's because they won't pay her enough that she can take care of it and doesn't have the right kind of health care plan, too. [13:28:04] So the money is being moved around in our economy and all kinds of ways. But a lot of times it just gets parked and somebodies bank account, who's all set anyway instead of going into the pockets of those who need it most. And we'll be spending it on food, medical care, rent, the basic necessities, filling our economy with the kind of fuel that creates more jobs. Maybe in theory there is some level of wage that would be so high that it would be inflation to do more harm than good. But we have 50 years worth of data that show us that we are nowhere near that level when it comes to the level that we're at today. [13:28:40] All right. You're gonna get the last word. [13:28:54] Yeah, because the question for you to back is why, why? Why did I run for president? Was there like a moment? How do we go through that decision? Well, it definitely was not how I pictured things when I began my career in local government at the beginning of this decade. Right. Nobody says I'm going to go home run for mayor of my city in the Midwest and then write to the White House. Right. [13:29:22] But what happened is the country changed and circumstances changed, and what I saw is that our country needs somebody who is not caught up in the Washington way of dealing with these problems. I've seen these debates on how to protect people from gun violence that are the same as the day I came home from high school to watch the Columbine shooting on the news. I see conversations about what we're gonna do on immigration that are the same as they've been since the 80s. [13:29:49] Last time there was a real reform and I see us caught in this loop that's going to require somebody from outside of Washington to shake things up their. It's going to require somebody, I think, from from middle America. I don't mean necessarily geographically, but somebody does. I don't need a focus group to tell me what's going on in middle America. I could just go to Kohl's or Target and, you know, I drive a Chevy. I'm not a millionaire. I'm actually the lowest income person running for president. Right. [13:30:19] Or the lowest wealth person running for president right now. [13:30:23] I mean, we're fine. Don't worry about us. But. [13:30:28] You know, married to a teacher. These are the kinds of voices that we're not seeing a lot right now. So I think about what our country needs. I think about what our party needs. So because winning is so terribly, terribly important right now. Right. And every time my party has taken the White House, think about this just from a history perspective in the last 50 years. [13:30:48] Every single time my party's won the White House. Certain things been true about the candidate. It's somebody who has never run for president before and was new on the scene. Somebody who hadn't been in Washington very long, if at all. Somebody you focused on calling the country to its higher values and generally somebody representing a new generation of leadership. [13:31:10] And so also as somebody who cares very much that that that we win, I think our party's got to find a way to have that kind of leadership and have it emerge from the part of the country that got overlooked in some previous political processes and cost us when it happened. [13:31:25] And so when you see a need, you realize what you bring to the table might actually match that need. And you trust a few people who would always tell you the truth to confirm whether or not you're crazy when you see it. That's when you sit down to have a conversation with your family. Truman and Buddy didn't much care. They just want to make sure they'll get their treats. Those were our rescue dogs. But chasin and I had a very serious conversation about what this meant to our our life, our marriage, our future and. [13:31:53] And we really thought it through and he got morning bargain for is on our first date. He said, you know, I've never been on a date with a politician before. What's your future look like? And I told him that the truth at the time, which was. Well, I'm. I'm up for reelection. I'm hoping to get reelected. And if so, I might run for office again, maybe statewide someday. [13:32:14] And so things have changed a little bit since that first date. But. Well, we came to the conclusion was that this was worth doing and and that we would do it together on two conditions. One, we would always stay true to what we believed and be ourselves no matter what the politics were. And to find some way through all the work, to have some fun while we're at it. Find some joy in the process. And one of the reasons that I'm so proud of our team is not just in the work I've been doing, but put in the work our organizers have been doing, and I hope you get to know your organizers here. [13:32:52] They carry those values through this campaign. Even the ones I haven't had a chance to meet yet, they carry those values that we have to not only work hard, stand up for what we believe in, but we've got to find some joy in that process. And seeing that has has fed my belief that what we're doing before the first vote is even cast can model what I am proposing to do for the entire country, which is to build that sense of belonging, live our values and bring people together. So here we are as. [13:33:23] So. [13:33:26] I got the high sign that our time is up, but I just want to thank you again for taking the time to be with us today. [13:33:31] I want to thank you in particular, because when I meet Iowans, I can tell how seriously you take the responsibilities that come with that thumb on the scale that you have when it comes to deciding who's going to be the nominee. And the president outside responsibility. Kicking the tires on everything we propose, getting to know not just what we're for, but who we are. [13:33:52] And I admire the seriousness you bring to that process. And I'm asking you to caucus for me, because I believe by supporting us in this effort here in Iowa, you can propel us to the nomination and the presidency. And when we change the presidency, when we change the country, we will be proud of what we did. I know in 2019, sometimes it is hard to look at our political process and feel proud. Sometimes it is hard to look at kids right now in the eye. [13:34:27] And explain what's going on right now when they're asking what we're doing to keep them safe or what we're doing to make sure that they grow up in a world that's going to treat them well or whether they're gonna be better off than their parents, like every generation before us has just been able to assume. It's tough, but I'm filled by the hope that in a few years we'll be able to look back. Talk to those same kids about how much better we made things starting in 2020. [13:34:55] We'll sound sorry. Got that bad by 20 19. But look at what we did in 2020 to make sure we had an economy that works for us. A climate where you can thrive. [13:35:02] A country where race doesn't dictate the outcomes of your life in a place that is safe and has a sense of belonging for all of us. That's what we can build together. And it starts right here in Iowa. So I am asking you to join me in making that possible and to spread the sense of hope that is required to be involved in politics at all from running for office to showing up on caucus night. [13:35:23] I know hope went out of style for a little bit in politics because of everything we're dealing with. But you can't do this if you don't have some measure of hope. Running for office is an act of hope. And I am asking you to spread that sense of hope that is required because without it, we will never get ahead in this country with it. We will take great pride in what we did in 2020. [13:35:41] So I look to you to embody and spread that sense of hope and share it with others. A, you know. [13:35:54] And do you see how we don't have to be caught up in the Trump error anymore? [13:35:57] We can pick up the chant the remote. Take one last look at that reality show and change the channel to something better. Washington I believe that you will make me the next president of the United States when you do, I will work every day to make you proud and we will make history together. Thank you for your support. Thank you for being here. And I'll see you on the trail. Thank you.
WHITE HOUSE BRIEFING WITH JAY CARNEY STIX
WHITE HOUSE BRIEFING WITH JAY CARNEY. STIX WH Press Briefing with Jay Carney SLUG: 1115 WH BRIEF STIX RS37 83 AR: 16X9 DISC#: 108 NYRS: 5114 11:32:10 JAY CARNEY: Hello, everyone. Good afternoon -- or good morning. Thanks for being here. Before I get started, as some of you have seen reported, I can tell you that later this afternoon the president will meet with Aung San Suu Kyi at the White House. The president looks forward to her visit, as it provides another opportunity to reaffirm our long- standing support for her struggle and the struggle of many others towards democratic, just and transparent governance in Burma. This is her first trip to the United States in more than 20 years. The president very much looks forward to that visit. 11:32:49 That's all I have at the top. Q: What time? MR. CARNEY: Late afternoon, around 5:00. Q: Will there be -- (inaudible)? 11:32:56 MR. CARNEY: We're still -- press coverage TBD, but we're working on it. Jim. Q: Thanks, Jay. Two foreign policy -- (inaudible) -- reports that Iran is using Iraqi air space to deliver weapons to Syria. The issue came up today in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. What steps is the president prepared to take to prevent Iraq from allowing Iran into their air -- (inaudible) -- space? Any conditions on financial aid or anything like that? 11:33:25 MR. CARNEY: Well, let me just say broadly that we have made clear to countries around the world that we all need to work together to prevent Assad from acquiring weapons that he can use to continue to perpetrate violence against his own people. And that's a message that we carry in conversations with leaders everywhere. I don't have anything specific for you with regards to Iraq, and I'm not aware of the -- of the meeting on the Hill that you referenced. But that is something we're concerned about generally. We've worked very hard with our international partners to cut off access to weapons and financing for Assad, and we continue to do that. Q: On China, Secretary Panetta returned from his trip there and reported that Chinese leaders are expressing concern over a U.S. military shift to the -- to the Pacific. Does the White House have any concerns that that, together with the attention that China has been getting in the presidential campaign, is increasing any tensions with the Chinese? 11:34:42 MR. CARNEY: What I said yesterday holds true today, which is that we have a very complex, broad relationship with China that is extremely important, and we -- when we meet with the Chinese at the level of the president and below, we engage with them on all of the issues that are part of our relationship. And that includes areas of disagreement as well as areas of cooperation and agreement. We obviously have an important trade relationship and economic relationship as well as military-to-military relationship. 11:35:22 We are, as the president made clear on his trip to Asia last fall, a Pacific power. We have a presence there that's important to the United States and to the region, and we intend to pursue that. But it -- this is about, you know, broader issues than China. It's about the fact that the United States has -- obviously a Pacific power with Pacific interests. And you know that this president believes that in the eight years prior to him taking office, there was a loss of focus when it comes to Asia by the previous administration because of all the concentrated attention on Iraq in particular. 11:36:11 And he has sought to rebalance our national security, foreign policy and international economic posture towards Asia for that reason. Q: So protests in China that the U.S. presence has emboldened other countries like Japan on territorial disputes -- does the president feel that it would be wise to put your finger on the scale on some issues like that? 11:36:36 MR. CARNEY: No, look. We believe that good relations between China and Japan benefit everyone in the region, and U.S. policy on the Senkaku Islands, which I think is the issue at the moment, is long- standing and has not changed. The United States does not take a position on the question of the ultimate sovereignty of the islands, and we expect the claimants to resolve the issue through peaceful means among themselves. Jeff (sp). Q: Jay, does the president have any reaction to the end of the teachers' strike in Chicago yesterday? 11:37:11 MR. CARNEY: His position has been that he hoped to see both sides in the dispute come together, reach an agreement that could serve and would serve the interests that were paramount, the interests of the children of Chicago, the students in the Chicago school system. And he certainly welcomes resolution to the dispute and welcomes the fact that kids have returned to class this morning. Q: And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, oil prices are falling again. Do you have anything updated to say about the SPR and your thinking about that? 11:37:54 MR. CARNEY: I don't. Our thinking remains what it was. In regular consultation with our international partners, we monitor global oil markets, and we keep all options on the table to deal with disruptions if necessary, but I have no announcements to make on that. Q: Is there a price level that would change this thinking at all, of oil prices and or of gasoline prices in this country? 11:38:29 MR. CARNEY: Again, Jeff (sp), I -- it's the kind of thing that I won't get into great specificity on. We simply monitor the situation, mindful of the impact that higher global oil prices have on global economic growth and American economic growth and mindful of all the various implications that arise when you have a situation like that. But I -- you know, I'm not going to get into the details of price levels or reserve levels, and suffice it to say that we -- the President insists that all options for dealing with this issue remain on the table, and that includes the SPR. Q: You mentioned yesterday -- just last follow-up on this -- you were pleased about Saudi Arabia's action. Can you talk a little bit about what types of negotiations or discussions happened between the White House or U.S. officials and Saudi officials on this? 11:39:31 MR. CARNEY: No, I can simply say that we welcome the Saudi Arabian oil minister's recent remarks and share his concerns about rising oil prices and their -- broadly speaking, not in recent days, but rising prices in the international oil market, and we welcome Saudi Arabia's continued commitment to take all necessary steps to ensure the market is well-supplied and to help moderate prices. But you know, we have ongoing consultations and conversations with our allies and our partners, including Saudi Arabia, on this issue and many others. Jake. Q: In the wake of the attacks in Benghazi, the Pentagon and the State Department both made statements they then had to correct, the Pentagon involving whether or not there were Marines at the embassy in Tripoli -- there were not -- and the State Department regarding the presence of security firms at the Benghazi compound. Why was there such confusion? And is the White House or anyone conducting any sort of internal investigation into what went wrong? 11:40:35 MR. CARNEY: Well, there is an ongoing investigation into what happened in Benghazi that's being led by the FBI. And -- Q: Not that one. I'm not talking about the criminal act. I'm talking about the -- obviously, there wasn't adequate security, that -- along the lines of what went wrong and what the administration could have done better. 11:40:51 MR. CARNEY: I think I would refer you, for questions about security at the Benghazi diplomatic facility and broadly speaking at diplomatic facilities -- consulates, embassies -- around the world, to the State Department. In terms of the statements that were corrected by Defense of State, I would refer you to those departments. 11:41:14 You know, from our perspective, we got out to you the information that we had as soon as we had it and it was available. And our assessment of what happened has been based on the best available information that we've had. There is an ongoing investigation, led by the FBI, now going back to specifically happened in Benghazi, and we await the results of that investigation for more information about the protests and the attacks and what precipitated them and who participated in them, with the primary objective here of fulfilling the president's commitment that those people responsible for the deaths of four Americans be brought to justice. Q: What reason could there be? Or let me -- let me rephrase that, who made the decision that there should not be in Marines in -- at our diplomatic posts in Libya? More than half of our diplomatic posts have Marines. I understand they're not there to protect people; they're there to protect classified data. But it doesn't hurt to have them there. Who make that decision? 11:42:28 MR. CARNEY: Well, I think security at diplomatic facilities is overseen by and run by the State Department. So I'd refer you to them about how decisions are made and what the allocation of resources was in Benghazi and elsewhere. I think they're the best people to answer that question. Q: Is the president concerned that there was a failure by someone in the administration to ensure adequate security measures, whether through -- 11:42:53 MR. CARNEY: The president is concerned that violent actions were taken that lead to the deaths of four Americans. You can be sure that he's concerned about that. And he is absolutely concerned that we take the necessary measures to make sure that those who killed Americans are brought to justice. And he has been focused from the beginning on ensuring that adequate security reinforcements be brought to bear at embassies and consulates and diplomatic facilities where that's deemed necessary. Again, there's an investigation -- a broad investigation into what happened and how and why in Benghazi. And we have -- will await the results. Q: Is that about the perpetrators of the violence? 11:43:44 MR. CARNEY: Well, I think it encompasses everything that happened -- I mean, I'm sure that they will look at everything that happened there. I mean, I would refer you to the FBI for details. But look -- I mean, Jake, I think what happened in -- Q: It was the anniversary of 9/11, an unstable country with roving bands of individuals who are armed, a government that says it itself cannot provide security; it's not ready to do so yet. And it would just seem not that complicated to discern that there need to be some sort -- serious security effort there to protect our diplomats. 11:44:22 MR. CARNEY: Jake, I appreciate the question, and I understand it. And I -- and I can simply say that there is an active investigation into what happened in Benghazi that led to the killing of four Americans. And the president has taken action to make sure that we have reinforced security at facilities as deemed necessary and is very focused on ensuring that we bring to justice those who killed Americans abroad. But I appreciate your question, and I think that, you know, we are awaiting the results of the FBI investigation. Q: OK. On one other subject, did the president have any response to the Office of Special Counsel report on Secretary Sebelius violating the Hatch Act? 11:45:08 MR. CARNEY: I have not spoken to him about it. I think that Secretary Sebelius has responded to that and made sure that what was an -- you know, her remarks were extemporaneous. The Health and Human Services Department has since reclassified the event to meet the correct standard. The U.S. Treasury has been reimbursed. And Secretary Sebelius has met with ethics experts to ensure that this never happens again. The error was immediately acknowledged by the secretary and promptly corrected, and no taxpayer dollars were misused. Q: Is it safe to assume that as far as the president's concerned, that's the end of the matter? 11:45:49 MR. CARNEY: Well, I think it's safe to assume that action has been taken by the secretary and the department to remedy what was, you know, the result of an inadvertent error based on extemporaneous remarks. And she acknowledged it immediately, promptly corrected it and ensured that no taxpayer dollars were used and that the event -- the department reclassified the event to make sure that the correct standards were met. Q: Thank you. MR. CARNEY: Mmm hmm. Dan. Q: Thank you, Jay. Aside from the FBI investigation, doesn't the White House have its own intelligence that would allow you to say with some degree of certainty that the attack in Benghazi was either a coordinated attack or a spontaneous reaction to the movie? 11:46:32 MR. CARNEY: The White House doesn't have its own intelligence, Dan. The White House has -- the White House has the -- Q: (Off mic) -- I mean -- MR. CARNEY: Outside of the intelligence community of the United States government? Q: No, outside of the FBI investigation. You don't have -- 11:46:45 MR. CARNEY: Are you suggesting that we have a clandestine intelligence operation here in the White -- (laughs) -- Q: You were able to find out a lot of information on your own, independently, and what I'm saying, in addition to what the FBI is doing, does the White House not have information that it has gathered that will allow -- 11:46:57 MR. CARNEY: I think the FBI is leading an investigation that will encompass all of the information available to the White House and to the intelligence and the broader diplomatic community. What I can tell you is that, as I said last week, as the -- our ambassador to the United Nations said on Sunday and as I said the other day, based on what we know now and knew at the time, we have no evidence of a preplanned or premeditated attack. 11:47:30 This, however, remains under investigation, and I made that clear last week, and Ambassador Rice made that clear on Sunday. And if more facts come to light that change our assessment of what transpired in Benghazi and why and how, we will welcome those facts and make you aware of them. But again, based on the information that we had at the time and have to this day, we do not have evidence that it was premeditated. We have -- you know, there is -- there -- it is a simple fact that there are in postrevolution, postwar Libya armed groups, there are bad actors hostile to the government, hostile to the West, hostile to the United States. And as has been the case in other countries in the region, it is certainly conceivable that these groups take advantage of and exploit situations that develop, when they develop, to protest against or attack either Westerners, Americans, Western sites or American sites. 11:48:44 And again, this is something that's under investigation. We have provided you our assessment based on the information we've had as it's become available. As more information becomes available, we will make, you know, clear what the investigation has revealed. Q: And another question on Afghanistan: Given some of the developments that we've seen there recently, does the president still believe that Afghan forces are capable of handling their own security and will be able to do so in time for the 2014 deadline? 11:49:22 MR. CARNEY: The president believes that after a decade of war, we can and should pursue a strategy that transitions security authority over to Afghan forces and allows us to end the war in Afghanistan and bring home our men and women in uniform. That process is under way. We have gotten to this point because the president, having inherited a policy in Afghanistan that was widely viewed as adrift, without a focused mission, underresourced, he very deliberately, working with his national security team, honed in on what the proper objectives should be in Afghanistan, made clear that our number one objective in that region was to disrupt, dismantle and ultimately defeat al-Qaida and to ensure, in support of that goal, that Afghanistan could not become a safe haven again for al-Qaida or other extremists who have as their objective attacking the United States or U.S. allies. 11:50:38 And that -- the execution of that strategy continues. It led initially to a surge in U.S. forces, which halted the Taliban's momentum, which allowed us to take the fight to al-Qaida in the region in a way that we had not been able to before, that led to the decimation of al-Qaida's leadership, including the elimination of Osama bin-Laden, and has now allowed us to draw down the surge forces and to continue the transition to Afghan security forces' responsibility for security of that country. 11:51:18 That process continues. As I said the other day, we are very concerned about the green-on-blue attacks that have been taking place in Afghanistan, the increase in those attacks, and our commanders are taking measures to ensure that there is more security for our troops in Afghanistan. But the process of partnering with and training Afghan security forces continues, and the process of transitioning to Afghan security lead continues. And the president has made clear that the pace -- that the drawdown of U.S. forces will continue. The pace of that will depend on evaluations by and assessments by commanders on the ground. But it will continue, and he remains committed to ending the war in Afghanistan in keeping with the NATO objectives, by 2014. Q: (Off mic) -- but does he think they will be prepared to handle their own security? 