Transcripts For CSPAN Washington Journal 20091211

later, we will talk about the future of iraq. . >> call in and tell us what you think about the management of the healthcare bill. you can email us at wj at c-span .org or tweet us. >> this is an editorial in the las vegas sun newspaper yesterday. once against, harry reid is demonstrating why harry reid is sowing so well. >> that is from the las vegas sun. this is from the reno scammer newspaper. -- arena scam inner -- examiner >> only a third of nevada's votersq-l well-known for callin president obama a loser and liar while giving a speech to school children. telling the review journal director he hopes they go out of business. a means to help pass obama care and the slave master references. these come as no surprise. we are sure to see many more twone now and the 2010 elections. the question is now how deep they will sink. why do you continue to tout the healthcare bill. are you a representative of nevada's people? those are two different opinions on senator reed. fur from nevada, we especially want to hear from you. mark in little river, south carolina on the republican line. go ahead with what you think. caller: he has the best congress money can buy. mary lander got her $3 million for holding out. senator ben nelson is holding out. all you have to do is hold out and be a democrat and you can get what you want from harry reid. he's not going to be there next year. anybody that would hope that this would be their senator is kind of off their rocker. host: believer in arizona. what do you think about the management? caller: peter. i think hery reed is doing 9 best he can with the option. reed has man who is definitely a republican. members of his own party. they went after him. who did they get? they got nay sayer in there. i like senator reed. i feel sorry for him. he's up against a stone wall. >> good to hear from you. you have a great holiday season. el pass owe texas. >> i know harry reid is an opportunityist. i have observed him in vegas many times where he was dealing with one of the biggest right wing conservatives they have i observed him many times at the imperial palace with this guy. host: now you are a dralt? caller: always. host: and you are not a fan of harry reid, is that right? what do you think about harry reid's management. >> this debate has come to a point i have seen in the senate. in some ways trying to embarass or den he great me.]ka >> it appears that they always shut the republicans out. i would like to see them bring in some real insurance risk experts who know about setting up the insurance and how they should be funded. i think one of the big questions i've heard discussed over again in more than 50 years experience is that the insurance companies must accept all and thot take into account risk factors such as gender and previous risk. regard leffs what the final rates turn out to be. they need to turn out a system that will analyze all of this system set up if you can't measure that, it cannot be managed. a risk expert will tell you you need to track all of that and impact that which you have on the cost. there's some talk about them putting up the dollars establish the high risk pool in the insurance industry. people were very young, et cetera. were rated according to a point system. proving i have no problem. >> a quick vote favor's harry reid las vegas sun writing. the next move on the healthcare reform. cost assessment to comprimise. president johnson trying to pass medicare in 1965. once the legislation was improved by the committee. for god's sake, don't let dead cats stand on your court. >> about five years ago, i was disappointed with senator reed. i labeled him as a whip. i wouldn't even rank him as a charismatic person. he has a real difficult job. i believe the republicans feel they've been quheeted. they are trying to get back to barack obama to deal with anything that come as cross the desk. i believe there's a lot of the work. a lot of the decisions he's doing his best. it only takes one and it is all over. >> saying he's doing the best he canb managing a diverse gro of his own party. the scoring reached on tuesday. can it pronounce the package? this is a big tip given the body's approach. skins the house has already passed its own bill. only an intervention could stop it in the ensuing week. in addition to the fact mr. reed is using the confidence that they may be able to put the support through the chang chamber. within sitting distance of a conclusion. clear clear >> that goes on but that is a summary. indianapolis caller: the mayor from nevada has dn the best job he could possibly do? you here me host: we are listening to you caller: considering the way the democratic caucus is set up. all i hear on my radio is constant lobbying trying to call this social ix. host: anyone who wants to buy the same health benefits as members of congress reshould be prepared to fork over a large chunck of cash. a family of four earning $54,000 in 2016 would be eligible for a subsidy of $10,100 to help defever the expenses. clear clear >> they are too busy behind closed doors. the house of representatives may declare they sent a bill to them. they are too busy worrying about what they can get out of it. host: this is from the "washington post." a couple of articles about congressional action, not related to healthcare. funding a year end push host: from florida, on the republican line. what you do you think about harry reid's management of the henl care reform? caller: i think it is a big mess. i work to an allen plant. they sold the plant to several different companies. i have been med beingly retired since 1969. i have a very low pension. host: we appreciate you sharing with us. thank you for calling and watching this was taken in their hotel roam. black water guard buying the secret rate. writing that private security guard participated$jc the transporting of the detainees from 2004-2006 playing a central roll in what company insiders. if you want to read more, that's the lead story this morning in the 9/11. go to our website ohio, john and what do you think about the management of the healthcare bill. >> for