11:52:19 MR. CARNEY: Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifice of our men and women in uniform and our partners' men and women in uniform, we have made tremendous strides towards enhancing the capacity of and the numbers of Afghan security forces. And that remains a fact even as we contend with this serious problem with green-on-blue attacks. Despite the -- you know, in -- it is true that while we have changed the directives involved in partnering with Afghan forces, it remains true that for a long time now there have been extraordinary number of missions conducted successfully where U.S. forces or ISAF forces have partnered with Afghan forces. And it is essential for Afghans' future that Afghan security forces be able to take over security for their country. It is -- and it is certainly in the interest of the United States that after a decade of war we continue with that transition, in keeping with the president's mission. Bill. Q: (Off mic) -- there was no evidence of a preplanned attack. How come -- MR. CARNEY: Well, I'm going to just repeat now again that -- Q: Well, how is it -- but how is it -- (inaudible) -- MR. CARNEY: Based on the -- Q: -- RPGs, you know, automatic weapons, mortars -- 11:53:54 MR. CARNEY: Bill, I know that you've done a little bit of reading about Libya since the unrest that began under Gadhafi. The place is -- has an abundance of weapons, and there are -- Q: No question about it. Do you expect -- (inaudible) -- armed that way? 11:54:07 MR. CARNEY: -- there are unfortunately many bad actors in that country, as there are throughout the region. Q: That's not the point. MR. CARNEY: And they have -- they've very armed. I'm not -- the point is, you can make suppositions about what happened. We prefer to have an investigation that looks very closely into what happened and assembles the facts and presents them. Based on -- all I'm saying -- Q: A lot of people on the ground have seen the fragments of the -- remains of the mortars and the heavy weapons that were used. 11:54:36 MR. CARNEY: We've made clear that there was -- that there were armed assailants who used heavy weapons. We obviously haven't disputed that. And -- Q: So this is just a random crowd that got together with their heavy weapons and insulted by the film and decided to go, you know, blow up -- 11:54:53 MR. CARNEY: As I think I just said, there has certainly been precedent in the past where bad actors -- extremists who are heavily armed in different countries and different regions of the world have taken advantage of and exploited situations that have developed in order to either attack Westerners or Western assets or American or American assets. That is not -- Q: But they planned to do it, don't you think then? 11:55:20 MR. CARNEY: They might or they might not. All I can tell you is based on the information we had at the time, we have now, we do not yet have indication that it was preplanned or premeditated. There's an active investigation. If that active investigation produces facts that lead to a different conclusion, we will make clear that that's where the investigation has lead. It's not -- our interest is in finding out the facts of what happened, not taking what we've read in the newspaper and making bold assertions that we know what happened. We'd rather investigate it. Q: But doesn't it seem likely, given -- 11:55:59 MR. CARNEY: I think that goes back to making presumptions about what happened. And we would rather investigate it. Yes. Q: Jay, on -- there were a fair number of questions yesterday about the Romney tape and what he had to say. There was a tape that the Republicans immediately tried to distribute yesterday, I guess, to push back, that's fairly old, 14 years ago, of the president talking about redistribution. My question is from a policy standpoint, the Republicans seem to be trying to use that tape to suggest that the president's goal is to redistribute income and wealth. And can you say from a policy standpoint whether that is a fair characterization or not? 11:56:36 MR. CARNEY: Ed, I would say that all of us who follow politics and policy, whether we're on this side or your side of the podium, have seen circumstances like this where a campaign is having a very bad day or a very bad week. And in circumstances like that, there are efforts made, sometimes desperate efforts made to change the subject. You know, the charge based on this 14-year-old video sounds very familiar to one that was tried and failed in 2008. You know, 14 years ago, then-Senator Obama was making an argument for a more efficient, more effective government, specifically citing city government agencies that he did not think were working effectively. He believed then and believes now that there are steps we can take to promote opportunity and ensure that all Americans have a fair shot if they work hard. 11:57:38 He certainly doesn't believe, as some apparently do, that any student who looks for a government-backed loan is looking for a handout, or that a senior citizen receiving Social Security is a freeloader, or a combat veteran not paying taxes is a victim. He believes that we need to make government more effective and more efficient. He believed that then; he believes it now. Q: But when he says pool resources in that tape, that we need to pool resources -- (inaudible) -- and he believes in redistribution, does that -- since you're characterizing what he meant 14 years ago with confidence, was he also suggesting he believes in redistribution of wealth? 11:58:21 MR. CARNEY: The president believes that we have to have a government that works efficiently and effectively and wisely in the use of taxpayer dollars on behalf of the American people that advances the American economy, that helps provide opportunity to middle-class Americans and those seeking to enter the middle class. 11:58:43 He certainly believes that programs like Social Security and Medicare that every American who works contributes to are beneficial for the entire society. And those programs use money that you and I put in every week to ensure that your grandmother and my grandmother have health care now. That's a wise use of government resources and taxpayer dollars. But again, if you look at what he said back then, it was all about his concern as a state senator with inefficient, ineffective local government programs and the need to make them more efficient and more effective. And that is a focus and a concern that he has brought here to Washington, first as a senator and now as president. Q: And the last question: Beyond the attacks back and forth, The Wall Street Journal today cites U.S. census data that says that in 2011 49 percent of the population lived in a household receiving some sort of government benefits and that back in the '80s it was only 30 percent. So my question would be: Do you think, since the president does talk a lot on the stump about the debt problem, about balancing the budget -- is that a sustainable path, to go from 30 percent to 49 percent in terms of people receiving benefits? Is that sustainable? Can you actually balance the budget if we're headed in that direction? 12:00:06 MR. CARNEY: Well, I think you have to look at what those benefits are. We obviously have grown older as a nation. And if you're questioning whether or not Social Security is a necessary and beneficial program for America's seniors, I think the president's answer would be clear, yes, it is. Is it absolutely essential that Medicare as we know it remain in place to provide health care to America's seniors? Yes, it is. Are veterans' benefits -- and we certainly have a large number of veterans and veterans who need assistance returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- are those benefits necessary and helpful to American society? The answer absolutely is yes. 12:00:42 Again, you know, there have been a lot of assessments of the 47- percent figure, some of them very interesting and, I think, substantive and worth examining. You know,it was noted in a different context, when we talk about effective tax rates, all those hard- working Americans, everybody who pays payroll taxes, is working and earning a paycheck, and a lot of them are paying a higher effective tax rate -- even if their federal income tax is extremely low or zero -- than some millionaires and billionaires out there, because of the carried-interest law or other measures by which somebody like Warren Buffett or others can manage to pay far lower effective tax rates than a schoolteacher or a bus driver or a police officer. The president believes that when we talk about tax reform, that's one of the things that we need to fix so that the tax system is more fair. Q: You used the word "desperate." So the White House believes the Romney campaign has gotten desperate, you said? 12:01:45 MR. CARNEY: No, I made an observation, as a keen observer of the political scene, that when a campaign is having a bad day or a bad week or, some might say, a bad month -- Q: (Off mic.) (Laughter.) 12:01:59 MR. CARNEY: -- and this has been true in campaigns from both parties, candidates of all stripes -- you sometimes witness an effort to -- that seems desperate -- to change the subject. 12:02:12 (Scattered laughter.) We might be -- we might be witnessing that now -- (laughter) -- but I leave it up to the experts, including you. Q: (Off mic) -- those questions in Chicago, but you seem to be willing to weigh in on the campaign now. 12:02:24 MR. CARNEY: I had a four-shot espresso before I got out here. (Laughter.) Q: Thanks, Jay. I just want to go back to the surge for a moment. To be clear, have all of the surge forces now been withdrawn at this point? 12:02:35 MR. CARNEY: Well, the so-called surge forces, I believe 33,000 roughly, are due to be fully withdrawn by the end of this month. We would -- I would have to check on the absolute status right now. I don't believe they're, to a person, completely withdrawn yet, but they are due to be withdrawn by the end of the month. Q: You don't have any updates about whether or not they've actually been withdrawn entirely? 12:02:57 MR. CARNEY: I don't believe that every single person has been withdrawn yet, but again, the timetable is, they will be brought out by the end of the month, and my understanding is -- I would refer you to the Pentagon for more details, but my understanding is that that timetable is being met. Q: OK, and also, Senators McCain, Lieberman and Graham put out a statement today saying that the green-on-blue attacks were actually precipitated by the overly speedy drawdown of the surge troops, and they recommended the administration, quote, "take a step back and reconsider withdrawing surge troops" in light -- in light of these insider attacks. What is the president's reaction to that, and is this under consideration at all? 12:03:39 MR. CARNEY: We disagree. The president believes that it is absolutely essential to continue with the transition to Afghan security lead, that after a decade of war -- more, in Afghanistan, it is time to wind down that war and to gradually transfer security responsibility to the Afghans. 12:04:07 We have expended a great deal of blood and treasure in that effort. And it is through the heroic and remarkable service of our men and women in uniform in particular that we are at a place now where Afghan security forces have developed capabilities and have developed the numbers that allows them to gradually take over security lead. The green-on-blue attacks are a very concerning problem. And action is being taken to protect against those kinds of attacks, but it does not change the mission. The mission continues. 12:04:53 And I mean, with regard to those assessments, I would simply note that when this president took office, he inherited an Afghan policy -- an Afghan policy from the previous administration that was largely endorsed by some of the very same critics of the president's policy in which there were a fraction of the number of troops that this president allocated to the effort in Afghanistan and the Af-Pak region and nothing like the kind of focus on a clear mission on the disruption, dismantlement and defeat of al-Qaida that this president has pursued. 12:05:27 The president made clear in the 2008 campaign that needed to refocus attention on Afghanistan, that we needed to end the war in Iraq. He has fulfilled the promise to end the war in Iraq and he is fulfilling his promise with regards to Afghanistan. Q: Well, if it's not linked to the drawdown of the surge forces, has the administration gotten closer to figuring out what is behind this uptick in the violence? 12:05:49 MR. CARNEY: You know, I would -- for details on this, I think the Pentagon and ISAF would be the best places to go. I think one thing that I understand to be true, and that is the assessment of our commanders in the field, is that because of the success we've had in halting the momentum of the Taliban and retaking territory controlled by the Taliban, this is a tactic that is being used as an alternative by the Taliban and other extremists -- which might argue against some of the assertions being made that you cite. 12:06:24 But let me be clear. This is very concerning, and that is why the steps are being taken by our commanders in the field, by General Allen and others. But it does not change the -- I'm sorry, does not change the mission. Margaret. Q: Thanks, Jay. I wanted to ask you a couple of follow-up questions about the president's meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi later today. Can you talk a little bit more about what it says about how he sees her role both in Burma/Myanmar and also, you know, more broadly in the region, since the meeting is happening? And in terms of diplomacy, I know, like, if the Dalai Lama visits, the president has to kind of take considerations about how to position that vis-a-vis the Chinese government. I'm wondering how this compares. Did the U.S. give Burma a heads up? Diplomacywise, is there any issue or concern about that visit in terms of how the U.S. goes forward? 12:07:16 MR. CARNEY: Well, the president very much looks forward to this visit. The president views Aung San Suu Kyi very much as you described her, which is -- and I did before, which is as somebody who has been a remarkable beacon for democratic reform in her country and for her people. And that struggle has lasted for many, many years, and it is certainly appropriate that she will be receiving the Congressional Gold Medal in recognition of her many-year struggle in Burma, a struggle that is resulting now in her visit and in the remarkable reforms that have been undertaken by President Thein Sein in Burma. 12:08:10 And as I think we discussed the other day when I was asked about her visit and reforms under way and reciprocal actions that we've been taking in response to those reforms, you know, a great deal has been transpiring in Myanmar, Burma. And we continue to work with President Thein Sein and the government there, as well as others, to help the cause of reform and to help the cause of the democratic process there. Q: Is the visit itself, and the symbolism that that connotes, what's most important? Or do you expect that they're going to actually discuss anything substantive that he's asking her for information about or, you know, vice versa? 12:08:56 MR. CARNEY: I don't want to, you know, read out a conversation that hasn't taken place yet. You know, I know he looks forward to meeting with her. He's spoken with her by phone in the past but has not met with her. And I'm sure there will be substantive elements to the discussion. But it is certainly the case that we are engaged with the government of Myanmar very actively when it comes to the reforms that we have been urging them to put in place and that they have been putting in place. Mark (sp). Q: Circling back to the video again on the Middle East, yesterday you said it wasn't leadership; it was the opposite of leadership for Mitt Romney to say that a solution in the Middle East is an issue that should be kicked down the -- down the field. But if you look at the Obama administration's record on the Middle East for at least the past 12 months, it seems as though the White House is effectively kicking it down the field as well. When Senator Mitchell left as special envoy, he wasn't replaced at a similar level. The president hasn't announced a major or even modest new initiative on the Middle East since the speech he gave on the Middle East early last year, and diplomatic engagement by the U.S. on this issue is, by all accounts, at a very low level. So I guess the question I'm asking is is it fair for the White House to say that he's showing no leadership and saying he's kicking it down the field when it appears that you guys are kicking it down the field as well? 12:10:37 MR. CARNEY: Well, I would contest the premise. As you know, Mark (sp), when this president came into office, he made this a priority. And he has taken steps to try to advance the peace process. And this is a very, very difficult problem, there is no question. And it has been a problem that previous presidents have worked to resolve. And the fact that we are still short of peace does not mean we should throw up our hands and pre-emptively tell our supporters or tell the American people or the Israelis or the Palestinians that we're not even going to try. 12:11:25 This president's committed to taking steps to move the Middle East peace process forward, to bringing the two parties to the table to negotiate a lasting peace. That is the only way that a two-state solution can be achieved that provides the security that Israel deserves and needs and the sovereignty that the Palestinian people seek. And we have -- I would certainly not argue that we have not met with the kind of success in those efforts that we all desire and we believe that the majority of Palestinians and Israelis desire. But we will continue to work on the issue, and my point was that leadership is about acknowledging the difficulty of the challenges that you face and trying to tackle them. It is not pre-emptively announcing that they're too hard, so why bother? Q: Can I -- I mean, I take your point about the difficulty of it. But I'm just wondering what evidence you can point to that the president has continued to push hard on this, because if you look at it from the outside, it does appear that he's made perhaps a very valid decision, a very defensible decision, that he's not going to get anywhere between now the election, at least, so he's chosen to put it on the back burner. 12:12:55 MR. CARNEY: Well, we continue to press both sides to come to the negotiating table to resolve these very difficult issues that remain the obstacles to a lasting peace. And we have come at this problem in a variety of ways, and we'll continue to work with our international partners, with the Israelis and Palestinians in that effort. 12:13:26 Again, I concede that this is a challenge. I concede that this president, like his predecessors, so many of them, have -- has not succeeded in helping bring about that final and lasting peace between the two parties. But it is too important an issue to disregard and declare unsolvable. That's the -- that's not in the interest of the United States, it's not in the interest of the Israelis, and it's not in the interest of the Palestinians. I mean, it is stated policy of both the Israeli government and the Palestinian authority that a two-state solution should be pursued. And it is certainly the policy of this administration and predecessors of this administration, both Republican and Democratic, that it should be pursued. And it is the correct avenue to achieving peace in that region. 12:14:25 So this president will continue that effort, hopefully, beyond January of next year and, you know, accept that it's a challenge but believes deeply that it's a challenge that we have to meet. Q: Jay? Q: Jay? MR. CARNEY: Yes. Bondi (ph). Q: The French government has decided to temporarily close their embassies -- (inaudible) -- in several Muslim countries after -- (inaudible) -- Charlie Hebdo published cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad. Is the White House concerned that those cartoons might further fan the flames in the region? 12:15:06 MR. CARNEY: Well, we are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad. And obviously, we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this. We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory. But we've spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our Constitution. In other words, we don't question the right of something like this to be published; we just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it. And I think that's our view about the video that was produced in this country and has caused so much offense in the Muslim world. 12:15:51 Now, it has to be said, and I'll say it again, that no matter how offensive something like this is, it is not in any way justification for violence, not in any way justification for violence. 12:16:10 Now, you know, we have been staying in close touch with the French government as well as other governments around the world, and we appreciate the statements of support by French government officials over the -- over the past week denouncing the violence against Americans and our diplomatic missions overseas. Q: (Off mic.) MR. CARNEY: Andrei (ph). Q: Thanks, Jay. Same subject. Earlier today in Moscow, there was a minor flare-up because the leader of the Russian communists, Mr. Zyuganov -- MR. CARNEY: (Inaudible.) Q: -- right -- supposedly said in his Twitter account something denigrating about the killed American ambassador, and I don't even want to go there and to repeat what he said -- he denied it, by the way. But the story was -- most of the story was that it created an outrage in Washington, and that the Americans will sanction Mr. Zyuganov and then on and on and on. My question to you is, have you heard about this? Have people said this at all? 12:17:14 MR. CARNEY: I'm hearing about it for the first time. So I'm not aware of this report, and I'm not aware of any outrage here. I just -- it wasn't brought to my attention. Q: Have you ever heard of someone being sanctioned in a situation like this for making an offensive comment -- 12:17:34 MR. CARNEY: I have not. Q: -- about an American -- (inaudible)? MR. CARNEY: Again, I have not heard this report. I know of no basis to it. That's all I know. April? Q: Jay, following up on that line of questioning, what, if anything, is the White House doing to secure this homeland. And skirmishes are happening overseas, anti-American sentiment. What is the president doing, and if you could just tell us -- what can you tell us? 12:18:05 MR. CARNEY: Well, I can tell you that it is a fundamental reality of our contemporary life here in the post-9/11 world, but even prior to it, that we have to be extremely vigilant, and that vigilance continues. I have no specific briefing to give to you about actions taken in the wake of the protests and unrest in the Middle East, but I can assure you that our security team and our counterterrorism specialists are, as they always are, extremely vigilant about potential threats about the United States here and against Americans here in the country. Q: Now, also, the president, when he first became president, he did the -- (inaudible) -- and he did it just for this reason, to -- (inaudible) -- any kind of anti-American concern. Is there thoughts around the White House or are there conversations among senior staffers that may need to happen again to do some kind of outreach so that this kind of anti-American sentiment will not cause more problems than what's going right now? 12:19:16 MR. CARNEY: Well, I wouldn't put it that way, April. I would simply say that I remember well, since I covered it, that President Bush, in the immediate aftermath of the terrible, devastating attacks on 9/11, spoke very clearly about the fact that we would not be and were not at war with Islam. And that remains the case. 12:19:42 And I think that's a message that this president has carried from the beginning of his administration, echoing the very same sentiments that President Bush put forward in the wake of 9/11. We have made clear -- the president has, Secretary Clinton, Ambassador Rice, even the press secretary -- that we find the video that has been so offensive to Muslims to be disgusting and reprehensible and not something that in any way represents the values or the beliefs of the American people, and we made clear that obviously the American government had nothing to do with it. 12:20:32 We make the additional point -- and it is an important point -- that no matter how offensive such a video is, there is no justification for violence. There is no justification for attacking and killing innocent people, in this case, in Benghazi, innocent Americans, including an ambassador who had done so much to help the Libyan people and to help them emerge from the shadow of tyranny under Moammar Gadhafi. And that is a message that needs to be very clear as well. Q: So in the investigations about -- (off mic) -- and the initial -- (off mic) -- that happened in Libya, is it -- has it been concluded that this wasn't to try to show America something on 9/11, show anti-American sentiment for 9/11? Is that -- 12:21:28 MR. CARNEY: I've had -- April, I've had a lot of questions about what we know about what precipitated the attacks in Benghazi, and I -- and I said earlier and have said on previous days that based on the information we have now, we don't have evidence that it was premeditated or preplanned. It is certainly the case that there are a number of bad actors and armed groups of extremists in Libya who might take advantage of a situation that was brought about initially as a response to the video in question. But this is under active investigation and we await the results of that investigation by the FBI before we can reach any firm conclusions about what precipitated the attacks. Q: So what you're saying is it's a cooincidence that it all happened in 9/11? 12:22:24 MR. CARNEY: Right now I'm saying we don't have evidence at this point that this was premeditated or preplanned to coincide on a -- happen on a specific date or coincide with that anniversary. If that changes, we will certainly make you aware of it. Q: Thanks, Jay. Q: Just a follow-up, Jay. 12:22:41 MR. CARNEY: Thanks very much. END