some reason, they don't want what was offered pushing forward. i'm sure that they could get public options, they would have put it in there it's a regional, national political battle that is about what the voters want in nebraska. you see them with a stiffness about what they are going to do when this happened. that's so that they can put up some kind of front. thank you so much. democrats defend bills in wall street. overall on thursday the accused republicans >> sweeping the legislation would better demonstrate. selling financial products other than taxpayers accountable for bad decisions. to florida. caller: i think he is a classy individual that continues to represent the american people. host: on the republican line. go ahead. caller: first of all, we had a bail out in the banks of wall street. we keep hearing there's more and more people back to work but the unemployment rate is rising. obama administration plans to channel money from the bail out program. small businesses as part of an effort of high unemployment. one plan involves a new entity that would give banks access to the funds without restrictions including limits as long as the money was used to support loans of a small business. returning next week with 12 of the world's largest bank to increase lending to small businesses louisiana on the ind line. caller: good morning. to call this a healthcare bill is a miss no , er. we will not and cannot ever have decent healthcare whenever this is a profit margin involved. that is the bottom line. how good could it be for us? loopholes lurk. >> buried in the financial regulatory overall is a position that appears to do one thing. one of a number of excemptions allowing customers#ñ aiming to overall the nations regulatory kate evering to members of the military in their family. the managing bettlelheim. let us know where you are. >> waiting for a congressional caucus. including in that is a potential expansion of the medicare to folks 55 and over. until they get the numbers, lawmakers really don't want to add advance this debate too much furnler. >> how popular is the expansion of healthcare? >> we are getting preliminary response. not very detailed sometimes 30% or more lower. they are reamly upset. some of them cut deals. they are dealing like the post will be moved. host: how significant were nancy pelosi's comments? guest: they didn't foresee this sort of plan. they were themself the version of a healthcare bill. one has to figure the folks from the political left just want to see some sort of government run enter its that's one of the points all year long. the government is the only entity with enough might to ex-tract the session. you see a potential situation on the ground.z there's talk that if the bill passes something it's been provided offering in the form of management amendment. what they had would come over to the house. one skenar yo. there are a variety of procedural sessions. just to get into the vote. we are running out of the vote. increasingly, we are talking about keeping them in that week thank you, the managing he had tore quarterly. we will continue with our discussions c-span has partnered foreign hansed coverage throughout the month. find out more at c-span's healthcare hub. this weekend a look at climate change. the scientist that question the validity of global warming. interviewed by the general on how google become a new media giant book tv. >> representative squarts is on your screen. a member of the house ways and means committee. congresswoman, we were talking earlier about harry reid's management of the healthcare bill. this is so of the moment all of the hearings. we work for months in the process the three committees working up the bill and does address the major concerns assuring access to affordable meaning and coverage approving quality and outcome. there's a lot of consistency. that really come bined it in the committee. we believe they will get to 60 votes. there's a lot of similarity and some differences. hopefully we can work out our differences and get it done. >> we have heard that there's the potential that they could send the senate bill over to the house and say vote on our bill. what do you think of that option? >> it's something the senators love to do and in smp ways have struggled in the common ground that they have done. we have seen the timey here is sensitive. we want to get this done. there's a lot of similarity between staff and senate. we'll begin taking your calls talking about the senate's proposal to expand medicare option to people 55 and over. >> as soon as we see something in writing from the senate, we'll be able to make an assumption on that. >> afford blet we need to make sure there are options available and affordableable some different thinking about how we do this exchange cree aing affordable choices making sure you are affordable. you have to buy it in a policy. the only policy in the market is $10,000. those are the kind of details you want to ensure. and in a very practical way, we will make sure it works for the american family and businesses everybody talking about small business. the small businesses left have gone to mexico, china, taiwan, brazil. don't ask me for the tax down. >> ok. let me say that small businesses are very much the driver in this country. 40% increase. the premium cost one of these that is very important to us why we are moving forward. you point out that we are competing in a global marketplace. both size businesses compete. they know that they are competing with countries that have figured this out. it's another reason why if we are going to be competitive it's another form of action. >> steve in wisconsin on the republican line you are on. caller: good morning. one quick question. this is just a yes or no answer. does congress have something to say about the bills getting passed host: go ahead. caller: a little over eight years ago, i was up in canada on a fishing trip. at night, i was talking to the locals about their fishing trip . that was the biggest joke they had. they said how high theiríob tax are. if they wanted to go to see a dentist, they would drive 100 miles to the united states. i have seen what happened. in canada, now taken over the whole thing, insurance companies are out. our laws say congress is supposed to help. we are not doing a canadian style coverage we made is very clear. most seniors are pretty happy with medicare making sure americans are covered. most got coverage to the am ployer those who have the coverage and like it keep it. we are working with the employer based coverage. what we are really focused on is making sure the bulk of employers getting the quality we spend. those really under insured that we address that issue we help americans able to buy in a marketplace. that's what you are doing to help those workers. all of us in the long term. all of us are play paying the õ)uq" now. they can't afford to pay for it. we all pay for tr it. we think we are doing that in an efficient way. better to take that responsibility by the insurance in the appropriate setting. we are looking to make sure there are enough primary doctors an nps. representing the 13th district. tell us about the 13 g district. some of those farm lands are not so much farming anymore. host: on the republican line go ahead with your question. caller: thank you. my comment is that the federal government mandates the pump. i will go to jail before i pump that mandated insurance. i'm not aware of any insurance that is making that position right now. they are making a choice to sell insurance health insurance is by and large regulated by the state. that's the issue here. we go to make sure we have enough insurance products to choose and have the competition. that is one of the things we think the choice is bringing down opinions. that is one of the things we are encouraging here. we are weighing in and saying particularly when it comes to small business individuals, the insurance companies are not necesarily so anxious to cover because of the risks involved. we want to encourage that by setting some new standards and actually trying to really encourage that marketplace. we do have in the house bill, the ability for interstate compact. for states to come together in nulinge how could we actually maybe encourage more insurance companies to come in and join together. we are going to encourage that and hope it brings about a more active marketplace. it really isn't very much competition. one insurance carrier, maybe two dominate. when you try as an employer, you really don't have a lot of choices. we want to see a lot more choices. brian, please go ahead with the congresswoman. >> good morning. it seems to me into administration before congress is a buy product of the pork. it's appalling nothing has been done on it considering the stand also, i'm not sure the difference between medicare and medicaid, excuse my ignorance. my understanding is med i cade is for indgent people and med care you pay a premium for. medicare is the health insurance for seniors we are looking to make sure we strengthen medicare program for our seniors that would eliminate what is known as a doughnut hole. making sure it's there. the health insurance for the very poor. that is medicaid. on the issue of pork, since the democrats have taken over the house, we have cut the number of earmarks by other half. we really keep the reform bill. good morning representative and peat. i got a question and comment. bare with me, i'll be quick. i have already funded my insurance program as far as i'm concerned through those taxes i'm 59 years old. i paid into it. why should i not have care? >> most of us do. the way it works is when you pay those payroll taxes, you are paying for those who are currently getting medicare. that doesn't go into a fund for you. seniors are in that category of baby boomers. we are going to see a whole lot more seniors coming up. we are not really prepared financially in terms of paying extra for social security. we are very aware of the fact of medicare. seeing so many more seniors but also because of healthcare, we have been able to do services. . didn't host: allyson schwartz spent 14 years as a member of the pennsylvania state senate before getting elected to congress in 2004. prior to that she was a health care executive in philadelphia. what does that mean? health care executive? guest: i worked in health care for many years, starting health centers. and i know what it means to meet the needs of a woman's health center when it came to us. also i got reimbursement from insurance companies or people that work self pay or medicaid. i think that we did a great job. host: last call for the congresswoman comes from long beach. caller: good morning. how are you? guest: fine, then keep. caller: i represent the majority of people in this country that are conservative christians. i think that i also speak for conservative jews in this country that believe that if we have national insurance, we do not believe that abortion should be included in this package. in our opinion the abortion is the killing of a baby. guest: you have obviously followed this. there was agreement in the house and in the senate that no public dollars were to be used for abortion services. abortion is a legal procedure in this country, and we tried not to make new law on this but we did say that no public dollars would be used under health-care reform. i do not think that there will be. but there will still be the ability for people to purchase, with their own private dollars, health insurance that covers abortion services. host: allyson schwartz, members of the ways and means committee, i hope that if you are in conference in the next couple of weeks you will come to give us another visit. guest: absolutely. host: thank you for being on this morning. in a moment we will be joined by one of the commanding generals from iraq, robert caslen, responsible for the multinational forces in northern iraq. we have got about 10 minutes, we are going to do some open phones. whenever public policy issue you would like to discuss, we will begin that in just a minute after this news update from c- span radio. >> president obama left norway today after being awarded the nobel peace prize. financial regulations are being voted on