JOE BIDEN IN NH 102011
FTG FOR COVERAGE ON JOE BIDEN / INT BROLL BIDEN SPEAKING TO GROUP AT PODIUM PLS COPY/PASTE TO RECORD : ALL NOTES/LOGS BELOW 5109 BIDEN IN NH 102011 (EVEN THOUGH THIS ISN"T POLITICS.PLS DMAC WITH RECORD BELOW) Biden speaking in New Hampshire on the goal to grow the economy for the benefit of all Americans, and how to restore the middle class. M/S of Biden standing at podium 12;00;41 The dream is still within our reach. We set out to restore our standing new world which had plummeted. To grow our economy for the benefit of all Americans, and how to save and strengthen the middle class which was getting killed over the previous decade.Even before the recession.Even before the recession. When our economy was growing, the middle class was still getting killed. Not getting to share in on the benefits. Productivity was up 20% 12;01;13 The medium income of middle class families dropped 2,100 between 2001 and 2007.BEFORE THE RECESSION. The same medium house income of the wealthiest Americans rose by 50%. This is NOT about class warfare. This is about "how do you maintain the deal?" How do you maintain the deal that's been the essence of who we are as Americans. That everyone has got a shot, everyone has got a shot. 12;01;56 I'm here with a SIMPLE MESSAGE: We have one single goal. To RESTORE THE MIDDLE CLASS. The way to do that is to not only create new jobs, but new industries. 12;02;25 How can these new industries come about? Where are they going to come from? "Well the way we do this as we invest in research and development. We think we have to invest in innovation, education, and info structure. Because this is what provides decent jobs. The jobs of the future. Not just green energy. But entirely new energies and industries. Jobs are going to allow us to remain the strongest economy in the world. WHERE IS IT WRITTEN. WHERE IS IT WRITTEN that your generation cannot dominate the world economically as we have the previous 75-100 years." 12;03;23 I just got back from China. Spent 10 days over there getting to know my specific assignment. President Obama asked President Xi and I to get to know each other.."Do you think they're cutting education? Do you think they're cutting back on info structure?" Well ladies and gentlemen, here we are. In the past decade, the middle class had already taken a hit. We need jobs to ensure that your generation has the exact same opportunities to succeed as every generation before you. It is really that basic. That's the issue. That's why the president and I ran in the first place, and that's why we are running again. 12;04;43 This isn't about November. This is about TOMORROW. 12;04;50 If you know anything about me, I have great relationships with the other side of the aisle. For real. Literally. I have their respect, they have mine. I have never in my day questioned another man's motive in politics. I learned that very early on. But there's TWO deeply held visions that both sides think is the way to benefit the country. 12;05;19 ONE of those visions says if we lower taxes, we continue to lower taxes on the wealthiest 1-2% of the country, (Camera P/O. W/S of Biden at podium and audience) they'll invest that money that will generate new growth, that will generate new industries, that will generate the opportunities that you need. They actually do believe that unregulated wall street is the most efficient/effective way to allocate capital to the markets. And they say (and they BELIEVE) that the way to help you is to CUT OUR WAY TO PROSPERITY. They believe the way to move forward during these hard times is to cut our way to prosperity. 12;06;07 M/S of Biden. The other vision says we are strongest in this country when everyone carries their fair share. That a regulated wall street that is more transparent and less risky is a more PRODUCTIVE ENGINE of economic growth for the nation. Because it is the PRIVATE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM that drives this economy. NOT GOVERNMENT. Government can provide seed money, can set goals. But it's the PRIVATE ENTERPRISE that's been the magic of the growth of this country. 12;06;43 That other vision believes that cutting ISNT ENOUGH. That we have to invest in education, innovation, and info structure. The economic drivers of the future prosperity of this country. And the truth is, we have a fundamentally DIFFERENT SET OF VALUES than the other side does. 12;07;04 At its core, all of this in our view rests on a fundamental premise of fairness and SHARED responsibility. SHARED RESPONSIBILITY. Today I want to talk about how we can realize that vision, and make it clear to ALL Americans. That if education and hard work are available and you engage in it, then the opportunity to realize the American Dream is still available 12;07;35 You see the data. So many middle class folks don't believe in it anymore. And you can't blame them. But the FIRST STEP is to give the economy a JOLT right now. A lot of people are hurting. 12;07;52 We found out that the last quarter before we came in to office (no one knew it at the time), the economy shrunk almost 9%. Pretty historic. Before we even got our first bill passed, unemployment had already increased by 8 million people. Before I lowered my hand on that magnificent January day in front of a couple million people in a mall, THAT MONTH 720,000 new unemployed by the 20th of that month. Across the country now there are 14 million people out of work. Here in NH you've fared better than most, but you lost nearly 32,000 jobs between Jan 08 and Jan 10 while the unemployment rate nearly DOUBLED during the same period. 12;08;47 We know that the path to prosperity in this country has always rested on the understanding that if we educate, innovate, and build better than the rest of the world, IF EVERYONE gives their fare share and plays by the rules, nothing stops us from succeeding. 12;09;08 The American Jobs Act is what we're fighting for right now. The goal of the American Jobs Act is to put people back to work NOW, TODAY, TOMORROW, THIS YEAR. Put money in their pockets, and begin to invest in their future. I'll address some of these short term problems without adding a penny to the long-term debt 12;09;32 In terms of job creation, you hear others say well you won't create new jobs. Look at non-Democratic or Non-Republican institution that the public looks to. Micro-economic advisors says it will create 2.1 million jobs.These same institutions looked at the Republican job plan and said there are some good parts of it that will create jobs. These parts of the plan we have PASSED. 12;10;30 Nationwide, it would give 160 million workers and 60 million small businesses a tax cut because we cut the payroll tax in half. Meaning, another 1500 dollars in the pocket of every American. The tax cut goes to the small business owner as well. So many benefit. 12;11;33 It allows us to go out and repair and modernize 35000 school across the country. BTW we spend so much money just to heat and maintain them. Twice as much as we spend on computers and books in the school. If we modernize those schools, we create more jobs and have more money for school supplies. 12;12;25 And its investment in roads, and bridges, and railways that will mean 450,000 nationwide. 1700 right here in this country. Think about this. The rest of the world is not waiting around. What attracts business? INFO STRUCTURE. There is no investment more important than the one we make in the economy of tomorrow. And that's our KIDS. 12.13.30 So our Jobs Bill will support 400000 education jobs. BTW in the last 4 months, close to 400,000 have been laid off. 280,000 teachers are out of classrooms. Including 1700 education jobs here in the state of NH 12;14;03 Even though Republicans in the past have supported every one of these ideas, for some reason they have decided now that they can't support it. They're against it. 12;14;16 The President and I sat down and we both agreed, literally, "Lets put in the bill things that are non-ideological and things that Republicans have historically supported. When's the last time you heard a Republican against cuts for small businesses and taxes? So we put this bill together not to go out and take issue.But to say all the things that work.Although 51 senators said they're for it, they're not even allowed to debate it. It's called filibuster. 12;15;10 This week, the president wants to take the bill piece by piece. Want everyone that is against it to explain to the American people WHY we shouldn't do what we are proposing AND how to pay for it. 12;15;30 Wants everyone to know this is about responsibility. If you are not for job creation, TELL THE PUBLIC WHY? What are you proposing. Explains that more cops on the street means less crime, etc. 12;16;20 What we are doing here is we're trying to figure out how to get this moving. This is about going over the heads, and going to the people. To pay for these jobs, this bill says "The people that have the most money, should chip in and pay a little more. This isn't class warfare. If you're a millionaire it says that ½ 1% tax increase on the first dollar after your millionth dollar. Seriously. No tax increase on the first million dollars.The average wager in this group is of 3 million dollars.For a billionaire, it would mean the average additional cost would be 7,200 dollars they pay in taxes. BUT, if you're making 1,100,000 dollars, and this passes, you will pay 500$ more than you did the year before. To me, this DOESN'T SEEM LIKE MUCH OF A HARDSHIP. And BTW I honest to god believe that millionaires think this is fair. I honest to god believe that the vast majority of people in that circumstance believe this IS FAIR. That this is not "soaking the rich." 12;17;52 The Republicans are refusing to support this bill.because they don't think it is appropriate to ask this of these folks. Republicans are so determined to get favor from millionaires and billionaires that they won't support this extra tax and they won't support that veterans have a job to come back to.The troops fighting for their lives, losing their lives, coming back mortally wounded, and they have to come back and fight harder here for a job than they did in War! The unemployment rate for Veterans coming from these two wars is 11.4% (Camera P/O-W/S of audience) 12;19;05 BROLL of audience So we say to all of the folks out there that are small business owners, if you higher one of these men or women, you get tax credit. I don't see anything wrong with that. Is the ideology of the other side so rigid that they're prepared to not take these actions that will help create jobs?! 12;19;50 They say that it not only won't create jobs (which I've stated to you all these independent validaters acknowledge it will and argue it will), but they say well you know, even if it does its only TEMPORARY. I come from a family with when there was a recession, SOMEBODY in my family lost their job. Maybe these guys have never experienced what it's like to lose a job. It is temporary, but if you're arguing what constitutes temporary, it's not very temporary to those men or women who are able to stay in their house. It's not really temporary for those teachers that are out of jobs and for those kids when Kindergarten is eliminated. When they have a lesser chance of graduating high school and then getting a job because they didn't experience necessary early education. It's not really temporary for that life save in a home invasion because a squad car is able to respond faster to an emergency. TELL THOSE PEPLE HOW TEMPORARY THIS IS. The jobs we want to create and the investments we want to make, the tax reform we want to encourage, the way we want our financial sector to work, all of that is part of a larger debate about how we want our country to be. 12;22;33 Household wealth in America fell 16 trillion dollars because of the financial crisis. It is essential that we maintain free financial markets. Taking on wall street is not about constraining capitalism, it's about RETURNING to capitalism. When working correctly, wall street has a purpose. It allocates capital. It's important that invest banks get access in order to bring capital all around the world. It's because this job of allocating capital is so important, we let these institutions go out and borrow money to ensure the economy doesn't slow down. YOU LET THEM. IT IS YOUR MONEY. We need financial institutions in this country to serve their purposes. Allocating capital to the most productive uses. That's not govts decision. When banks become private casinos it does not work. Now, after passing this financial law, our friends on the other side want to go back to the way things were. Repeal the protections that were put into place. Meanwhile, they are doing everything in their power to undermine the law by underfunding the agencies that have the responsibility to enforce these protections. I FIND IT AMAZING. They think that wall street should be able to write its own rules. It's like they've forgotten that 16 trillion dollars of household wealth went up in smoke. 12;26;05 We haven't forgotten. We haven't forgotten the retirement accounts that were devastated. Or that the life savings had disappeared. Or that the equity in your parent's homes, which they counted on to send you to college and the future. Look, I understand that people have different views but I quote "You are ENTITLED TO YOUR OWN OPINION, you are NOT ENTITLED TO YOUR OWN FACTS." The fact is the financial meltdown occurred for a reason! It was because of unregulated, reckless and unscrupulous behavior by some on wall street. Not because someone suggested that the government was telling the financial industry what to do. It's nothing more than an attempt to rewrite history. We're not going to prevent ANOTHER meltdown. Or grow our economy. Or create jobs. UNLESS we get our financial system back to doing what it did best. And what it does best. ALLOCATE CAPITAL. 12;27;08 That's why the president and I are insisting that the US senate stop using the arcade rules of the senate to undermine the implementation of the law of the land. 12;27;44 You would think the banks would be a little grateful thanks to the American tax payers they have jobs. Instead, how do they repay you? They deny small business loans, they charge to use your debit card, they refuse to restructure mortgages when it's even in their interest. Instead of attacking our administration, the banks should be on their knees thanking the American people. It's one thing to attack politics, but denying help to the very people that bail them out.The American people have held up their end of the bargain. It's time for the rest to hold up THEIR end of the bargain. At the end of the day we need to RESTORE THE ECONOMY, yes. But we also have to do something more fundamental-We need to restore the power of America's basic bargain. A bargain that says get an education, play by the rules, go out there, and YOU CAN DO IT. A bargain that says each generation should not only have the same opportunity, but better than the previous. Too much of this current crisis is that we got away from what made us great in the first place. BUT we have the ability to go back to what we were by asking everyone to pay their fair share. 12;29;48 We believe the most powerful people in the country have a responsibility not only to themselves, but to their community and their country! .Government is about making tough choices. But THIS IS NOT A TOUGH CHOICE. If we're going to achieve anything close to the American dream than we have to live up to the American value of shared responsibility. 12;30;22 If we do that, then we will have truly learned the lessons of the past and charter the course to a much brighter future because at the end of the day YOU ARE OUR FUTURE. YOU NEED THE OPPORTUNITY. Because you are in my view, this generation. This generation is the most GIVING and the most CAPABLE generation. To deny you the opportunities is not only terrible for you, but it would be a disaster for this country. 12;31;10 So as my grand pop used to say, "Keep the faith. Keep the faith. There's nothing, nothing, nothing that this country cannot do once it sets its mind to it and there's a shared responsibility for getting there." 12;31;25 Thank you all for listening, and may god bless you. APPLAUSE. W/S of Biden and Audience 12;31;52 Leaves podium with microphone, is now in front of the stage. Shakes hands with crowd and continues speaking. So why don't I take a couple questions. I know this is going to sound like age discrimination, but I'm going to take questions from students. 12;32;07 Question "Thank you very much. My name is Tata and I just graduated in 2010. And I'm concerned about social security, and not getting social security when I get older. So I agree that it needs to be reformed, but I just want your views on how that's going to happen?" 12;32;34 The least big problem we have is social security btw. The fix for social security is one of the easiest to do. Dealing with social security is not going to deal with the long term debt or end any financial problems. But to answer your question, there's four ways it can be done. And the only way it can be done is if both parties agree to it. The four ways it can be done are 1. If you increase the amount of money susceptible to social security tax..People are going to be living longer. 2. If we raise the retirement age to 67 from 65 that will help. Do need to go on.It has to be addressed, it can be addressed, and it will be addressed. For practical reasons and economic reasons it's the most soluble of all the problems. 12;36;25 The bigger problem is dealing with healthcare cost: Medicare. There are a lot of problems that are considerably more urgent. 12;37;05 W/S to boy in back of audience. Stands up to ask question. BROLL 12;37;27 Biden: Did you all hear the question? No? What he asked was "How can we trust the government to guarantee our financial future when the govt bailed out these banks that did all these bad things, lied to us, and caused all these problems, etc. etc." 12;37;46 What you're expressing btw is an overwhelming frustration that the vast majority of the American people feel. The problem is "Too big to fail". Had the banks gone bankrupt, we would have moved into a depression. The unfair thing is they HAD TO BE HELPED. THEY HAD TO BE BAILED OUT. You would have seen a complete depression. The difference between our team and the other team with bailing them out is we said "okay, we bailed you out, but now you have to play by different rules.You will be held accountable in a different way. You have to play by the rules that worked really well." That's what is going on now. That's the debate now. The difference between us is a lot of the other guys think the best way for the economy to grow is let them do it their way. Don't tell banks what they can and can't do. You should have confidence in how well you think the person you elect is going to enforce protections. We need protections so we don't get pulled down with them. Your confidence should be in direct proportion to how certain you are the people who run the government are going to adhere to ensuring that it will never happen again. 12;41;53 Biden and Sophomore in college exchange friendly banter. W/S POV of questioner. College student: First of all, thank you, and thank your son for his service to our country. We have two groups or movements that have created a megaphone. The tea party and now the occupy wall street. Through these movements do you think we can come to common ground and get some common sense on issues such as repeal of class Stiegel and Citizens united? Thank you. 12;43;13 First of all, I agree with your fundamental premise. That there is a currency that runs through what seems like two opposite movements. But at its core, they both deal with the issue that it's just not fair anymore. That ordinary people can't get a break. They come to different conclusions.I would argue that we have gone through similar periods in our history. We're at the aftermath of a significant crisis. We go through a period where people are lurching and moving and trying to find their way to a new place.All has changed in the world. All has changed utterly. Because of the technology, more capital flows. So much has changed, and all the institutions in the world are catching up with how to work with the change to continue to make equity. This financial collapse has caused so much commotion that you're going to find both parties out there trying to figure out the best way to deal with the issue. You need to figure out what caused the problem to create a solution. Each team looks at the problem and sees different causes. The occupy wall street and the people of the tea party both acknowledge the problem, but they think there are different solutions..We need a republican party. We need it. Right now there is nobody to make a deal with.What you see going on now is the Republican party is trying to identify itself. In the past, made a deal to never raise taxes no matter what. It happened to the democratic party years ago. And this is the place we are in now. I'm optimistic. After being a senator and a vice president, I see this as an incredible opportunity for us to get a consensus on how to deal with this changed world. 12;49;51 NOW I DON'T KNOW...WHEN I GOT OFF THE PLANE, I WAS TALKING TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE IN FACT HAD PROOF THAT THIS OUT FIT...THE REBELS...THE ACTING GOVERNMENT NOW...HAD KILLED GADHAFI...I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT. I CAN'T CONFIRM THAT PERSONALLY NOW...BUT LOOK...LOOK AT HOW THAT ALL CAME ABOUT... FOR YEARS AND YEARS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT BURDEN SHARING IN NATO...EVERYBODY CARRYING THEIR FARE SHARE...NOT THE UNITED STATES TALKING CARRYING LOAD AND SPENDING ALL THE MONEY FOR THE WHOLE WORLD. SO YOU REMEMBER WHEN THE PRESIDENT AND I CAME ALONG AND SAID LOOK...WE'LL SUPPORT NATO...BUT NATO HAS TO TAKE THE LEAD. THAT'S WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED TO DO...IT WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE THE U.S. RUNS NATO...IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE NATO...WHICH WE ARE A PART OF...THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF...IS ABLE TO ACT. SO IN THIS CHANGED WORLD BECAUSE OF ALL THE DIFFERENT WARS AND BECAUSE AS THE TWO BLOCKS HAVE BROKEN DOWN AND THERE'S ONLY ONE SUPER POWER LEFT AND THERE'S NO LONGER THIS...THE WAY IT WAS WHEN THE SOVIET UNION EXISTED...WE HAVE A WHOLE NEW SET OF PROBLEMS. WE DON'T HAVE 18-THOUSAND ICBM'S AIMED AT THE UNITED STATES WHICH IS A WONDERFUL THING, BUT WE ALSO HAVE EMERGING NATIONS AND CHAOS AND NEW MOVEMENTS AND ARRESTS. SO...IN THIS TERRIBLE BEAUTY...THIS ALL'S CHANGED WORLD...WHAT HAPPENED??? NATO GOT IT RIGHT...NATO GOT IT RIGHT...AND GUESS WHAT??? LIBYA...GADHAFI IS GONE...WHETHER HE'S ALIVE OR DEAD...HE'S GONE. THE PEOPLE OF LIBYA HAVE GOTTEN RID OF A DICTATOR OF 40 YEARS WHO I PERSONALLY KNEW...THIS IS ONE TOUGH, NOT SO NICE GUY. AND GUESS WHAT...THEY GOT A CHANCE NOW...BUT WHAT HAPPENED? IN THIS CASE, AMERICA SPENT 2 BILLION DOLLARS TOTAL AND DID NOT LOSE A SINGLE LIFE. THIS IS MORE THE PRESCRIPTION FOR HOW TO DEAL WITH THE WORLD AS WE GO FORWARD THAN IT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST. SO...THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE WORLD'S BEGINNING TO WORK TOGETHER A LITTLE BETTER. LOT OF PROBLEMS OUT THERE...BUT THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON. 12;52;08 And my father's generation went through this after WW2. We're in the midst of going through it now. That's a long answer to your profound question.And I could have given you a short/glim answer, but you deserve more. You're entitled to more. Folks that's why I'm optimistic. Because the same thing at its core is motivating both of these groups that are capturing the public's attention, that there is a kernel in there for which we can organize and begin to get a national consensus. Because folks, for 50 years we had a national consensus between democrats and republicans on how to regulate wall street. We had a national consensus on education in America. There was no difference in the last 50 years on Medicare or social security. There was no fundamental difference on the main principles of America. But we go through this fundamental difference when the BARGAIN BREAKS DOWN. Now we're re-establishing a new one. I'm optimistic we can do it. But I'm absolutely confident, if the formula is to go back to what it was for the previous 10 years it will be a disaster. Absolutely convinced of it. We can argue about whether or formula is the right one. One thing for certain though, the alternative being offered so far will get us no where that's for sure. 12;54;22 God love you all as my mom would say. I appreciate you taking the time with me (I know it's hot in this room- you guys are very polite. I hope you all invite me back. BROLL CROWD STANDS AND APPLAUDS.MUSIC PLAYING 5226 CAMPAIGN 2012 MITT ROMNEY COUNCIL BLUFFS IA 102011 ROMNEY in COUNCIL BLUFFS TAKING QUESTIONS FROM AUDIENCE QUESTION OFF CAMERA IS NOT INTELLIGIBLE 171440 I don't think so. I think the great majority of the American people want to select a person who is most capable of getting our country going again. With strong values, strong economy and a strong military. And I think what's among the things that are unique and exceptional about our country is the fact that in America we recognize and appreciate differences in faith. We accept religious differences. We have a pluralistic society with a lot of different faiths. And our constitution even embodies the view of our founders that a religious test shouldn't be applied to people running for office APPLAUSE OF AUDIENCE 171522 I'm shaped by the Judeo-Christian values which I have and hope that those will hold me in good stead like they have so far. In interplay as: QKLINK 5 CAMPAIGN 2012 CAIN NV REPUB LUNCH M/S of Herman Cain at podium w/ BROLL In an unpublicized appearance at the Republican Women of Las Vegas and Republican Women of Washington State Club Luncheon and Social, Cain's 999 plan seemed to fold. Following last night's criticism at the Nevada debate and the increased scrutiny he has been receiving since his surge in the polls, Cain seemingly struggled to push his economic policy forward. 