in the house as the senate continues to work on the health care bill. the climate change summit in denmark resulted in $3 billion per year from european union leaders to help poorer countries combat global warming. while more troops are being sent to afghanistan, robert gates is visiting an airbase in northern iraq. where he told american soldiers that their mission remains critical, despite the recent attention given to the situation in afghanistan. he also said that plans are on track to reduce forces in march. in pakistan, five americans detained will most likely be deported. though the men have not yet been charged with a crime, apparently they had been trying to contact jihadist groups through facebook and youtube, traveling to pakistan to see them in person. those are the latest headlines from c-span radio. host: we have got about 15 minutes of open phones here. for republicans, 202-737-0001. for democrats, 202-737-0002. for independents, 202-628-0205. you can send us a twitter, twitter.com/c-spanwj. a couple of news articles, we would like to share these with you from the online conservative media mogul and drew bright heart, he is launching a new web site to take on the democratic media complex. the web site is going to be called big journalism. michael walsh is going to run the web site. from "the wall street journal," "the net worth of u.s. house how rose 5% in the third quarter as stock prices rebound." this is from "politico." "conservatives praised the nobel speech. it drew remarks from newt gingrich and sarah palin. "i liked what he said." "newt gingrich praised the speech on a drive show on public radio international, as well as the idea of a liberal president that goes to oslo to accept a peace prize and remind the committee that they would not be free without the ability to use force. in some ways, a very historic speech." "approximately 47 million americans will be second with swine flu from april to mid november. 9820 of them died on thursday. -- thursday appeared well -- 9820 have died as of thursday." knoxville, tennessee. caller: the first three callers were right on the money. i would rather go to jail than have the government in my life. i was recently laid off. i was perfectly happy with my health care. they need to focus on jobs. that is where the focus needs to be, getting the jobs and stop attacking the private sector. this is the big power grab. thank you. host: gary, indiana. good morning. caller: i am going to leave a couple of comments and echo the sentiments of the caller that just called in. the american people cannot be taxed any further. this is too much. i also want to comment on the speech from president obama yesterday. it was a spectacular speech. but i think that the president would be better served, probably, to have a republican majority in the house and the senate. democrats are gutless. they have a 60 proof majority and they have shown an ability of any type of good governance for the american people. nancy pelosi is ready to push through anything on health care. i think that the blue dog, progressive, liberal not withstanding, these people should have put their political clout on the line and said look, we are going to go for this and do something good for the american people. as a result, they will not be going back anyway as. after this length of time, not to come up with a pragmatic solution for the american people without health coverage, that is an atrocity. that is my comment today. thank you. host: "top 30 ed goldman sachs will not get a bonus. shareholders have been given a vote on compensation. the policy comes as some of the world's financial capital ways steep taxes on the employees of banks during the credit crisis. -- credit crisis." and other banking story -- "france yesterday said that they would follow the lead of britain by levying a super tax on the bonuses of business people in french -- france." pa., stephanie. independent line. please go ahead with your comment. caller: several little things. first of all, capitalism and the free market has led the regular people down. it is only good for the top 20%. another thing is i think we need to get rid of the congress people who think that legalized bribery is bilal of the land. you want to talk about the constitution? that is not in the constitution, when they take these bribes from anyone that they can. healthcare is the reason that all of the workers are discriminated against. even though they are the most dependable and experienced, they cannot get work. health care is a reason that workers cannot go to work part- time. i think a lot of people want to work part-time, but then they have no health care. host: thank you, stephanie. indiana, republican line. caller: i have been listening to this health care debate. we all have a right to health care. people get on television and talk about what they do, again and again with health care. everyone deserves the right. thank you. host: a couple of articles on iran, i would like to point them out in case you're interested. "iranian protests turned more radical." " thousands flee iran, 30,000 so far have sought refuge status since the controversial presidential vote and a bloody street violence. you know that middle column of the wall street journal where they do a strange story? here it is today am, "bernie may of make new friends behind bars -- madoff makes new friends behind bars. here is a picture of a portrait drawn by one of his new friends ." from the front page of "usa today." "sarah palin got an interview with caffey kiley this morning." maxine, florida. you are on the line. caller: bank you for taking my call. i am calling in regards to the republicans and the abortion issue. republicans are always talking about government meddling into our affairs. i feel that abortion should be left up to the woman in her guard, -- a woman and her god, not to the people. that is my comment. host: loretta, atlanta. caller: i think that you are an excellent host. i really appreciate your work. my comment regarding this last segment in particular, in an administrative assistant at has been paying into the system since 1965. i was not given the option, i was required to do it. a couple of days ago during open enrollment, i am already paying an $96 per month for a prescription drug coverage. a couple of days ago i learned that in order for me to stay within prescription drug coverage that i can afford, my premium monthly is going to go from $28 per month to $39 per month. all i have ever heard is how much of this will benefit anyone. i have nothing against anyone that does not have coverage. everyone needs help, i understand that. but i feel it is not fair to be told one thing and then and, when you get on the phone -- and we are not getting any cost-of- living increase next year. this is something that is very painful. i do not understand why the congress does not get it. to me they are totally oblivious to what is going on out here. i resent the fact that we are told that we are not going to be negatively affected by this. i just learned a couple of days ago, $28 to $39, that will be a billion, impact. host: thank you for sharing that. this is from "the washington post." it talks about the people that crashed to the white house. "master class in white house gate crashing. the late beatrice white. we know of one incident 71 years ago, new year's eve of 1938, when a couple of kids on a dare simply drove up to the white house and were waved in by the guards. it turns out that the teenagers were mistaken for other youngsters that were supposed to be there. they were taken upstairs to wait where eleanor roosevelt and a small group of friends or watching a new movie. they got bored waiting and took off to get the president's autographs. he was found in his study and fdr, finding the entire thing a hoot, characterize them as plucky and gave them an autograph. eleanor was not amused. "a rather unfortunate incident by a thoughtless boy and girl that displayed very rude behavior. to some young people, at least, behavior of this kind might make them seem heroic. she wrote that she would not hire anyone that acted that way. she also sent a note, the liver the next morning to the mother of beatrice, -- delivered the next morning to the mother of beatrice, saying that she was not a proper young lady. the mother was horrified and published. "a few years back we spent some delightful evenings with beatrice white, we can report that she was a pistol, even in her 70's." that is from the federal page this morning. on december 11, 1944, the house of representatives declared war on the axis powers. on this day in 1941 they declared war on germany and italy. we will be talking about the iraq war with major general robert caslen. ♪ >> coming out today, the latest in a series of hearings about what led to the acquisition of merrill lynch by the bank of america. live coverage this morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern. you can also follow it on c-span radio and online c-span.org. president obama is making his way back to washington after winning the nobel peace prize yesterday. we will show you the speech in its entirety tonight at 8:00 here on c-span. this weekend, a look at climate change with former vice president al gore. lawrence solomon, on the scientists the question the validity of global warming. the biography of canton and scalia, the author is interviewed by the former solicitor general. ken oletta on healtow google became an internet giant. this weekend, on c-span 2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: with us now is the commander of the multinational division in northern iraq. he is now out of iraq, reese stationed in hawaii. major general, tell us about your operation. guest: we were responsible for operations in northern baghdad. we had three other arab province since. the home of saddam hussein, and the heart of the insurgency. we also had kirkuk, which is very unique for its kurdish and arab tensions. we also have responsibility for kurdistan. as the multinational north division commander we have responsibilities for 23,000 u.s. soldiers and and other service members, responsible to train iraqi police and to do our best to work with the development of the security forces and government, helping us to build the economy. host: how long were you there? guest: we were there for over one year. we were not a part of the surge. host: how would you assess that region now? politically and militarily? terrorism? guest: from a military standpoint, the iraqi people have done a phenomenal job to build their security forces. the agreement that went into effect in january 1, 2009, through our partnership we were able to work with the iraqis can really coach them, teach them, mentor them, which i think brought them quite a ways. they have contributed to security in a big way. iraq is at the major crossroad of political decisions right now. there elections are now willing to take place on the seventh of march, which is critical. as you transition from one parliamentary government to another, that will be good to see. also at stake is the resolution of the disputed area. which was my area. the disputed area between kurdistan and the arabs, who both claim the land. host: what is the status of that dispute? guest: they had recognized that it was disputed when they first wrote their constitution. they have an article in their constitution that requires a resolution of the disputed land. they had a tie line associated with it and they went past that. as for what we did, working with the prime minister, we came up with a security apparatus that was finally approved. a security apparatus that includes kurdish forces, the iraqi army, and the united states. the united states is the trusted agent, assisting the other side in the area. that is going to be critical to keep the security in place. it will also be important when it comes to resolving this. host: are you satisfied with the structure and the ability of iraqi forces? guest: in a short answer, yes. i would say that the iraqi security forces still have some improvements to go. in their capability to bring intelligence from all different sources together. the iraqi security forces have to improve police. counterinsurgency is about protecting the people. having