10:41:37 Cain admitted that some of the provisions of his 999 plan had not yet been released to the public. Addressing criticism that his plan was regressive on the poor, Cain called the allegation a lie. "It is not regressive on the poor because of some provisions that we're gonna make." 10:42:24 But when it came to discussion about how his 999 plan would affect seniors, Cain seemed to be confused. "If you're on social security, that's not taxed in the first place. Your social security check doesn't get taxed." When attendees at the luncheon challenged Cain's assertion, he quickly said that what he meant was that social security would not be taxed under his 999 plan. 10;42;37 "No, no, that's what I'm saying. Now it is, right? But under 999, it doesn't. That's what I'm saying. It won't get taxed under 999. Now it does, but you're right." ***The awkward exchange with the luncheon group showed signs that Cain's 999 plan might be waffling from the ongoing review and critique of his plan from other presidential candidates, economists, and the media. ***Cain, also addressed green energy and the existence of global warming. Something he has not focused on in past campaign events. 10;43;45 Pulling out a stack of folded bills from his pocket and holding it up the applauding group, Cain said, "This is the green energy that I want to bring back by getting government out of the way. No, I'm not going to be investing in green energy. The government's role is not to try to pick winners and losers." 10;44;48 And Cain plainly denied the existence of global warming. "Global warming. Global warming. It doesn't exist." (APPLAUSE) 10:44:59 "Are there some things that we as human beings can do more responsibly," said Cain. "Yes, but it's not the crises that they wanted us to believe. We can take care of this planet and grow the economy responsibly without shutting down the coal industry, creating barriers to natural gas exploration. Without shutting down the exploration of all the oil that we have in the outer continental shelf. We can do that." 10;45;36 BROLL of Cain taking pictures with various women. Has his book out as well. **Cain also dismissed last night's 999 criticism from his GOP rivals. 10:36:15 That's the part that they don't get. You don't care if they had a political office, America needs a problem solver, not another politician, that's why I'm running. I find it kinda interesting that in the debate a week ago and in the debate last night, one of my colleagues reminded me again that while your ideas sound intriguing, and its good, catchy, it won't pass. And I pointed out to them that that's the difference between a politician and a problem solver. They put together stuff they think they can pass, problem solvers put together stuff that can fix the problem. That's a big difference "And last night six of my opponents kept trying to tell me why it won't work. That's why they are politicians. They always want to tell you why something will not work. And I know that we can make this work. Why? (10:37:14) One of the big reasons is that you get it. You instinctively know it is better than the mess we deal with today. They want to hold onto the status quo. But all of those attacks that we got last night, we'll deal with them. We'll deal with them. I'm not worried about that. I'm not backing off just because the so called pundits wanna criticize." (ends 10:37:40) Cain, who has recently come under fire for proposing an electrified along the southern border of the United Sates; a proposal he later called a joke, nearly walked back into the fray. (10:37:55) Discussing illegal immigration, Cain brought up the fence. "Secure the border for real. Stop talking about it. We will do that with a combination of a real fence for part of it. I love it when some people want to criticize me for being insensitive. You're insensitive." An audience member brought up the fact that it could be electrified. Cain responded. "Right, if you don't touch the fence - see, I ain't ' say that, that's what got me in trouble in the first place!" QKLNK 5 CAMPAIGN 2012 CAIN TELEPROMPTER 1014 "i think that's a silly rule. but i'm unemployed. but that's okay, i'm not in it for the money right now. [someone screams, where's your teleprompter?] you know the teleprompter fell off the bus on the way over here. we moved too fast, we need to get rid of some dead weight. so we threw the teleprompter off the bus." QKLNK 5 CAMPAIGN 2012 CAIN NV WEST REPUB 10-19 Log of Cain's speech at Western Republican Leadership Conference in Las Vegas 10/19 In interplay as: Campaign 2012 Cain NV West Repub 10-19" He talked about the usual - 999, foreign policy, energy independence, Reagan's shining city on the hill, and the fact that "stupid people are ruining America." 10:25:21 " I like being up close to the folk. Not behind the podium. and I didn't bring my teleprompter (crowd laughs) His 999 plan has now become a chant. When he started to explain it, the crowd filled in the blanks for him. 10:25:42 "All of their plans start with trying to pivot off of the current tax code. I'm the only one that has a plan that throws it out. And put in what we call (crowd chants) 9-9-9. Awww, I love y'all." (10:26:04) The American people get it Cain addressed the criticism that his 999 plan was regressive on the poor. He maintained that he just hadn't told anyone about it yet. (10:26:15) "The other thing they try, well it's going to be regressive on the poor. Well no it's not, we anticipated that attack but I didn't tell them how I was going to fix it yet. I wanted to wait until I get attacked on that for a while, we already have a plan for that. But I wanted to see if they would come at that. They thought it was going to be dead in the water. No. We are a compassionate nation. (10:26:41) We do want to help those that are doing all they can to help themselves but they might need a little bit of help. Cause we're not going to throw the people at the poverty level under the bus. No we're not going to do that. But we've already made provisions for that. I just haven't told the public and my opponents about it yet." Cain discussed the transparency of 999 which got a bit of a laugh from the audience: (10:27:06) "When we put that plan together, we had five objectives. We wanted it to be simple - 999. Transparent. There are no hidden nines. That's it." (ends 10:26:25) The future of America 10:27:57 People are going from concerned to fear - why? Because of this administration, because of Washington DC, this is why I say the American dream has been hijacked. The good news is we can take it back Cain also tackled his lack of foreign policy experience by trying to downplay Obama's experience with a line he's used in all of his stump speeches: 10:28:33 "You know when you rise up in the polls you get this big target on our back and so I have been criticized for not having extensive foreign policy experience. And the guy there now does? Is there a double standard or something that's going on here? I have consulted with foreign policy experts. Let me tell you what they have told me. Herman, all you need is character and common sense and intelligence and we got plenty of people who can fill out the details and help you put together a strategy. That's what leaders do." Tackling China, Cain had three words to share, that were actually two words, but who's counting: (10:29:53)"My strategy is three words. Outgrow China. If our economy's growing we won't ever look back. Outgrow China." On the second amendment: (10:30:34) "I kinda like my guns and bible. And I ain't gonna give them up." Cain also showed his trademark wit when an audience member's phone rang: (10:30:51) "Three things I need you to do, we need you to do, your grandchildren need you to do. First, (phone rings) answer the phone. Tell Obama I'm busy. I've been criticized for having such a sense of humor. I suppose since I'm running for president I'm supposed to be politically correct. I'm supposed to be presidential. I ain't gonna change." RS 5109 CAMPAIGN 2012 ROMNEY SIOUX CITY IOWA 102011 RS 5109 CAMPAIGN 2012 ROMNEY SIOUX CITY IOWA 102011 FTG. Of CAMPAIGN 2012 / Mitt Romney speaks and takes questions at Morningside College 10/19/11 9:55:36 Romney walks in, starts shaking hands with students and faculty 9:55:41 "I'm Dr. Sam Clovis (?) the chair of the department of business administration and economics here at Morningside College and for some of you who may have heard, I have a radio show. I want to take this opportunity, you didn't come here to listen to me, all the press is here, great turnout, I want to introduce - candidate for President of the United States - Governor Mitt Romney." .Applause, Mitt take microphone and center stage. 9:56:06 "Thank you, thank you so much. I was just on the radio with Sam this morning, he asked some good questions on the air there.Randy has a pretty good audience in the morning. How about your show - do you do just as well as Randy? (to Sam O/C) Well thank you for joining me this morning, a number of students from Morningside have joined me this morning. (Turns to students) How many of you are from Morningside (Many raised hands). *** 09:56: 33 ** "I have to be honest with you guys, I don't know how any young person in this country would vote for a Democrat ** I realize that could be a bit of a mind-stopper there, but I just want to say to you that my party is focused on making sure that America is strong and prosperous for you. Not just how well we can do for ourselves and how many benefits we can accrue for my generation, but instead how can we make sure that we care for our own folks at the same time we care for the next generation - and we leave America stronger and more prosperous than when we found it. 09:57:09 "Because you see what we enjoy today, I'm 64 years old, what I enjoy today - the benefits of living in America are the results of the investments and contributions made by my parents, made by the greatest generation, like these folks here (points to senior citizens in crowd), who made a real contribution in holding off tyranny in the world and building the strongest economy in the world and leaving a nation that had an economic base that was second to none. And right now the question is: what are we going to leave? Are we going to leave a stronger America? Will this be an American century - this century we're in - or is it going to be the century of some other part of the World? And I want this to be the American century. I want us to have the strongest values and the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world. I'm committed to making sure we keep America strong" 09:58:07 "My foreign policy could really be boiled down to the idea of keeping America strong and doing whatever it takes to make sure this nation is strong. Now one of the elements that is threatening the strength of our economy, excuse me, the strength of our nation and our military capacity and our values around the world is our economy right now. The economy's in trouble, and you know that. This President points out that he did not cause the recession and he's right. But he made the downturn worse, and made the recovery last longer than it should have. And I don't think he's a bad guy, I just don't think he understands how the economy works. I think he's over his head. And the evidence of that is that you have 25 million people today, 3 years after he was inaugurated, 25 million people out of work, or stopped looking for work, or in part-time jobs when they need full-time employ. Evidence of that is when you get your graduation certificate from Morningside and you go out to get a job, you're going to find it's not as easy as you expected. Evidence of the failure of the President in dealing with our economy is the fact that home values are continuing to go down in this country. And that the median income of Americans over the last three years has dropped 10%. This is unprecedented." 09:59:25: "So what I want to do is get this economy going again. And allow the American people to know that the future for them and the future for their kids will be brighter than the times they've enjoyed in the past." 09:59:36 "Now we have the President right now campaigning. He's going across, I think he's in - well let's see - I think he's in North Carolina today. And he's campaigning for his stimulus. Someone needs to tell him, the stimulus is dead - gone - disappeared - invisible. The emperor has no clothes. That stimulus bill was turned down by the Democrats, his own leads in the Democratic party in the Senate have said no. That bill isn't going forward. I don't know what he's campaigning about. What he needs to do is stop campaigning and stop blaming and go back to Washington and sit down with Democrats and Republicans and work on legislation that'll get America working again." 10:00:29: "Leadership is hard. Reaching across the aisle with people who disagree with you on issues and finding common ground, that's tough. He hasn't been able to do those things. He likes campaigning so that's what he's doing. But we didn't elect him to campaign, we elected him to lead. And we need that leadership." 10:00:53: "Now I've laid out a series of things I think you have to do to make sure the foundation of our economy is so strong we start creating jobs again. And I describe them in seven major categories even though it's a much longer list than that.but just to remind you: 10:01:09: "One, you've got to make sure that the tax rates for our employers are competitive with other nations. Our are right now the highest in the world, along with Japan. And as a result overtime, businesses will tend to leave our shores and go to the places where the taxes are more competitive." 10:01:26 "Number 2 - you have to have regulations. By the way as Republicans we have to make sure that we don't pretend that we want to get rid of all regulation. You need regulation to make free markets work. But the regulation needs to be modern, and up to date. Streamlined, and the regulators need to be encouraging the private sector and not trying to kill it. And right now our regulatory burden is killing jobs in America and this President has added more regulation, I think by a factor of 4 times, than the prior President. 10:02: 04 "Number 3 - you have to have trade policies that open markets for American goods. And when people cheat you need to hold their feet to the fire. Now this is an exporting state, as you know. Iowa exports products around the world. I want to open more markets for American goods - for Iowa goods, for goods for all of our states. And right now, you've got a President whose been in office for 3 years, and he stalled on trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. Those have finally made it through the Congress, but during these last 3 years while this President has negotiated no new deals to open up new markets for America, the Chinese and the Europeans have put together some 40 different deals. And that means they're going to have trade relationships establishing distribution and brand awareness that'll make it harder for us. We need a President that's going to open up markets." 10:03:00: "Number 4 - you've got to have energy policies, that'll get us on a track of becoming energy secure and energy independent. And that means you don't say no to all the sources of energy in this country. You develop our coal, our oil, our natural gas, our nuclear power, our renewable resources like ethanol and wind and solar, you use all of those and you encourage efficiency in our use of energy." 10:03:25: "Number 5 - you have to have the rule of law. In order for America to have confidence to invest in the future you've got to believe that the law is going to be followed. And when the President stacks the national labor relations board with labor stooges that tell a manufacturer like Boeing that they can't build a factory in a non-union state, you violate the rule of law, and that's wrong. 10:03:45 "Number 6 - you have to have institutions that build human capital. What do I mean by that? We're in a capitalist system as you know. Sometimes people don't like that word, I like capitalism and I like free enterprise, I have no problem using that word. Capitalism and free enterprise are the only anecdote to poverty that the world has ever seen. Even China is copying a lot of what we've done in the free world and bringing a lot of people out of poverty - finally. But you have to have in capitalism not just capitalism for financial resources or capital for fiscal goods, you also have to have human capital. And we have to have institutions that build human capital in an exceptional way. And let's think about what they are - schools K-12, unfortunately our kids are treated to our schools that are performing in the bottom quartile of the nation - and you also have to have great institutions of higher learning - we do a good job there but it's a lot more expensive than it ought to be. Education and higher education system, and then you also have immigration policies that open the door to the best and the brightest. And that welcome legal immigration and that stop illegal immigration because illegal immigration is an enemy of legal immigration. 10:05:22: And I mentioned there were seven things and the last one is: if you are thinking about investing your life savings in America or if you had capital in some big company you were asked to run and you were thinking about where you put your money, you wouldn't want to put it in a place you don't know whether down the road they're going to face a meltdown or a place where a dollar isn't going to be worth much in the future. So if you have a government that consistently spends more than it takes in, you're going to worry about the future of that country. We cannot allow our nation to continue massively more than we take in. We have to cut our spending, we have to cap how much the federal government is going to take out of our economy, and we have to have a balanced budget. And those are things that are essential to get this economy going and set things right for America." 10:06:11: "Now I know that this is a town meeting kind of a format, so you're going to be able to ask questions and I know there are friends in the audience, I see some Romney stickers on, although I've learned that sometimes those are camouflage and there's some Romney stickers in here, there are some Obama stickers in here, there are folks who are going to be voting for other people, and that's whats fun about this nation. I love the fact that we can disagree, let's do it respectfully, and I'll try to do it respectfully, too. Now let's turn to any questions you might have." 10:06:48 Signals to woman O/C "Yes, Ma'am" Woman approaches stage, is given mic, both Romney and woman facing each other 10:06:51:** "You were on Governor Huckabee's show a few weeks ago and one of the things you folks talked about was that you would support a life begins at conception amendment. Now that would essentially mean banning most forms of birth control, 98% of American women, including me, use birth control. So, could you help me understand why you oppose the use of birth control?" ** *** 10:07:19: ** "I don't.I'm sorry life begins at conception, birth control prevents conception. My own view is this and let me clarify my view so that you understand that: What I believe is the right course with regards to abortion and life, is that I would like to see the Supreme Court return this right to the States and let States create their own legislation with regards to life. That's my view and States will make different decisions which is their right to do so. And my view is that I'm not out campaigning for an amendment of some kind, I'm campaigning to see Justices ultimately appointed to the Supreme Court who will follow the Constitution, who will return the right to the States, and who will let them decide for themselves." ** 10:08:08 Woman poses follow-up: ** "But I don't know if you want to have some Staff look into this, but hormonal forms of birth control work a little differently and so they actually prevent implantation and not conception. So it would ban hormonal forms of birth control which is what most women use so if you don't know if you want to look into that but as someone who uses birth control this is a very terrifying prospect to me - so I hope that you can, you know, look into that, I guess." ** 10:08:38 "Yes, back there please (indicates woman in back O/C) 10:08:45 "What do you think about the fact that our Democratic run Senate has not passed a budget since this President been inaugurated, to me this has caused much of our financial crises and problems, because we are running on resolution after resolution after resolution, which they create a big crisis over, wastes a lot of our time, and nothing else is getting done. What would you as President do, if say the Senate is still in the hands of the Democrats, to get an actual budget done?" 10:09:20: "I would lead. One of the responsibilities of leadership is that you work within your own party, and you also work across the aisle and see if you can't bring people together. And had the President been spending the last 1,000 days inviting people to the White House, going to Congress, sitting down in rooms, working with people back and forth, trying new ideas, listening to ideas, then I might have said well he's tried and they just can't get the other side to move. But he hasn't been doing that, he's out in North Dakota campaigning. Look, the job we elected him to do happens to be right now in Washington. You've got all these people out of work, you've got government spending massively more money than we ought to be spending, and he's not there leading. When he came into office, one of the things I found most surprising was his decision to delegate the stimulus to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, my guess is they had about as much experience in the private sector as he did - none. And so they crafted an almost 800 billion dollar stimulus plan which protected government jobs and didn't get the economy going. And now they want to do another one like that, I mean shame on us if we fall for that twice. We have to insist on a President that's willing to lead. And I agree with you, the idea of a budget process is to make the tough decisions that we need to make, as opposed to kicking the can down the field, look Washington is broken. I said that 4 years ago and it's more true today than it was 4 years ago. Washington is broken. It's not doing its job. And that's not because of the real estate, it's not because of the 535 members of the Senate and the House, it's because right now it doesn't have a leader. And America needs leadership. And I'll say it again - I like the President, I think he's a nice guy - but he's never led before. He didn't lead in the legislature in Illinois, he didn't lead in the US Senate, he has not had that experience. And I don't know the answers to all things by any means. There are a lot of things I can be educated upon and learn from, but I've learned how to lead through different experiences doing that. And I have 5 boys, and I could come down and complain that the dinner table is not respectful, that there's too much joking going on, that these boys should get there on time. But it wouldn't be their fault if these things didn't happen, it would be my fault if these things were going on. You need to be the leader of the family, I learned leadership at my Dad and Mom's feet, I've learned it throughout my career, and we need to have a President who understands not just the economy but how to lead. And if I'm president of the united states, I will do everything in my power to get people to work together for the good of the American people. I would give that all my energy. Thank you" 10:12:28 Next question, Romney approaches woman seated 10:12:30: "There seems to be a big appetite for getting rid of the IRS. Because it is a book of special favors and opt outs for friends of legislators. Also, there's about 800 billion in subsidies that we could get rid of in order to balance our budget and I'm wondering where you stand on those issues?" 