police that can really protect the people of the cities. third, the one thing, security will be sustaining, iraq has to work on a rule of law. there are a lot of things necessary in the rule of law. the chief judge, his entire objective in life is to retire. the bodyguard's will protect everyone who comes in and out. that is the lifestyle that a lot of the judges are living because of intimidation. rule of law is a critical aspect that requires a lot of work. host: how do you measure success over there? guest: an excellent question. we had a redeployment ceremony right before thanksgiving. we invited the family members of our fallen warriors. one of the fathers came to talk to our battalion commanders. he asked if his son was sacrificed. that is tied to our success. our success is really dependent upon the strategic relationship with iraq. january 1, 2012, the day after the last american leaves, iraq is sitting in a critical location in the middle east, sitting on top of a significant energy resources, on the western bank of a potentially nuclear- armed iran. our strategic partnership in 2012 has got to be strong and significant. that will be what determines success. at the lower level, success right now is an iraqi security force that can resupply itself. security forces that can dig out terrorists, apprehend them, and bring them to trial. success is fixing roulade in the judiciary. those are a little bit of success. when we were over there we were seeing little bits of that every day. host: what about daily life success for iraqis? walking without last barriers or being able to shop freely, is that success for the military as well? guest: speaking of that, i would add on the economy. success in iraq is for young men and women to be able to get a job. to be able to through that jobs apply for their family. that will give them a lot of hope. so, the rebuilding of the economy is critically important in iraq right now. that will serve as the alternative to a young man that might consider joining an insurgent activity just so that he can get some money. fixing the economy is very important. host: do you have an iraqi counterpart over there? if so, who was it? do you stay in touch? guest: we actually had a partnership with five iraqi armored divisions. we had a couple of operational the man's -- commands. we also partnered with political leaders, like the governors. also the ones in kurdistan. it was very good to develop these relationships and partnerships. i have only been gone for a month, but we have been corresponding. i have got their addresses and we will send them christmas cards, things like that. host: a couple of headlines -- "al qaeda warns of more attacks in iraq. targeting dens of evil and dens of apostates. they are determined to approve the pillars of this government is about -- government." if you have interaction with the islamic state of iraq? guest of that was the primary insurgent group -- guest: that was the primary insurgent group that we were going after. mosul was in our area, so we went after them in a big way. their influence has diminished. i would make the case that the al qaeda ideology has alienated themselves from the majority of the iraqi people. counterinsurgency, separating the people from the insurgency. not many people in iraq will leave in the al qaeda ideology. their primary motive is to conduct these very high profile attacks to discredit the iraqi security forces. when you saw what happened in baghdad last week, that was what they were doing. through that is where they continued to gain influence. host: finally, the lead story this time from "the new york times," "blackwater guards tied to secret cia raids." did you have any contact with whitewater? guest: -- contact with blackwater? guest: not in my area. host: numbers are on the screen in case you would like to call in. rex, tennessee. caller: a couple of questions. first, do you believe that part of the problem in iraq is that the people had been hard-pressed so long that they are afraid to stand up for themselves? my second question has to do with the military itself. do you think that nowadays the u.s. government, when fighting a war, is to restrain from using the full power? i do not think that many people understand that if the united states wanted to a leash its full power, we could end these wars pretty quickly. guest: thank you for your question. and readdress the second point. hist when a soldier feels threatened, a soldier has the right to use lethal force, which is important. but sometimes when you have the application of lethal force and you commit collateral damage, the people that receive that collateral damage, people that lose family members and homes, it has an enduring effect. in an insurgency, where you are trying to get the government to gain legitimacy. those people in receipt of collateral damage have no trust in the government and security forces. in the end you are alienating that group of people. application of lethal force is critical to success. in the end we have the right to use whatever levels of combat power necessary. but we used that application judiciously because it was important to understand the effects that we were trying to get on the ground. the iraqi people have been oppressed. but i did not see them concerned or anxious about getting involved in political affairs. if you look at their recent political debates, that was fantastic. even though it went past the deadline and threatened to the on-time elections, the fact that the people were engaged in that type of dialogue resolved through a political process, it shows that the people are engaged. host: democratic line, new jersey. go ahead. caller: thank you for your service. good morning, general. during the time of the iraqi surge, do you think that there is a way to separate the taliban? do you think of these troops going to afghanistan are going to make a difference? guest: i was in iraq, i cannot speak to your question regarding afghanistan. some of the principles that we learned about counterinsurgency, i think that some of those principles do have application to the strategy that was developed by general