10:12:47: "Yeah, you know there's a lot we could do to try to reform our tax code to make it work better. And that's going to be another, I'd like to see a tax code that has lower tax rates, flatter tax rates, where a lot of the special deals are taken out of the tax code, but let me tell you what I think we need to do right away. Because that process of going through a complete restructuring of our tax code is going to take a long time. And I've got some ideas in ways to do that.but let me tell you what I want to do immediately. What I want to do immediately is help people who have been hurt by the Obama economy, and that's the middle class. And so what I look to do is provide an immediate tax relief package for the middle class, and I think that could get passed pretty quickly if I'm lucky enough to become president, pretty quickly within the first 100 days or so. So what I would do is this, for anyone whose making 200,000 a year or less we would eliminate the tax on your savings - meaning no tax on your interest or dividends of capital gains. So middle income people could save their money for college or retirement or for a home or for whatever the heck they want, without having to pay taxes on it. And I think that lowers the burden on the middle class of America, and that's a relatively simple change that I think can be carried out relatively quickly. I'd also like to have our employers have their tax rates brought down from the current 35% rate to 25, which is competitive with nations around the world - and to do that without losing revenue - we'll get rid of some of the special breaks that have been put in the tax code by various lobbyists or various industry groups over the years. Now there a couple more questions, what other things could we do? What other tax ideas might work? Another idea might be to go over to the 'fair tax' - that idea is this - to replace the income tax with a sales tax, a national sales tax, a consumption task if you will. And there a lot of positive features to that, we can look and see if we could make that work, what all the pros and cons would be. Our current fair tax has a problem that keeps me from endorsing the fair tax proposal as it currently stands and that's this: it raises the taxes on middle income families, and therefore it lowers them on the other two ends - among the poor and among the wealthy. And I don't like the idea of raising taxes on middle income Americans, I think we ought to be lowering taxes on middle income Americans. So for me, that's a non starter although the concept of a consumption tax makes a lot of sense, the so-called flat tax that Steve Forbes championed, how many years ago was that? Does anybody remember? .in 2000.the flat tax has some positive features, then again you have to look and you have to make sure that it doesn't raise taxes on middle income Americans. For me, one of the key criteria in looking at tax policy is that we help the people that need the help most and in our country the people who need the help most are not the poor - who have a safety net - and not the rich - who are doing just fine - but the middle class. So I will look for tax policy which makes tax reporting and calculating easier, which reduces the burden on the middle class and which causes the growth of our economy. Because the best way to balance our budget in addition to cutting spending is to encourage growth. Those are my principles and the subsidies are deductions, there are corporate subsidies, and you're going to have to take some of those out to reduce the tax rate from 35 to 25 and then there are the deductions for individuals, for instance one of the deductions for individuals is that we get to deduct the interest on our home mortgage. Now some our saying, get rid of that, well - if you get rid of that who bought homes and are deducting their mortgages on their taxes are going to find that's going to cost them money, and it'll be unexpected. And they may find that may not be helpful to the home industry as well, and buying and selling homes right now is probably something that we don't want to hurt. So you have to look at all the individuals, and people say get rid of the charitable deduction, get rid of the home mortgage deduction, those things would be pretty dramatic in the change they would cause so before I propose that, we're going to have a very careful evaluation on what impact they would have on middle income Americans and on growth. Thank you" 10:17:28 "oh there's a question, yes sir." passing of mic ****101733 Gov, I want to thank you for being here. The first time I saw you was when you were Gov of Massachusetts. And I got to hear you speak. I was very impressed when you talked about reaching across the aisle and being bipartisan in Massachusetts. Now, when you were giving your introductory remarks before, you talked about how you don't think Barack Obama is a bad guy, you just think he's in over his head. And I think there are a lot of people, and a lot of Iowans who agree with that. 101802 SO far your campaign hasn't been very heavy(?) in Iowa.; And instead we have candidates who concentrate on the vitriol , the hyperbole. We have a candidate who once thought the greatest problem plaguing the nations schools was the movie Aladdin. We have another candidate who the only thinghe has to offer is a 999 pizza deal, I mean tax plan. And we have acandidate whose only claim to fame is that he shot a coyote as governor. 101836 Are you here in Iowa today, and is your campaign here in Iowa today to finally give the people of Iowa an alternative to that? *****101845 YES. (LAUGHS) Look, I want to get the support of Iowans. This is not my first trip to Iowa, as you know. And I will be here again and again campaigniong here. I want to get the support of the good people of Iowa. I'd love to win in Iowa. Any of us would. And so I'll campaign here. I intend to campaign ..in all the early states at least, and maybe in all the states at some point. Look, I want to become the President of the United States. I didn't imagine that would be part of my life's experience..that I'd be campaigning for President. Had I known that I was going to get involved in politics, I'm not sure I would have chosen Massachusetts to do so as a Republican. A little tough there as a republican. And yet I find myself in a position where, having spent my life in the private sector-25 years-working in small business, starting a business, having run other enterprises, I have in my view the kinds of skils America needs right now to get our economy going again. And, so I'm running for President, and that will take me around the country, and you guys have a big say. Iowa comes first. You have an enormous say in who the next President is going to be. And I think the American people are increasingly aware that Pres Obama can't get elected in the second term-SHOULDN'T get elected in the second term. And President Obama was on the Today Show a few weeks after his inauguration and he said, "Look, if I can't get this economy turned around in 3 years, I'll be looking at one term. APPLAUSE. Romney continues *****102044 And here is he today, campaigning, and talking about a new stimiulus. And we say, MR. President, we let you have your way with the economy for 3 years. He ignores the fact that the first two years he had a Democrat House and Senate, and he put in place a $700 mllion stimulus bill. He ignores that fact. He igonores the fact that he pushed thru obama care and other pieces of legislation that the American people tried to stop every way they could-even electing a REPUBLICAN Sen in Massachusetts. We tried to stop it and he went ahead with those things. And now we're suffering and he's trying to find someone to blame. And we've gone from hope and change to divide and blame. And the Ameircan peo have seen enough of it. And they want ot see someone who can lead and I think , I can tell you.I'm not going to agree with the democrats on aall their issues..I'm not going to agree with liberals I'm not going to compromise my principles. But I'm going to look for common ground. But I happen to believe there are democrats who love America just like there are republicans who love ameria. The old Ronald Reagan line-it's not that liberals they're ignorant, it's just that what they know. You seek to educate the opposing side. And where you have agreement. And now, given the state of our budget defitict and the massive debt that America has and the challenges around the world, I believe there are good democrats-like tip o'neill who sat down with Ronald Reagan. They'll sit down with me and say, What can we do about this, where can we find some agreement? How about this one, how about that one.let's find a way to work together. I've seen it happen in my state. I've seen it happen in other states. And I've seen it happen in this country under leaders and I intend to be the leader. 10:20:55: Question from woman: "I have two questions, one is easy and one is a little more difficult. The easy one is what are you going to do about Czars, are you going to get rid of them or are you going to keep them? The other question is, how are you going to stop the influx of illegals, to me you have to shut the spigot off and put the fence up. 10:23:53: "Czars, I hope I never get to the point where I have to appoint Czars, there will certainly be envoys that go to places in the world that represent the president of the united states or the state department - but czars, if you will, that are managing the cabinet doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The structure of our governmental organization is kind of strange, I was the business world as I've mentioned a couple of times already, and every now and then businesses reorganize - they find ways to do certain things better, there are even consulting firms that come into companies that come into companies and say you've got reorganize, you're not organized properly, people are reporting in the wrong order, you have to have this person in front of that person - businesses do that to be more efficient. We haven't done that in this country in hundreds of years. We have the same structure now as we did back in the days of George Washington. It probably makes more sense to update the ways we work together, there are probably some agencies and departments that ought to be combined, there are probably some agencies that could be eliminated, there are a lot of programs that could be eliminated. I would like to see if we can't make our government more efficient and more responsive to our people, but I don't expect to appoint czars, I can tell you that." 10:25:20: "everything I'm focused upon is getting America stronger. I want strong values, I want a strong economy, and I want a military that's second to none in the world and everything I do will be focused on making America stronger and keeping our nation the hope of the world. We're a shining city on a hill and I want to keep us as a shining city on the hill and I will do everything in my power to keep us strong. Now you had another question.what would you do about illegal immigration?" 10:26:59: "Well I mentioned that at the beginning, you know the interesting thing about illegal immigration is that it's not that difficult to solve intellectually, it's the politics that are hard. Some problems are hard to solve intellectually, how are we going to stop the attacks that come from jihadists around the world? Now that's hard.that's a tough one and it's going to take ongoing work. But illegal immigration is pretty straightforward. I had the occasion, during my last campaign I went to the border with mexico, and we have a big fence there and they said people still get across the fence. They build ladders out of rebar, even with the fences, so I said what do we have to do then to stop the flow of illegal immigration? ****And he said something I agree with, one you've gotta have a fence, and two you've gotta have enough border patrol agents to patrol that fence and to secure it. Number three you have to turn off the magnets, and I didn't know what he meant by that. And he said well, when you have employers that knowingly hire people who are in this country illegally and they're getting paid ten times as much as they get paid in their home, then they're going to find a way in, you've got to crackdown on employers who hire people who are illegal.*** And that means you have to have a system that identifies whose here legally, which means you have to have a biometric card that has this is the person, they're allowed to work here, and you say to that employer - you look at that card, you type in the number, you swipe the card, and it instantly tells you whether they're legal or not and if they are you can hire them and if you don't check that card and you hire someone whose illegal than you're going to get sanctioned or fined like you would if you didn't pay your taxes. Once you do that, you close that magnet, but there are other magnets. ***10:28:00: "When I was governor of mass the legislature passed a 'dream act', texas was the first state with a 'dream act', saying we should give tuition breaks to illegals living in this country. That taxpayers should fund the college educations of illegals in Massachusetts, and my legislature even though it was overwhelming democrat, they upheld my veto. Now interestingly, there are other people who have a different course in that regard, I disagree, you've got to turn off the magnets - build a fence, have enough people to patrol it, and turn off the magnets. We do those things and we will stop illegal immigration, and not because we don't love immigrants. We do want legal immigration, we've got 4.7 million people who are waiting to come here legally, I want to follow a legal process where we bring in people who speak English, who have an education, who have skills we need in this country.**** Welcome to the usa, we love legal immigration, we will stop illegal immigration to protect legal immigration in our nation. Thank you" ***10:29:20: Question: "A good leader knows his weaknesses and is willing to bring them out to confront them, to make them stronger. What are some things that you think you, maybe you don't want to say personal things that you struggle with since you're running for president and all, but that your party struggles with and you want to see bettered or so that America can become unified?"*** ** 10:29:42: Romney: "You know I think that one of the things that my party needs to do better, and I'm sure I need to do better as well, something I learned from my first campaign, is to make sure we communicate our message clearly. Gosh darn, we don't do a good job of that. When I said jokingly at the beginning that if anyone here is going to college they shouldn't ever vote for a democrat, I meant that kind of jokingly but also kind of seriously and yet, most young people, most college students don't vote for us - we're not getting the message across. We haven't been very good at communicating a message, we've been outmessaged by our Democratic friends, ours is the party of trying to protect opportunity and making America's economy so strong that you get great jobs when you come out of school. Theirs is the party of benefits and handouts, it does not create the kind of opportunity you want in your life. **The other day I was pointing out that my Democratic friends want to give more and more benefits to people of my generation and a lot of us say, well fine heap it on me, but we're passing all the burden of that onto your generation. **Look - I'm going to be dead and gone before that 14 trillion dollars is paid off, the interest on that year after year is going to be paid by your generation, and my party is trying to stop that from happening by cutting back on the spending, not because we don't care about the things we spend money on, we'd all like to buy lots of stuff for everybody, but giving away free stuff is going to kill the next generation. We want America to be stronger and more prosperous for you. I am not in this race for me. I am almost 65 years old, I'm in this race for my kids and my grandkids, ** and so if we do a better job at communicating our message, we'll get the support of young people and I don't know how it works right here at Morningside in communicating the kinds of choices we have, but I think we do an ineffective job too often in communicating with young people, with Hispanic voters. **10:32:04: Another weakness of ours - we're not doing very well with Hispanic voters or with other minorities. ** But the Hispanic vote is a very large vote of our national voting public and ours is the party that wants to preserve the American opportunity that they or their ancestors came here for. This nation is all about freedom and opportunity and Gosh, that's what we're about. Number 1 weakness - come on Mitt and come on Republicans, do a better job at communicating our message."**** 10:32:33: "And I hope if I'm the nominee and I get the chance to debate barack obama I will get a chance to post up on the fact that I am in favor of keeping America strong, in creating good jobs, in making sure our military is second to none. Not for me, but for the coming generations of Americans. And I happen to believe that this is an exceptional nation. And I know that there are some, and I think our president is among them, who believe that our nation is just another with a flag. He said that American exceptionalism is like Greek exceptionalism or like British exceptionalism. And I disagree. This is nation that was founded on a radical principle: that our creator endowed with certain unalienable rights and among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that idea swept the world. Nation after nation adopted those principles to one degree or another. This is an exceptional nation with an exceptional mission and a strong America is part of our exceptionalism and I want to do a better job at communicating that." 10:33:47: "Yes sir." Man asks question. ***10:33:49: "How do you sell the tough cuts that the budget process needs and what kind of cuts?"*** ***10:33:53: "There are a number of things we could do right away that get us on the trajectory of balancing our budget and let me tell you what they are. One is to take our discretionary spending back to the 2008 levels, that's the paul ryan plan. Number 2 is to stop obamacare, it's an extra trillion dollars of spending that we can't afford and turn back to the states the responsibility for their own uninsured and their own poor. Number 3 - take Medicaid which is a huge federal spending program and grows at very high rates and send that back to the States. Say you care for your poor in the way you think is best, we're going to give you the money you got last year plus one or two percent and you live within that figure, so we slow down the massive growth of Medicaid. Number 4 - we cut federal employment by about 10%, maybe more, and do that through attrition because we've got a lot of people who are baby boomers who are retiring now, and finally Number 5 - we set federal compensation to equal what exists in the private sector. I saw yesterday.I would say don't quote me but with all these cameras here I guess that's not possible is it? (LAUGHTER) I did see a report saying that the average compensation of a federal employee is a $125,000.**** That strikes me as being higher than what exists in the private sector, I know there are differences in job titles and so on, but looking job to job - responsibility to responsibility I think we should link federal employee compensation with that which exists in the private sector. I think if you do those 5 things and you balance the budget.***Now we also have to be honest to young people coming along, and again we're talking about college kids, people in their 20's, 30's, 40's, and early 50's, about what the promises we make in regards to Social Security and Medicare. I want those programs to stay in place, I want them to be there as a safety net for the American people, but I also want to make sure that we're not overpromising and laying upon them a massive burden that they can't possibly carry out at the same time living in a country that has opportunity. So I propose ways to make Social Security and Medicare sustainable.***So you do all those things, and thank heavens, you're able to cut the spending of the federal government, you would cap it in my view, at 20% of the economy or less and you'll have a balanced budget amendment. And those are the big steps I would take, and by the way, I did that. Not quite at the federal level, I did it at the state level and the numbers were smaller, our budget gap was 3 billion not a trillion and a half, but we made the tough decisions, we consolidated agencies, we put agencies that used to have different offices, we put them together. We got rid of press secretaries and lawyers, because we said hey if we put you guys together you can use the same press secretary and the same level. Some programs in my budget, I actually eliminated, legislature put some of those back in but we found a way to balance the budget. And that is what I will bring to Washington, because the idea of consistently borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars actually, a trillion and a half dollars, borrowing that, knowing that we can't pay it back, and asking the next generation to be stuck with the interest and the principle payments. I don't understand how that can go on. I think it's immoral. I think its wrong. And as a result, we have to stop that. And I will make sure that happens." 10:37:51: "Thanks so much for spending some time with me. For those of you who go to college here, I hope you get credit for this and those who have come in for the community, thank you for spending some time, I appreciate the chance to be with you and to hear your questions. This is an important election, you know that. We're walking an economic tightrope right now. On one side we could slip into a double-dip recession, with all the borrowing that's been done, with all the printing of money that's been done by the Fed, it'd be a real tough time to go into double debt. And then on the other side of this tightrope is a long slide like Japan experienced and I don't want to see either one of those things happen. And I'm afraid if we stay in our current course, one or the other of those two very frightful scenarios will be realized. And I believe that it's essential for us to fundamentally restructure our economy to make sure that we can competitive with anyone in the world, opening up markets, getting regulation to work for us, getting our energy policies on track, getting America to compete globally. I will spend my energy getting America's economy strong so we can protect ourselves with a strong military and so we can promise the next generation that they can get the job, a good job with rising incomes, and that the future will be brighter than the past. That's why I'm running. I love this country. I hope I made that clear. I didn't say that as directly as I would have liked to. I love America. We're a unique nation, we're an exceptional nation. I love this country. I love the principles upon which it was founded. I believe in America. I believe in free enterprise. I believe in freedom. I believe in opportunity. I love America, I believe that we have a role to pass to the next generation in America that's strong and free and I'm not going to die without doing everything in my power to fulfill that responsibility. Just like my parents fulfilled their responsibility to give us a land that was free of those that would impose their tyranny upon us, and a nation that was the strongest economy in the world. I don't want to go down in history as being part of the worst generation, or a mediocre generation. We won't catc h up to the greatest generation but we can be a great generation, I want to be one of those. And I want the young people in the room to say thank heavens for my mom and dad, or for people like my mom and dad, who went to work to cut back on the excesses of government and to get America working again, to get Washington working again. And to provide for the future. This is a great country with a great role and a great responsibility. And the defense of liberty is not going to be long entrusted to any nation that is weak and timid, it is our responsibility to give to the next generation in America a future that is as bright and prosperous as the one that we inherited. And I appreciate your willingness to be here and I look forward to working with you as your president and hope for your vote. Thanks guys! Great to be with you!" 10:41:02 End of Speech, crowd begins to disperse.
CAMPAIGN 2012 DNC CONVENTION 090412 9PM HEAD ON
CAMPAIGN 2012 / INT BROLL DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION / HEAD ON ISO CAM / 9 MINUTE GAP DURING DEVAL PATRICK AS LINE WAS CUT AT SOURCE STACEY LIHN 20:55:01 Governor Romney says people like me were the most excited about President Obama the day we voted for him. But that's not true. Not even close. 20:55:12 For me, there was the day the Affordable Care Act passed and I no longer had to worry about Zoe getting the care she needed. 20:55:22 There was the day the letter arrived from the insurance company, saying that our daughter's lifetime cap had been lifted. 20:55:31 There was the day the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. 20:55:39 Like so many moms with sick children, I shed tears and I could breathe easier knowing we have that net below us to catch us if we fall, or if, God forbid, Zoe needs a heart transplant-Obamacare provides my family security and relief. 20:56:04 But we're also scared. Governor Romney repealing health care reform is something we worry about literally every day. Zoe's third open-heart surgery will happen either next year or the year after. 20:56:23 If Mitt Romney becomes president and Obamacare is repealed, there's a good chance she'll hit her lifetime cap. There's no way we could afford to pay for all the care she needs to survive. When you have a sick child, it's always in the back of your mind and sometimes in the front of your mind. 20:56:46 On top of that, to worry that people would let an insurance company take away her health care, just because of politics? 20:56:56 One in 100 children is born with a congenital heart defect. President Obama is fighting for them. He's fighting or families like mine. 20:57:14 And we need To fight for him. TED STRICKLAND, Former Gov of Ohio 20:58:18 Hello, I'm Ted Strickland, and I come from Duck Run, Ohio. Let me tell you, folks in Ohio know what happens when you have a president who stands up for average working people. 20:58:33 Ina Sidney is a grandmother who lost her ability to provide for her family when they closed down the auto plant in Perrysburg, Ohio. Ina says thanks to Barack Obama for having the courage to back an industry that others had given up on. She's an autoworker and a breadwinner once again. 20:58:57 As he celebrated the birth of his newborn baby boy, Brian Slagle lost his job just at the moment he needed it most. But today he's back making auto batteries in a factory in Springfield Township, Ohio. And he said there is only one reason he has a steady paycheck again: Barack Obama refused to let the American auto industry die. 20:59:30 James Fayson felt like there was no tomorrow when he was laid off. "I believe in working every day," he said, "and that was taken from me." Today, James is working sixty hours a week on the Jeep Liberty line in Toledo, Ohio. He is thrilled to say that his life right now is "eat, sleep and Jeep." He's back, he said, because Barack Obama gave us a chance for a comeback. 21:00:12 The auto industry supports one of every eight jobs in Ohio, and it's alive and growing in America again. Late last year, Chrysler announced they were hiring eleven hundred new autoworkers in Toledo. Just last month, GM announced a plan to invest 200 million dollars in Lordstown, keeping five thousand jobs in Ohio and building the next generation of the Chevy Cruze-a car we are proud to say is made entirely in Ohio. 21:01:00 And just today the big three auto makers announced that their sales have been up double digits since late last year. It's been a long slog back, and we've still got a long way to go. But all over Ohio-all over America-men and women are going back to work with the pride of building something stamped "Made in America." Before Barack Obama took office, it looked like that pride could have vanished forever, but today, from the staggering depths of the Great Recession, the nation has had 29 straight months of job growth. Workers across my state and across the country are getting back the dignity of a good job and a good salary. 21:02:06 You know, Vince Lombardi was right when he said, "It's not whether you get knocked down, it's whether you get back up." And my friends Ina Sydney, Brian Slagle and James Fayson were all knocked down. But Ina, Brian and James are all standing today. The auto industry is standing today. The middle class is standing today. Ohio is standing today. America is standing strong today. 21:02:47 That's what happens when you have a president who stands up for average working people. President Barack Obama stood up for us, and now by God we will stand up for him. Quite frankly, Barack Obama knows what it's like to pay a mortgage and student loans. He knows what it's like to watch a beloved family member in a medical crisis and worry that treatment is out of reach. Barack Obama knows our struggles. And, my friends, he shares our values. 21:03:36 Now, Mitt Romney, he lives by a different code. To him, American workers are just numbers on a spreadsheet. To him, all profits are created equal, whether made on our shores or off. That's why companies Romney invested in were dubbed "outsourcing pioneers." Our nation was built by pioneers-pioneers who accepted untold risks in pursuit of freedom, not by pioneers seeking offshore profits at the expense of American workers here at home. 21:04:23 Mitt Romney proudly wrote an op-ed entitled, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." If he had had his way, devastation would have cascaded from Michigan to Ohio and across the nation. Mitt Romney never saw the point of building something when he could profit by tearing it down. If Mitt was Santa Claus, he'd fire the reindeer and outsource the elves. 21:05:06 Mitt Romney has so little economic patriotism that even his money needs a passport. It summers on the beaches of the Cayman Islands and winters on the slopes of the Swiss Alps. In Matthew, chapter 6, verse 21, the scriptures teach us that where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. My friends, any man who aspires to be our president should keep both his treasure and his heart in the United States of America. And it's well past time for Mitt Romney to come clean with the American people. 21:06:17 On what he's saying about the president's policy for welfare to work, he's lying. Simple as that. On his tax returns, he's hiding. You have to wonder, just what is so embarrassing that he's gone to such great lengths to bury the truth? Whatever he's doing to avoid taxes, can it possibly be worse than the Romney-Ryan tax plan that would have sliced Mitt's total tax rate to less than one percent? 21:07:07 And so, my friends, there is a true choice in this election. Barack Obama is betting on the American worker. Mitt Romney is betting on a Bermuda shell corporation. Barack Obama saved the American auto industry. Mitt Romney saved on his taxes. Barack Obama is an economic patriot. Mitt Romney is an outsourcing pioneer. My friends, the stakes are too high, the differences too stark to sit this one out. Let us stand as one on November 6th and move this country forward by re-electing President Barack Obama. Thank you! KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, HHS Secretary 21;08;30 *Kathleen Sebelius takes the stage* 21;08;40 From 1965 to 1967, my dad, Jack Gilligan, served in Congress and helped pass landmark laws like the Voting Rights Act. Dad later became a great governor of Ohio, but one of his proudest accomplishments was when, as a congressman, he helped draft and pass Medicare. Today, at 91, my father is a happy beneficiary of that effort to bring quality health care to every senior citizen. And President Obama is building upon that legacy by bringing quality and secure health care to every American. 21;09;21 I was governor of Kansas when Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts. Many of us watched in amazement-envy, even-as he passed a universal health care law in his state. Well, Republicans may see Romneycare as a scarlet letter. But for us Democrats, Obamacare is a badge of honor. Because no matter who you are, what stage of life you're in, this law is a good thing. First, if you already have insurance you like, you can keep it. Insurance companies can no longer refuse to cover Americans with pre-existing conditions. That's what change looks like. 21;10;08 More than five million seniors have already saved money on their prescription drugs, and almost 33 million have benefited from free preventive services. The president cracked down hard on Medicare and health care fraud, recovering a record-breaking $10.7 billion over the last three years, protecting our seniors. That's what change looks like. The law gives tax credits to 360,000 small businesses so they can give their employees coverage and an array of affordable, private insurance plans to choose from. That's what change looks like. 21;10;49 If you're self-employed, between jobs, or can't get insurance through work, you'll have access to affordable health insurance as good as Congressman Paul Ryan's. That's what change looks like. If you're under 26, you can stay on your parents' plan. You can go back to school or get extra training without fear of a health catastrophe bankrupting your family. Over three million previously uninsured young adults are now on their parents' plans. That's what change looks like. 21;11;27 And under Obamacare, insurance companies can no longer discriminate against women. Before, some wouldn't cover women's most basic needs, like contraception and maternity care, but would still charge us up to 50 percent more than men-for a worse plan. They said women who had C-sections or survived breast cancer or even domestic violence had "pre-existing conditions" and would deny them coverage. But this president made it illegal to discriminate against women and ended the practice of insurance companies charging women higher premiums than men for the same coverage. This president ensured women's free access to preventive services like breast cancer screenings. Being a mother is no longer a liability, and being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition! That's what change looks like. 21;12;36 Today, nearly 13 million Americans are experiencing something remarkable: Instead of sending checks to their insurance companies, insurance companies are sending checks to them-over a billion dollars this year alone. Because if insurers don't spend at least 80 percent of your premium dollars on your health care, you get a refund. That's what change looks like. 21;13;05 I've spent my career fighting the worst practices of insurance companies. I know how tough it is to stand up to powerful forces that prey on consumers. Governor Romney and Paul Ryan know how tough it is, too. That's why they won't do it! They'll let insurance companies continue to cherry-pick who gets coverage and who gets left out, priced out or locked out of the market. President Obama is making sure that everyone-from cancer survivors to children with asthma-can get the care they need. 21;13;38 What's missing from the Romney-Ryan plan for Medicare is Medicare. Instead of the Medicare guarantee, Republicans would give seniors a voucher that limits what is covered, costing seniors as much as $6,400 more a year. President Obama extended the program's life by eight years while improving seniors' benefits, and strengthened the Medicare guarantee. (The president agrees with you: no vouchers!) 21;14;15 Romney and Ryan will take away women's basic health services and turn a blind eye to insurance discrimination. President Obama stands up for women, giving us control over our own health care. Romney and Ryan would put insurance companies back in control. 21;14;33 Barack Obama was raised by Kansas women, and I know Kansas women. They taught him the values of hard work, responsibility and fairness. That's why President Obama believes that if you work hard and play by the rules, you deserve the security of health care. Governor Romney, Congressman Ryan and their Republican colleagues say it's everyone for themselves. And that, fundamentally, is the choice in this election. Between Republicans who only fight for the favored few or a president who fights for the middle class. Between a nation whose politics play on the worst of our fears and a nation whose laws reflect the best of our values. 21;15;20 Forty-seven years ago, my dad proudly watched President Johnson sign Medicare into law. That day, President Johnson said few people "have the courage to stake reputation and position and the effort of a lifetime upon such a cause when there are so few that share it."President Obama is one of those people. A leader with uncommon compassion and uncommon courage. He has earned more than our gratitude. He has earned four more years! RAHM EMANUEL , Mayor of Chicago 211647 From President Obama's hometown of Chicago, CHEERS it is my honor to speak to you about the president I served. 211740 I want to tell you what I saw up close in the White House while serving our president in a time of crisis, about the values he leans on and the voices he listens to. 212745 When President Obama entered the White House, the economy was in a free-fall. The auto industry: on its back. The banks: frozen up. More than three million Americans had already lost their jobs. And America's bravest, our men and women in uniform, were fighting what would soon be the longest wars in our history. You remember the uncertainty and fear that seized the country. 212815 On that first day, I said, "Mr. President, which crisis do you want to tackle first?" He looked at me, with that look he usually reserved for his chief of staff, "Rahm, we were sent here to tackle all of them, not choose between them." CHEERS 212935 There was no blueprint or how-to manual for fixing a global financial meltdown, an auto crisis, two wars and a great recession, all at the same time. Believe me, if it existed, I would have found it. Each crisis was so deep and so dangerous; any one of them would have defined another presidency. We faced a once-in-a-generation moment in American history. 212909 Fortunately for all of us, we have a once-in-a-generation president. APPLAUSE 212919 And in those uncharted waters, I saw where the president finds his North Star. Every night, President Obama reads ten letters from everyday Americans. 212933 When I met with the president at the end of each day, he made sure he had their letters to read at his residence-letters from people just hoping for someone in power to understand their struggles 212953 I cannot tell you how many times-whether we were discussing the economy, health care, or energy prices- the president would walk to his desk, take out one of their letters, read it to all of us, and say, "This is who we are fighting for"-parents working hard to save for their child's education; middle-class Americans fighting tooth-and-nail to hold onto their jobs, their homes and life savings. APPLAUSE 213014 It is their voices that President Obama brings to the Oval Office. It is their values I saw him fight for every day. And in the first month in office, he fought for the American Recovery Act-to cut taxes for the middle class, to put people to work building America's roads, rails and runways. 213035 And today, our economy has gone from losing 800,000 jobs a month to adding 4.5 million private-sector jobs in the last 29 months. CHEERS 213048 Banks are slowly but surely lending again, and never again will taxpayers foot the bill for Wall Street's excesses. In case we forgot, that was the change we believed in. That was the change we fought for. That was the change President Obama delivered. 213115 President Obama took office knowing full well that for the last century, presidents had tried to reform our health care system. Today, because of President Obama's courage, kids can stay on their parent's plan until they are 26. Insurers cannot kick you off your policy because you have hit your preexisting limit. They will not be able to deny you because you have a pre-existing condition. Because of the president's leadership, every American will have access to affordable, quality health care. That was the change we believed in. That was the change we fought for. That was the change President Obama delivered. 213156 I saw the president make the tough calls in the Situation Room-and today, our troops in Iraq have finally come home so America can do some nation building here at home. That was the change that we believed in. That was the change we fought for. That was the change President Obama delivered. 2131`4 I remember when the president received a report that the auto industry had a few weeks before collapse. We met in the Roosevelt Room late into the night. Some of the president's advisors said that in order to save General Motors, you had to let Chrysler go under. Others said it was throwing good money after bad. Among all the experts, there were only guesses, and nobody put it at better than a one-in-four shot. Only the president suggested going all-in to save the industry and the jobs 213259 Rising above all the voices in Washington, President Obama listened to the voices that mattered to him most-the voices of the auto workers and the communities that depended on them, just like the voices of the steelworkers and communities on the south side of Chicago where he worked earlier in his career. To President Obama, they were not just companies that needed a loan, they were communities that needed a leader to stand up for them. And because President Obama made the right choice, over one million Americans are still working today. The American auto industry is not just surviving. It is thriving. Where Mitt Romney was willing to turn his back on Akron, Dayton and Toledo, Ohio, the president said, "I've got your back." 213210 That was the change we believed in. That was the change we fought for. That was the change President Obama delivered. 213215 And in those first few months, the president worked to put accountability into our children's schools with Race to the Top, so that every child has an education that measures up to their full potential. He was willing to demand change and embrace reform. The president never changed his views to suit the moment or the audience-and that is also a measure of leadership. APPLAUSE 213243 Every challenge was different, every choice was difficult, but every time, the leadership was steady. 213254 Now, one thing I know with absolute certainty, having served two great presidents, is that in the next four years, an unforeseen crisis, challenge or conflict is gonna seize the country. Whose leadership, whose judgment, whose values do you want in the White House when that crisis lands like a thud on the Oval Office desk? 212417 A person who said in four words, "Let Detroit go bankrupt," or a president who had another four words, "Not on my watch"? APPLAUSE 212434 A person who believes in giving tax cuts to the most fortunate, or a president who believes in making college affordable for all Americans? CHEERS 212445 A person who wanted to keep "don't ask, don't tell," or a president who believes that who you love should not keep you from serving the country you love? applause 212503 And believe me, when the fog of uncertainty that surrounds a crisis storms in to the White House, and all the advisors and chiefs of staff have only guesses and hedges to offer, it will be the president's leadership that determines how we as a nation meet the challenges that face the middle class. It is the president's values that shape a future in which the middle class has hope. 212524 The person who takes the oath of office in the next four months will shape not just the next four years, but the next forty years of our nation. In these next four years, we need proven leadership, proven judgment and proven values. America needs four more years of President Barack Obama. Thank you. KAL PENN, Actor and Activist 212620 I am honored To accept your nomination For president Of the United states! Wait, This is not my speech. Prompter guy, Can we pull up My speech? This is awkward. So,While we're waiting: A special message For those of you At home who have recently turned 18.Good news. 212645 I can now legally... Register you to vote. 212654 I've worked on a lot Of fun movies - But my favorite job was having A boss who gave The order to take out bin laden - And who's cool with All of us getting gay-married. 212705 So, Thank you, Invisible man In the chair for that, WILD CHEERING 212722 And , And for giving My friends access To affordable Health insurance And doubling funding for the pell grant. 212730 I started volunteering for Barack Obama In 2007. But nothing Compares to what I saw behind The scenes at the white house - When I had The honor to serve For two years as president obama's liaison to Young americans. 212745 I saw how hard He fights for us. One of the Most special days Was a saturday In 2010. 212753 The senate repealed "don't ask, Don't tell" - So anyone can serve the country they love, Regardless of whom they love. 212800 But that same day, The dream act Was blocked. That bill would give immigrant Children - Who've never Pledged allegiance To any flag But ours - The chance to earn their citizenship. Simple. Important. 212814 I was in a small office on the second floor Of the west wing With eight Other staffers. 213752 We'd worked Our hearts out And cared deeply about what this Would mean for Other young people. 212822 There wasn't a Dry eye in the room. Tears of joy For the history That was made. But also tears Of sadness, Because some american dreams would still be deferred. 212830 and about Five minutes later, President obama walked in, Sleeves rolled up. He said to us, "this is not over. We're gonna keep fighting. I'm gonna keep fighting. I need young people To keep fighting." That's why we're here! CHEERS AND APPLAUSE 212846 A few months later president obama fought to keep taxes from going up on middle class families. Our republican friends said, "sure you can do that" - But - One of the things They were willing To trade is a Little item called The college tax credit, Which today is saving students up to ten thousand dollars over four years of school. 212912 Now, president obama paid off his own student loans not too long ago. He remembers What it is like. He said making it easier to go to college and get technical training is exactly how we grow our economy, create jobs and out-compete The world. So, he stood firm. 212931 And that tuition tax credit is still here. 212838 but here's the thing.. if we don't register, If we don't vote - It won't be. I volunteered in Iowa in 2007 Because like you, I had friends Serving in iraq. Friends who were looking for jobs. Others who couldn't go to the doctor because They couldn't Afford it. I felt that Had to change. 212957 So I knocked On doors. I registered voters. 213004 And I'm volunteering again now because My friend matt Got a job at a Detroit car company That still exists, And lauren can get The prescription she needs. I'm volunteering because josiah Is back from iraq, Chris is finishing college on the G.I. bill, And three weeks ago my buddy Kevin's boyfriend Was able to watch Him graduate from Marine corps training. That's change! WILD APPLAUSE And we can't Turn back now. 213033 So before I close - And as I Wonder which Twitter hashtags You'll start using when I'm done talking - Hashtag sexy face - I ask all you young people to join me. You don't even Have to put Pants on. Go to Commit. Barackobama.com And register right there. And the oldies Out there, You guys can do it, Too. Let's keep fighting For a president Who's never stopped fighting for us! 213059 Go online. Find your local campaign office. Call your friends. Call some strangers. Volunteer. That's how We're going to Win this thing. 213112 I really enjoyed listening to Rahm's speech. But he's a Mayor now, So he can't use four-letter words. But I'm no mayor. So I've got one For you: Vote. CRAIG ROBINSON AND MAYA SOETORO-NG 21;31;52 Maya: Greetings and aloha from the great state of Hawaii! I'm Maya Soetoro-ng, an educator, mother of two and proud to be Barack Obama's little sister. 21;32;12 Craig: I'm Craig Robinson, Michelle Obama's big brother, father of four and head coach of Oregon State University's men's basketball team. Any seven-footers out there, gimme a call! 21;32;29 Maya: Craig and I come from different states, we've had different upbringings and, as you can see, we have different perspectives on things. 21;32;39 Craig: But no matter how different we may seem, we share a set of values our parents gave us-values the same in Chicago as they are in Honolulu: a willingness to work hard, a commitment to education and the responsibility to look out for each other. They're the values at the core of how Barack and Michelle have lived their lives, raised our nieces and led this country as president and first lady of the United States. 