mcchrystal. so, i think that there is some merit to that. host: you did serve in afghanistan for a little while? guest: yes, sir. host: chief task force of one down region at the air force base? guest: that was in the very early days. right after 9/11. you remember anaconda, then you had for a bora afterwards. i came right in after that. those go the general is a graduate of west point. he has gotten a couple of master's degrees. one from long island university. he served in desert shield and desert storm. he has held faculty positions at west point, including football coach. he was 78 in commandant. is that the chief of the academy? guest: commandant is responsible for the military development. leadership development is military, physical, and academic. my battle body, the dean, we worked on military. guesthost: what was your footbal record? guest: it has been too long. host: tell us about the 25th division. guest: it is headquartered in hawaii. they have a tremendous lineage that goes back to world war ii and the korean war. they also participated in haiti, the work in haiti. host: in 1994? guest: wright, 1994, 1995. they are involved in the global war on terrorism. they have had two rotations in iraq and one in afghanistan. they are scheduled to go back to iraq. based on the last mission, it will be changing. a very honorable division. my memories are fantastic. host: lincoln, nebraska. go ahead. caller: i salute your service to the nation, general. my question, the prime minister of iraq has said that most of the slaughter occuring in iraq is because of the neighboring countries supporting those terrorists. how long will the united states continued dialogue with countries that are small -- slaughtering civilians in iraq? before they take some action to put a stop to these terrorists? guest: thank you for your question. did there have been recent discussions about what has caused these recent attacks. the prime minister, as did -- prime minister credited the recent attacks to al qaeda. but there is another insurgent movement in iraq. it is a nationalist movement. it is focused on the former regime. there is support for them from the neighboring countries. i know that the united states is working diplomatically with neighboring countries to try to work that out and get that stuff resolved. host: what was the worst thing about being in iraq? guest: the worst thing? good question. i think that the worst thing was seeing the sacrifice of our young men and women, going through the moral services and working through that. the good part was to see how supportive their brothers and sisters were of each other. and house supportive they were of the family members when we came back. host: when you lost a soldier over there, what was your process? guest: depending on where we were on the battlefield, i tried to go immediately to where the vent occurred ji-- where the event occurred. we lost a battalion commander at one point. my job was to talk to the command, put my arm around them. reassure them that they needed to continue to work through this particular thing. we had a memorial service. we always had a memorial service when we lost a soldier. brothers and sisters would get up there to memorialize and talk about the soldier. it was excellent, very helpful. it did not necessarily bring closure, but it was good for helping out. of course the unit would accompany the remains back to the final resting place. when i was the commandant of the cadets i became close with senior leadership. i lost one of them. his name was dan hyde. i still wear his bracelet with his name on it. that was one of the toughest days for me, personally. he was a tremendous man with tremendous potential. his family came to the redeployment ceremony. you understand that the sacrifice of these young men and women. these strong, long-term strategic relationships become clearly more important. host: minnesota, republican line. caller: hello, general. merry christmas. two things -- of wanted to commend c-span for having you on. i wish that they would have more military. you have a beautiful part. when people can hear what military people go through and what they feel, i think that the -- one of my greatest upset has been the lack of the verve that we initially had for the war. it hurts the military when we do not support them as fully as we can. my concern is that we will not support them and not give them what they need. i think that they should come home under those circumstances. had anyway, i do not know what you can say to that, because it is political. thank you very much. guest: thank you for your support. i was at west point in the vietnam war. i remember when i would go on leave i would definitely not wear my uniform, i would try to grow my hair and b as in condi go as possible. at the time the military was not accepted by the public. didn't when i made the decision to go to west point, my high school teachers tried to talk me out of it. an interesting dynamic. that is not the dynamic we have today. today everyone thinks you for your service. the outpouring of support for soldiers and service members is fantastic. the support of the hawaiian people to the family members that we left behind was unbelievable. i cannot think those people up. the support that i have seen for the american people in this war has been fantastic. they have separated their political opinion about the war. what has not been at issue is support for american service members. i would like to thank them for the support they have given us. thank you. host: how did you get that jacket through security? guest: they have got to put it through the metal detector. absolutely. [laughter] host: jerry, good morning. caller: thank you for your service. how come they are not rotating other soldiers from like japan and germany and throughout the world, bringing them through for iraq and afghanistan upanisha? i would also like to war -- like to know if the war is sustainable and livable. also, go navy. guest: [laughter] re question right of until the end. no, great question. when the time on the ground was over, the brigade was redeployed. there was a time when