21;33;13 Maya: Four years ago at this convention, I spoke with you all about how Barack and I didn't grow up with much in the way of wealth. But we were blessed with a mother who taught us that education is the surest path from limited means to limitless opportunity. She inspired me to become a teacher. And she inspired Barack's deep commitment to giving all our young people the opportunities our education gave us. 21;33;41 He's made sure more of our youngest children have the stable foundation that Head Start provides. He's saved the jobs of teachers in our schools. And he's helped more of our students afford a higher education. Our mother also taught us that everyone has worth, regardless of who they are or what they believe. That's what inspired Barack's vision for a more inclusive and compassionate America, where everyone has a part to play in our shared story. 21;34;18 He's worked to guarantee women equal pay for equal work and the freedom to make our own decisions about our health. He named two brilliant women who understand our lives to the Supreme Court. And he's fought to make sure gay Americans can openly serve the country they love. Making sure everyone in America has a chance to make it like he did-that's what my big brother is all about. And that's what he'll do for four more years! 21;35;03 Craig: Four years ago, I told you how, when she was a young girl, Michelle used to talk to me about which kids at school were having a tough time at home and didn't have anybody to stick up for them. And what inspired her most as she traveled this country on that campaign were the stories of brave Americans who juggle everything at home while their husbands or wives are off at war. 21;35;29 You see, America's military spouses and families make profound sacrifices, too. And Michelle promised that if she had the privilege to serve as first lady, she'd do everything she could to make sure America was there to honor, recognize and support their unique service. I've been so proud to watch her rally Americans to give millions of hours of their time in service to our military families. 21;36;00 She's working with schools that educate military children to add better courses. When Barack challenged businesses to hire 100,000 veterans and military spouses, Michelle and Jill Biden rallied CEOs to the cause. And last month, they stood with CEOs to announce that they've hired 125,000 veterans, surpassing the goal more than a year ahead of schedule. 21;36;35 She's still the kind little sister she always was-now she's just sticking up for those who stand up for us. And I'm proud of her work to give our children a healthier start in life. Let's face it, Maya, I'm going to need the recruits! 21;36;55 Maya: Barack and Michelle have always been there for us. Tonight, we're here for them. And with your help, we can fill the White House with their warmth, compassion and commitment to all our people for four more years! Thank you. LILLY LEDBETTER Good evening, I'm Lilly Ledbetter and I'm here tonight to say: What a difference four years make! 214000 Some of you may know my story: How for nineteen years, I worked as a manager for a tire plant in Alabama. And some of you may have lived a similar story: After nearly two decades of hard, proud work, I found out that I was making significantly less money than the men who were doing the same work as me. I went home, talked to my husband, and we decided to fight. 214029 We decided to fight for our family and to fight for your family too. We sought justice because equal pay for equal work is an American value. That fight took me ten years. 214048 It took me all the way to the Supreme Court. And, in a 5-4 decision, they stood on the side of those who shortchanged my pay, my overtime, and my retirement just because I am a woman. 214102 The Supreme Court told me that I should have filed a complaint within six months of the company's first decision to pay me less even though I didn't know about it for nearly two decades. 214117 And if we hadn't elected President Barack Obama, the Supreme Court's wrongheaded interpretation would have been the law of the land. 214129 nd that would have been the end of the story. But with President Obama on our side, even though I lost before the Supreme Court, we won. cheers 214150 The first bill that President Obama signed into law was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. I think it says something about his priorities that the first bill he put his name on has my name on it too. 214202 As he said that day with me by his side, "Making our economy work means making sure it works for everyone." The president signed the bill for his grandmother, whose dreams hit the glass ceiling, And for his daughters, so that theirs never will. Because of his leadership, women who faced pay discrimination like I did will now get their day in court. 214250 That was the first step but it can't be the last. Because women still earn just 77 cents for every dollar men make. Those pennies add up to real money. It's real money for the little things like being able to take your kids to the movies and for the big things like sending them to college. It's paying your rent this month and paying the mortgage in the future. It's having savings for the bill you didn't expect and savings for the dignified retirement you've earned. 214316 Maybe 23 cents doesn't sound like a lot to someone with a Swiss bank account, CHEERS 214333 Cayman Island Investments and an IRA worth tens of millions of dollars. 214344 But Governor Romney, when we lose 23 cents every hour, every day, every paycheck, every job, over our entire lives, what we lose can't just be measured in dollars. 214404 Three years ago, the house passed the paycheck Fairness Act to level the playing field for America's women. Senate Republicans blocked it. Mitt Romney won't even say if he supports it. President Obama does. In the end, I didn't get a dime of the money I was shortchanged. 214423 But this fight became bigger than Lilly Ledbetter. Today, it's about my daughter. It's about my granddaughter. It's about women and men. CHEERS It's about families. It's about equality and justice. WILD CHEERING 214453 This cause, which bears my name, is bigger than me. It's as big as all of you. which began as my own, is now our fight-a fight for the fundamental American values that make our country great. And with President Barack Obama, we're going to win. Thank you very much. God bless America. DEVAL PATRICK, Gov of Massachusetts 21:45:43 Good evening, Democrats! Are you fired up? Are you ready to go? I hope so. 21:45:54 This is the election of a lifetime; because more than any one candidate or policy, what's at stake is the American dream. That dream-the ability to imagine a better way for ourselves and our families and then reach for it-is central to who we are and what we stand for as a nation. Whether that dream endures for another generation depends on you and me. It also depends on who leads us. 21:46:27 In Massachusetts, we know Mitt Romney. By the time he left office, Massachusetts was 47th in the nation in job creation-during better economic times-and household income in our state was declining. He cut education deeper than anywhere else in America. Roads and bridges were crumbling. Business taxes were up, and business confidence was down. Our clean energy potential was stalled. And we had a structural budget deficit. Mitt Romney talks a lot about all the things he's fixed. I can tell you that Massachusetts wasn't one of them. He's a fine fellow and a great salesman, but as governor he was a lot more interested in having the job than doing the job. 21:47:33 When I came to office, we set out on a different course: investing in ourselves and our future. And today Massachusetts leads the nation in economic competitiveness, student achievement, health care coverage, life sciences and biotech, energy efficiency and veterans' services. Today, with the help of the Obama administration, we are rebuilding our roads and bridges and expanding broadband access. Today we're out of the deficit hole Mr. Romney left, and we've achieved the highest bond rating in our history. Today-with labor at the table-we've made the reforms in our pension and benefits systems, our schools, our transportation system and more that Mr. Romney only talked about. And today in Massachusetts, you can also marry whomever you love. We have much more still to do. But we are on a better track because we placed our faith not in trickle-down fantasies and divisive rhetoric but in our values and common sense. 21:48:53 The same choice faces the nation today. All that today's Republicans are saying is that if we just shrink government, cut taxes, crush unions and wait, all will be well. Never mind that those are the very policies that got us into recession to begin with! Never mind that not one of the governors who preached that gospel in Tampa last week has the results to show for it. But we Democrats owe America more than a strong argument for what we are against. We need to be just as strong about what we are for. 21:49:39 The question is: What do we believe? We believe in an economy that grows opportunity out to the middle class and the marginalized, not just up to the well connected. We believe that freedom means keeping government out of our most private affairs, including out of a woman's decision whether to keep an unwanted pregnancy and everybody's decision about whom to marry. We believe that we owe the next generation a better country than we found and that every American has a stake in that. We believe that in times like these we should turn to each other, not on each other. We believe that government has a role to play, not in solving every problem in everybody's life but in helping people help themselves to the American dream. That's what Democrats believe. That's what Americans believe. 21:50:49If we want to win elections in November and keep our country moving forward, if we want to earn the privilege to lead, it's time for Democrats to stiffen our backbone and stand up for what we believe. Quit waiting for pundits or polls or super PACs to tell us who the next president or senator or congressman is going to be. We're Americans, we shape our own future. Let's start by standing up for President Barack Obama. 21:51:46 This is the president who delivered the security of affordable health care to every single American after 90 years of trying. This is the president who brought Osama bin Laden to justice, who ended the war in Iraq and is ending the war in Afghanistan. This is the president who ended "don't ask, don't tell" so that love of country, not love of another, determines fitness for military service. Who made equal pay for equal work the law of the land. This is the president who saved the American auto industry from extinction, the American financial industry from self-destruction, and the American economy from depression. Who added over 4.5 million private sector jobs in the last two-plus years, more jobs than George W. Bush added in eight. 21:52:56 The list of accomplishments is long, impressive and barely told-even more so when you consider that congressional Republicans have made obstruction itself the centerpiece of their governing strategy. With a record like that and a vision that hopeful and powerful, I will not stand by and let him be bullied out of office-and neither should you, and neither should you and neither should you. 21:53:35 I want you to be real. What's at stake is real. The Orchard Gardens Elementary School in Boston was in trouble. Its record was poor, its spirit was broken, and its reputation was a wreck. No matter how bad things were in other urban schools in the city, people would say, "At least we're not Orchard Gardens." Today, thanks to a host of new tools, many enacted with the help of the Obama administration, Orchard Gardens is turning itself around. Teaching standards and accountabilities are higher. The school day is longer and filled with experiential learning, art, exercise and music. 21:54:23 The head of pediatric psychology from a local hospital comes to consult with faculty and parents on the toughest personal situations in students' home lives. Attendance is up, thanks to a mentoring initiative. In less than a year, Orchard Gardens went from one of the worst schools in the district to one of the best in the state. The whole school community is engaged and proud. 21:54:48 So am I. At the end of my visit a year and a half ago, the first grade-led by a veteran teacher-gathered to recite Dr. King's "I have a dream" speech. When I started to applaud, the teacher said, "not yet, governor." Then she began to ask those six- and seven-year-olds questions: "What does 'creed' mean?" "What does 'nullification' mean?" "Where is Stone Mountain?" And as the hands shot up, I realized that she had taught the children not just to memorize that speech but to understand it. 21:55:28 Today's Republicans and their nominee for president tell us that those first-graders are on their own-on their own to deal with their poverty; with ill-prepared young parents, maybe who speak English as a second language; with an underfunded school; with neighborhood crime and blight; with no access to nutritious food and no place for their mom to cash a paycheck; with a job market that needs skills they don't have; with no way to pay for college. 21:55:58 But those Orchard Gardens kids should not be left on their own. Those children are America's children, too, yours and mine. And among them are the future scientists, entrepreneurs, teachers, artists, engineers, laborers and civic leaders we desperately need. For this country to rise, they must rise-and they and their cause must have a champion in the White House. 21:56:30 That champion is Barack Obama. That cause is the American dream. Let's fight for that. Let's canvass and phone bank and get out the vote for that. Let's go tell everyone we meet that, when the American dream is on the line, you want Barack Obama in charge. 21:56:49 Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States. MARTIN O'MALLEY, Gov of Maryland 21:57:46 Greetings from Maryland, home to the number-one public schools in America for four years in a row! 21:58:12 Since the first days of the American Revolution, Maryland has been called the "Old Line State" because of this true story of a group of soldiers called the Maryland Line: immigrants and native born, black and white, volunteers all. It is August 27th, 1776-two months since our Declaration of Independence. Outnumbered and surrounded, Washington's army is about to be crushed forever at Brooklyn Heights. The British are closing in. 21:58:45 With America's future hanging in the balance, word is passed up and down the Maryland Line: "Fix bayonets, we're moving forward." And they do. Into the breach. They hold off the British just long enough for Washington's army to escape and fight another day. Today there is a plaque by the mass graves of those citizen soldiers. 21:59:13 It reads, "In honor of the Maryland 400, who on this battlefield saved the American army." In times of adversity-for the country we love-Maryland always chooses to move forward. Progress is a choice. Job creation is a choice. Whether we move forward or back: this too is a choice. That is what this election is all about! Democratic governors, with the support of our president, are leading their states forward-putting job creation first, balancing budgets, protecting priorities, making the tough decisions, right now, to create jobs and expand opportunity. Together with President Obama, we are moving America forward, not back. With 29 months in a row of private sector job growth, President Obama is moving America forward, not back! By making college more affordable for millions of middle-class families, President Obama is moving America forward, not back! By securing the guarantee of Medicare for our seniors, President Obama is moving America forward, not back! By putting forward a concrete plan to cut waste, ask those at the top to pay a little more, and reduce our deficit, President Obama is moving America forward, not back! And by adding American manufacturing jobs for the first time since the late 1990s, President Obama is moving America forward, not back! 22:00:30 Facts are facts: No president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the Great Depression inherited a worse economy, bigger job losses or deeper problems from his predecessor. But President Obama is moving America forward, not back. . 22:00:50 And yet; Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan now say they want to take America back. And so we ask: Back to what? Back to the failed policies that drove us into a deep recession? Back to the days of record job losses? Back to the days when insurance companies called being a woman a "pre-existing condition"? 22:01:21 No, thank you. I don't want to go back. Do you? Instead of a balanced, achievable plan to create jobs and reduce the deficit, Mitt Romney says he will cut taxes for millionaires and raise them for the middle class. 22:01:41 Instead of improving public safety and public education like President Obama, Mitt Romney says we need less police officers, firefighters and teachers. Instead of safeguarding our seniors, Romney and Ryan would end the guarantee of Medicare and replace it with a voucher in order to give bigger tax breaks to billionaires. Instead of investing in America, they hide their money in Swiss bank accounts and ship our jobs to China! 22:02:17 Swiss bank accounts never built an American bridge. Swiss bank accounts don't put cops on the beat or teachers in our classrooms. Swiss bank accounts never created American jobs! 22:02:34 Governor Romney, just because you bank against the United States of America doesn't mean the rest of us are willing to sell her out. We are Americans. We must act like Americans. We must move forward, not back. My parents, Tom and Barbara O'Malley, like so many of yours, were part of that great generation that won the Second World War. Dad flew 33 missions over Japan in a B-24 Liberator. He was able to go to college only because of the GI Bill. 22:03:19 Our parents taught us to love God, love our family and love our country. Their own grandparents were immigrants. Their first language may not have been English, but the hopes and dreams they had for their children were purely American. 22:03:37 You see, there is a powerful truth at the heart of the American dream: The stronger we make our country, the more she gives back to us, to our children and grandchildren. Our parents and grandparents understood this truth deeply. They believed-as we do-that to create jobs, a modern economy requires modern investments: educating, innovating and rebuilding for our children's future. Building an economy to last, from the middle class up, not from the billionaires down. 22:04:11 Yes, we live in changing times. The question is: What type of change will we make of it? As we search for common ground and the way forward together, let's ask one another-let's ask the leaders in the Republican party-without any anger, meanness or fear: How much less, do you really think, would be good for our country? How much less education would be good for our children? How many hungry American kids can we no longer afford to feed? Governor Romney: How many fewer college degrees would make us more competitive as a nation? 22:04:57 The future we seek is not a future of less opportunity; it is a future of more opportunity for all Americans. 22:05:12 See the faces of your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents. They did not cross an ocean, settle a continent, do hard, backbreaking work so their children and grandchildren could live in a country of less. They came here because the United States of America is the greatest job-generating, opportunity-expanding country ever created by a free people in the history of civilization! And she still is. 22:05:40 Let us not be the first generation of Americans to give our children a country of less! Let us return to the urgent work of creating more jobs, more security and more opportunity for our people. Together, let's move forward, not back-by re-electing Barack Obama president of the United States! God bless you all. JULIAN CASTRO, Mayor of San Antonio 22:08:45 My fellow Democrats, my fellow Americans, my fellow Texans: I stand before you tonight as a young American, a proud American, of a generation born as the Cold War receded, shaped by the tragedy of 9/11, connected by the digital revolution and determined to re-elect the man who will make the 21st century another American century-President Barack Obama. 22:09:26 The unlikely journey that brought me here tonight began many miles from this podium. My brother Joaquin and I grew up with my mother Rosie and my grandmother Victoria. My grandmother was an orphan. As a young girl, she had to leave her home in Mexico and move to San Antonio, where some relatives had agreed to take her in. She never made it past the fourth grade. She had to drop out and start working to help her family. My grandmother spent her whole life working as a maid, a cook and a babysitter, barely scraping by, but still working hard to give my mother, her only child, a chance in life, so that my mother could give my brother and me an even better one. 22:10:12 As my grandmother got older, she begged my mother to give her grandchildren. She prayed to God for just one grandbaby before she died. You can imagine her excitement when she found out her prayers would be answered-twice over. She was so excited that the day before Joaquin and I were born she entered a menudo cook-off, and she won $300! That's how she paid our hospital bill. 22:10:42 By the time my brother and I came along, this incredible woman had taught herself to read and write in both Spanish and English. I can still see her in the room that Joaquin and I shared with her, reading her Agatha Christie novels late into the night. And I can still remember her, every morning as Joaquin and I walked out the door to school, making the sign of the cross behind us, saying, "Que dios los bendiga." "May God bless you." 22:11:12 My grandmother didn't live to see us begin our lives in public service. But she probably would have thought it extraordinary that just two generations after she arrived in San Antonio, one grandson would be the mayor and the other would be on his way-the good people of San Antonio willing-to the United States Congress. 22:11:43 My family's story isn't special. What's special is the America that makes our story possible. Ours is a nation like no other, a place where great journeys can be made in a single generation. No matter who you are or where you come from, the path is always forward. 22:12:06 America didn't become the land of opportunity by accident. My grandmother's generation and generations before always saw beyond the horizons of their own lives and their own circumstances. They believed that opportunity created today would lead to prosperity tomorrow. That's the country they envisioned, and that's the country they helped build. The roads and bridges they built, the schools and universities they created, the rights they fought for and won-these opened the doors to a decent job, a secure retirement, the chance for your children to do better than you did. 22:12:47 And that's the middle class-the engine of our economic growth. With hard work, everybody ought to be able to get there. And with hard work, everybody ought to be able to stay there-and go beyond. The dream of raising a family in a place where hard work is rewarded is not unique to Americans. It's a human dream, one that calls across oceans and borders. The dream is universal, but America makes it possible. And our investment in opportunity makes it a reality. 22:13:34 Now, in Texas, we believe in the rugged individual. Texas may be the one place where people actually still have bootstraps, and we expect folks to pull themselves up by them. But we also recognize there are some things we can't do alone. We have to come together and invest in opportunity today for prosperity tomorrow. 22:14:13 And it starts with education. Twenty years ago, Joaquin and I left home for college and then for law school. In those classrooms, we met some of the brightest folks in the world. But at the end of our days there, I couldn't help but to think back to my classmates at Thomas Jefferson High School in San Antonio. They had the same talent, the same brains, the same dreams as the folks we sat with at Stanford and Harvard. I realized the difference wasn't one of intelligence or drive. The difference was opportunity. 22:14:55 In my city of San Antonio, we get that. So we're working to ensure that more four-year-olds have access to pre-K. We opened Cafe College, where students get help with everything from test prep to financial aid paperwork. We know that you can't be pro-business unless you're pro-education. We know that pre-K and student loans aren't charity. They're a smart investment in a workforce that can fill and create the jobs of tomorrow. We're investing in our young minds today to be competitive in the global economy tomorrow. 22:15:42 And it's paying off. Last year the Milken Institute ranked San Antonio as the nation's top performing local economy. And we're only getting started. Opportunity today, prosperity tomorrow. 22:16:04 Now, like many of you, I watched last week's Republican convention. They told a few stories of individual success. We all celebrate individual success. But the question is, how do we multiply that success? The answer is President Barack Obama. 22:16:36 Mitt Romney, quite simply, doesn't get it. A few months ago he visited a university in Ohio and gave the students there a little entrepreneurial advice. "Start a business," he said. But how? "Borrow money if you have to from your parents," he told them. Gee, why didn't I think of that? Some people are lucky enough to borrow money from their parents, but that shouldn't determine whether you can pursue your dreams. Not here, not in America, not in the 21st century. I don't think Governor Romney meant any harm. I think he's a good guy. He just has no idea how good he's had it. 22:17:34 We know that in our free market economy some will prosper more than others. What we don't accept is the idea that some folks won't even get a chance. And the thing is, Mitt Romney and the Republican Party are perfectly comfortable with that America. In fact, that's exactly what they're promising us. 22:17:57 The Romney-Ryan budget doesn't just cut public education, cut Medicare, cut transportation and cut job training. 22:18:04 t doesn't just pummel the middle class-it dismantles it. It dismantles what generations before have built to ensure that everybody can enter and stay in the middle class. When it comes to getting the middle class back to work, Mitt Romney says, "No." When it comes to respecting women's rights, Mitt Romney says, "No." When it comes to letting people love who they want to love and marry whomever they want to marry, Mitt Romney says, "No." When it comes to expanding access to good health care, Mitt Romney says, "No." 22:18:40 Actually, Mitt Romney said, "Yes," and now he says, "No." Governor Romney has undergone an extreme makeover, and it ain't pretty. So here's what we're going to say to Mitt Romney in November. We're going to say, "No." 22:19:20 Of all the fictions we heard last week in Tampa, the one I find most troubling is this: If we all just go our own way, our nation will be stronger for it; because if we sever the threads that connect us, the only people who will go far are those who are already ahead. We all understand that freedom isn't free. What Romney and Ryan don't understand is that neither is opportunity. We have to invest in it. 22:19:54 Republicans tell us that if the most prosperous among us do even better, that somehow the rest of us will too. Folks, we've heard that before. First they called it "trickle-down." Then "supply-side." Now it's "Romney-Ryan." Or is it "Ryan-Romney"? Either way, their theory has been tested. It failed. Our economy failed. The middle class paid the price. Your family paid the price. 22:20:26 Mitt Romney just doesn't get it. But Barack Obama gets it. He understands that when we invest in people we're investing in our shared prosperity. And when we neglect that responsibility, we risk our promise as a nation. Just a few years ago, families that had never asked for anything found themselves at risk of losing everything. And the dream my grandmother held, that work would be rewarded, that the middle class would be there, if not for her, then for her children-that dream was being crushed. 22:21:13 But then President Obama took office-and he took action. When Detroit was in trouble, President Obama saved the auto industry and saved a million jobs. Seven presidents before him-Democrats and Republicans-tried to expand health care to all Americans. President Obama got it done. He made a historic investment to lift our nation's public schools and expanded Pell grants so that more young people can afford college. And because he knows that we don't have an ounce of talent to waste, the president took action to lift the shadow of deportation from a generation of young, law-abiding immigrants called dreamers. 22:22:10 Barack Obama believes in you. Now it's time for Congress to enshrine in law their right to pursue their dreams in the only place they've ever called home: America. 22:22:25 Four years ago, America stood on the brink of a depression. Despite incredible odds and united Republican opposition, our president took action, and now we've seen 4.5 million new jobs. He knows better than anyone that there's more hard work to do, but we're making progress. And now we need to make a choice. 22:22:45 It's a choice between a country where the middle class pays more so that millionaires can pay less-or a country where everybody pays their fair share, so we can reduce the deficit and create the jobs of the future. It's a choice between a nation that slashes funding for our schools and guts Pell grants-or a nation that invests more in education. It's a choice between a politician who rewards companies that ship American jobs overseas-or a leader who brings jobs back home. 22:23:26 This is the choice before us. And to me, to my generation and for all the generations to come, our choice is clear. Our choice is a man who's always chosen us. A man who already is our president: Barack Obama. 22:24:08 In the end, the American dream is not a sprint, or even a marathon, but a relay. Our families don't always cross the finish line in the span of one generation. But each generation passes on to the next the fruits of their labor. My grandmother never owned a house. She cleaned other people's houses so she could afford to rent her own. But she saw her daughter become the first in her family to graduate from college. And my mother fought hard for civil rights so that instead of a mop, I could hold this microphone. 22:24:57 And while she may be proud of me tonight, I've got to tell you, Mom, I'm even more proud of you. Thank you, Mom. Today, my beautiful wife Erica and I are the proud parents of a three-year-old little girl, Carina Victoria, named after my grandmother. 22:25:45 A couple of Mondays ago was her first day of pre-K. As we dropped her off, we walked out of the classroom, and I found myself whispering to her, as was once whispered to me, "Que dios te bendiga." "May God bless you." She's still young, and her dreams are far off yet, but I hope she'll reach them. As a dad, I'm going to do my part, and I know she'll do hers. But our responsibility as a nation is to come together and do our part, as one community, one United States of America, to ensure opportunity for all of our children. 22:26:36 The days we live in are not easy ones, but we have seen days like this before, and America prevailed. With the wisdom of our founders and the values of our families, America prevailed. With each generation going further than the last, America prevailed. And with the opportunity we build today for a shared prosperity tomorrow, America will prevail. 22:26:59 It begins with re-electing Barack Obama. It begins with you. It begins now. Que dios los bendiga. May God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. Thank you. Thank you. ELAINE BRYE, Military Mom 22;35;40 *Elaine Brye takes the stage* 22;35;57 Wow! What's a mom like me doing in a place like this? I'm not even a political person. But what I am is a military mom. My husband and I are so proud of our five kids. One each in the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Marines. Our youngest is still in high school, and yes-we're hoping he'll join the Coast Guard. They are a mom's most precious treasures. 22;36;46 I don't know when I'm going to get them all together again because one of them is always deploying. But because of Dr. Biden and the first lady, our lives are a little bit easier. Along with President Obama, they have made helping military families a top priority. They've brought together the American people, including thousands of businesses, to become part of a nationwide support network. It is honor and respect in action and it warms this mother's heart. 22;37;32 Last December I wrote Michelle Obama a Christmas card, just a mom-to-mom note to say thank you for caring. The first lady not only read my letter-she invited my husband and I to the White House. It was an amazing experience. But what's even more amazing is knowing that our commander in chief and first lady are thinking about families like mine every single day. 22;38;03 So like I said, I'm not a political person. But I'm a mom, and if someone is there for my family and families like mine, then I'll be there for them. That's why I'm proud to introduce my fellow mom and our first lady, Michelle Obama MICHELLE OBAMA, First Lady 223851 Michelle comes out to "Signed , Sealed, Delivered, I'm yours.. 223921 WILD CHEERING FROM CROWD 213931 Thank you , thank you so much. Michelle waves to crowd 223951 CHANTS OF 4 more years.Michelle: with your help, with your help. 224009 Let me start.Thank you so much, Elaine.we are so grateful for your family's service and sacrifice.and we will always have your back. 224026 Over the past few years as First Lady, I have had the extraordinary privilege of traveling all across this country. And everywhere I've gone, in the people I've met, and the stories I've heard, I have seen the very best of the American spirit. I have seen it in the incredible kindness and warmth that people have shown me and my family, especially our girls. I've seen it in teachers in a near-bankrupt school district who vowed to keep teaching without pay. 224059 I've seen it in people who become heroes at a moment's notice, diving into harm's way to save others.flying across the country to put out a fire.driving for hours to bail out a flooded town. 224110And I've seen it in our men and women in uniform and our proud military families.CHEERS in wounded warriors who tell me they're not just going to walk again, they're going to run, and they're going to run marathons. 224141 in the young man blinded by a bomb in Afghanistan who said, simply, ".I'd give my eyes 100 times again to have the chance to do what I have done and what I can still do." 224115 Every day, the people I meet inspire me.every day, they make me proud.every day they remind me how blessed we are to live in the greatest nation on earth. 224200Serving as your First Lady is an honor and a privilege.but back when we first came together four years ago, I still had some concerns about this journey we'd begun. 224210 While I believed deeply in my husband's vision for this country.and I was certain he would make an extraordinary President.like any mother, I was worried about what it would mean for our girls if he got that chance. 224228 How would we keep them grounded under the glare of the national spotlight? 224233How would they feel being uprooted from their school, their friends, and the only home they'd ever known? 224239 See, Our life before moving to Washington was filled with simple joys.Saturdays at soccer games, Sundays at grandma's house.and a date night for Barack and me was either dinner or a movie, because as an exhausted mom, I couldn't stay awake for both. laughter 224307And the truth is, I loved the life we had built for our girls.I deeply loved the man I had built that life with.and I didn't want that to change if he became President. CHEERS 224317I loved Barack just the way he was. 224321 You see, even though back then Barack was a Senator and a presidential candidate.to me, he was still the guy who'd picked me up for our dates in a car that was so rusted out, I could actually see the pavement going by in a hole in the passenger side door.he was the guy whose proudest possession was a coffee table he'd found in a dumpster, laughter and whose only pair of decent shoes was half a size too small. 224357 But see when Barack started telling me about his family - that's when I knew I had found a kindred spirit, someone whose values and upbringing were so much like mine. 224410 You see, Barack and I were both raised by families who didn't have much in the way of money or material possessions but who had given us something far more valuable - their unconditional love, their unflinching sacrifice, and the chance to go places they had never imagined for themselves. APPLAUSE My father was a pump operator at the city water plant, and he was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis when my brother and I were young. 224437 And even as a kid, I knew there were plenty of days when he was in pain.I knew there were plenty of mornings when it was a struggle for him to simply get out of bed. 224449 But every morning, I watched my father wake up with a smile, grab his walker, prop himself up against the bathroom sink, and slowly shave and button his uniform. 224500 And when he returned home after a long day's work, my brother and I would stand at the top of the stairs of our little apartment, patiently waiting to greet him.watching as he reached down to lift one leg, and then the other, to slowly climb his way into our arms. 224523 But despite these challenges, my dad hardly ever missed a day of work.he and my mom were determined to give me and my brother the kind of education they could only dream of. 224534 And when my brother and I finally made it to college, nearly all of our tuition came from student loans and grants. 224507 But my dad still had to pay a tiny portion of that tuition himself. And every semester, he was determined to pay that bill right on time, even taking out loans when he fell short. 224556 He was so proud to be sending his kids to college.and he made sure we never missed a registration deadline because his check was late. 224607 You see, for my dad, that's what it meant to be a man. CHEERS Like so many of us, that was the measure of his success in life - being able to earn a decent living that allowed him to support his family. And as I got to know Barack, I realized that even though he'd grown up all the way across the country, he'd been brought up just like me. 224641 Barack was raised by a single mother who struggled to pay the bills, and by grandparents who stepped in when she needed help. 224647 Barack's grandmother started out as a secretary at a community bank.and she moved quickly up the ranks.but like so many women, she hit a glass ceiling. 224657 And for years, men no more qualified than she was - men she had actually trained - were promoted up the ladder ahead of her, earning more and more money while Barack's family continued to scrape by. But day after day, she kept on waking up at dawn to catch the bus.arriving at work before anyone else.giving her best without complaint or regret. 224723 And she would often tell Barack, "So long as you kids do well, Bar, that's all that really matters." 224730 Like so many American families, our families weren't asking for much. 224737 They didn't begrudge anyone else's success or care that others had much more than they did...in fact, they admired it. APPLAUSE 224750 They simply believed in that fundamental American promise that, even if you don't start out with much, if you work hard and do what you're supposed to do, then you should be able to build a decent life for yourself and an even better life for your kids and grandkids. APPLAUSE 224813 That's how they raised us.that's what we learned from their example. 224818 We learned about dignity and decency - that how hard you work matters more than how much you make.that helping others means more than just getting ahead yourself. 224830 We learned about honesty and integrity - that the truth matters.that you don't take shortcuts or play by your own set of rules.and success doesn't count unless you earn it fair and square. LOUD APPLAUSE 224856 We learned about gratitude and humility - that so many people had a hand in our success, from the teachers who inspired us to the janitors who kept our school clean.and we were taught to value everyone's contribution and treat everyone with respect. 224908 Those are the values Barack and I - and so many of you - are trying to pass on to our own children. 224914 That's who we are. 224923 And standing before you four years ago, I knew that I didn't want any of that to change if Barack became President. 224930 Well, today, after so many struggles and triumphs and moments that have tested my husband in ways I never could have imagined, I have seen firsthand that being president doesn't change who you are - , No, it reveals who you are. LOUD APPLAUSE AND CROWD STANDS 225000You see, I've gotten to see up close and personal what being president really looks like. 225006 And I've seen how the issues that come across a President's desk are always the hard ones - the problems where no amount of data or numbers will get you to the right answer.the judgment calls where the stakes are so high, and there is no margin for error. 225021And as President, you can get all kinds of advice from all kinds of people. 225025 But at the end of the day, when it comes time to make that decision, as President, all you have to guide you are your values, and your vision, and the life experiences that make you who you are. applause 225047 So when it comes to rebuilding our economy, Barack is thinking about folks like my dad and like his grandmother. 225055 He's thinking about the pride that comes from a hard day's work. 225059 That's why he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to help women get equal pay for equal work. cheers 225112 That's why he cut taxes for working families and small businesses and fought to get the auto industry back on its feet. cheers 225123 That's how he brought our economy from the brink of collapse to creating jobs again - jobs you can raise a family on, good jobs right here in the United States of America. 225135 When it comes to the health of our families, Barack refused to listen to all those folks who told him to leave health reform for another day, another president. 225146 He didn't care whether it was the easy thing to do politically - that's not how he was raised - he cared that it was the right thing to do. APPLAUSE 225206 He did it because he believes that here in America, our grandparents should be able to afford their medicine.our kids should be able to see a doctor when they're sick.and no one in this country should ever go broke because of an accident or illness. applause 225231 And he believes that women are more than capable of making our own choices about our bodies and our health care.that's what my husband stands for. Loud applause, Jill Biden stands up and applauds 225259 When it comes to giving our kids the education they deserve, Barack knows that like me and like so many of you, he never could've attended college without financial aid. 225312And believe it or not, when we were first married, our combined monthly student loan bills were actually higher than our mortgage. 225322 We were so young, so in love, and so in debt. That's why Barack has fought so hard to increase student aid and keep interest rates down, because he wants every young person to fulfill their promise and be able to attend college without a mountain of debt. APPLAUSE 225336 So in the end, for Barack, these issues aren't political - they're personal. 225340 Because Barack knows what it means when a family struggles. He knows what it means to want something more for your kids and grandkids. 225340 Barack knows the American Dream because he's lived it cheers.and he wants everyone in this country to have that same opportunity, no matter who we are, or where we're from, or what we look like, or who we love. 225416 And he believes that when you've worked hard, and done well, and walked through that doorway of opportunity.you do not slam it shut behind you.you reach back, and you give other folks the same chances that helped you succeed. WILD APPLAUSE AND STANDING OVATION AND CHEERING 225441 So when people ask me whether being in the White House has changed my husband, I can honestly say that when it comes to his character, and his convictions, and his heart, Barack Obama is still the same man I fell in love with all those years ago. 225507 He's the same man who started his career by turning down high paying jobs and instead working in struggling neighborhoods where a steel plant had shut down, fighting to rebuild those communities and get folks back to work.because for Barack, success isn't about how much money you make, it's about the difference you make in people's lives. WILD APPLAUSE AND CHEERS 225543 He's the same man, when our girls were first born, would anxiously check their cribs every few minutes to ensure they were still breathing, proudly showing them off to everyone we knew. 225602 That's the man who sits down with me and our girls for dinner nearly every night, patiently answering their questions about issues in the news, and strategizing about middle school friendships. laughter 225624 That's the man I see in those quiet moments late at night, hunched over his desk, poring over the letters people have sent him. 225630 The letter from the father struggling to pay his bills.from the woman dying of cancer whose insurance company won't cover her care.from the young person with so much promise but so few opportunities. Person in audience yells" I love you Michelle" 225642 I see the concern in his eyes...and I hear the determination in his voice as he tells me, "You won't believe what these folks are going through, Michelle.it's not right. We've got to keep working to fix this. We've got so much more to do." APPLAUSE CHANTS OF 4 MORE YEARS, 4 MORE YEARS! 225727 I see how those stories - our collection of struggles and hopes and dreams - I see how that's what drives Barack Obama every single day. And I didn't think it was possible, but today, I love my husband even more than I did four years ago.even more than I did 23 years ago, when we first met. I love that he's never forgotten how he started. I love that we can trust Barack to do what he says he's going to do, even when it's hard - especially when it's hard. I love that for Barack, there is no such thing as "us" and "them" - he doesn't care whether you're a Democrat, a Republican, or none of the above.he knows that we all love our country.and he's always ready to listen to good ideas.he's always looking for the very best in everyone he meets. And I love that even in the toughest moments, when we're all sweating it - when we're worried that the bill won't pass, and it seems like all is lost - Barack never lets himself get distracted by the chatter and the noise. 225853 Just like his grandmother, he just keeps getting up and moving forward.with patience and wisdom, and courage and grace. 225911 And he reminds me that we are playing a long game here.and that change is hard, and change is slow, and it never happens all at once. 225921 But eventually we get there, we always do. 225926 We get there because of folks like my Dad.folks like Barack's grandmother.men and women who said to themselves, "I may not have a chance to fulfill my dreams, but maybe my children will.maybe my grandchildren will." 226944 So many of us stand here tonight because of their sacrifice, and longing, and steadfast love.because time and again, they swallowed their fears and doubts and did what was hard. 225956 So today, when the challenges we face start to seem overwhelming - or even impossible - let us never forget that doing the impossible is the history of this nation.it's who we are as Americans.it's how this country was built. WILD APPLAUSE AND CHEERING 230028 And if our parents and grandparents could toil and struggle for us.if they could raise beams of steel to the sky, send a man to the moon, and connect the world with the touch of a button.then surely we can keep on sacrificing and building for our own kids and grandkids, right? 230058 And if so many brave men and women could wear our country's uniform and sacrifice their lives for our most fundamental rights.then surely we can do our part as citizens of this great democracy to exercise those rights.surely, we can get to the polls and make our voices heard on Election Day. APPLAUSE AND CHEERS 230126 If farmers and blacksmiths could win independence from an empire.if immigrants could leave behind everything they knew for a better life on our shores.if women could be dragged to jail for seeking the vote.if a generation could defeat a depression, and define greatness for all time.if a young preacher could lift us to the mountaintop with his righteous dream.cheers 230156 and if proud Americans can be who they are and boldly stand at the altar with who they love.then surely, surely we can give everyone in this country a fair chance at that great American Dream. CHEERS! AND APPLAUSE AND CHANTS OF YES WE CAN 230231 Because in the end, more than anything else, that is the story of this country - the story of unwavering hope grounded in unyielding struggle.
CAMPAIGN 2012 DNC CONVENTION 090412 9PM SWITCHED POOL
CAMPAIGN 2012 / INT BROLL DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION / SWITCHED POOL FEED STACEY LIHN 20:55:01 Governor Romney says people like me were the most excited about President Obama the day we voted for him. But that's not true. Not even close. 20:55:12 For me, there was the day the Affordable Care Act passed and I no longer had to worry about Zoe getting the care she needed. 20:55:22 There was the day the letter arrived from the insurance company, saying that our daughter's lifetime cap had been lifted. 20:55:31 There was the day the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. 20:55:39 Like so