there was a lot of coalition support on the ground in iraq. we are still getting support from other countries, but that is one of the issues that the department of state is working on. it was good to work with the koreans. the big question about whether or not the war can be mistaken is whether or not we can maintain the will of the american people to understand the sacrifice and service of these men and women, that it is worth it. to make sure that we finish and complete this war in iraq in a sustained and successful manner. that is important. the other critical part of a sustained, a protracted conflict in these particular wars, is to maintain the all volunteer army. even though we are 18 years into this global war on terrorism we are still maintaining 100% reenlistment rates for the young men and women, this 9/11 generation that understands what is going on and elected to volunteer to serve their country. so far i am impressed with what i am seeing. host: "usa today" has an article about the fort hood tragedy to increase the challenge for muslim american arab american service members. did you have them in iraq with you? guest: yes, i did. a couple of them were actually born in iraq and as soon as they came to the united states they became united states citizens. they were very helpful to understanding the culture. they are tremendous american soldiers. we did not have a lot, but we had a few. it was important to reach out, giving them opportunities to worship on the base. our chaplains did a great job with that. host: vivian, good morning. caller: i am having such a hard time comparing this military to the military that my father was in, that flew out of africa. i am not buying into this loving a man in uniform thing -- this is a different military. what you said first about the resources in iraq, that is the first honest military thing i have heard anyone say. to me, if you are going to join the military, which so many kids do. a country that spends $680 billion on their military, kids cannot get a job so they join the military, turning kids into killers from all over the world. you are not going to join us on this murdering spree? we will hired killers from china. from the school of the americas. this is not the same military as my father's. host: general? guest: thank you very much. let me tell you, i was in the pentagon at 9/11. my son was a sophomore in high school. very fun-loving young man. he had 100 questions when i came home. as he tried to understand what had happened, he made the decision to join the military. he pursued an appointment to the u.s. military academy. he himself is going to deploy to iraq in the new year. but he is typical of the 9/11 generation. the fact that we have americans making a voluntary decision to serve their country speaks tremendously of his generation. we understand the nature of this conflict and the risks associated with it. i think that this is something that america can be proud of. i am proud not only of my son, but the men and women of this generation. i think that they're no different from your father's generation, from the greatest generation. those men and women serve their country voluntarily. they came back and rebuild america. 50 years from now, i think that this will be a glorious history of these men and women. host: why did you decide to the join the military in the 1970's? guest: i was free approach to play football at west point. -- i was preapproved to play football at west point. [laughter] [applause] guest: when i looked at the development opportunities and leadership potential, i had no problem with the five-year commitment. once i got in the army and you are out there, getting your boots and dirty and leading soldiers, it grew on me. i said i was gonna stay in for another assignment, another assignment. i was a company commander and i love that work. when i went to west point, however, it was not something i was going to do for 32 years. host: where did you grow up? guest: connecticut, then northern vermont. from there i entered west point. host: what is your biggest frustration about the army? guest: [laughter] i would have to think about that. i would just say that i do not have a lot of frustrations. the army is a great way of life. the frustration that have is the young men and women that joined the army and the they do not decide to take advantage of all of the opportunities. but that is their decision to make. host: we have a twitter -- will be allowed at the assigned date or does it depend on what it looks like on the ground? guest: we will be pulling out at the assigned to date. the security agreement went into effect in january, but we had to be out of some of the cities by the 30th of june. we had not yet reached the attack levels in june that would have created the with trip -- withdrawl conditions out of the city at that time. tactically i would have made the case for staying, but strategically the general understood and the prime minister wanted us to move out of the city. one month ago the governor of one of local provinces, who ran on an anti-coalition platform, told me that i used to see you as the army of occupation. but because you were true to your word, i do not see you that way anymore. i embraced the fact that you are here for the restructuring of our province and how important that is. the entire image that he had transitioned from how he used to see american forces to how he saw forces now was completely dependent upon the fact that we did what we said we would do. we left the cities. that is very important. that is a strategic message that the iraqis did not believe. they did not believe we would abide by it. when we did, they understood that we were going to leave the cities on the 30th of june, dropping down to 50,000, then leaving at the end of 2011. they believe that we will do it and it is important for us to maintain that timeline. host: so, the american soldiers are no longer patrolling? they are on bases? guest: they are no longer on patrol in the cities. when the security forces are on patrol we have advisers in that capacity. we have clearance and other operations outside of the cities. strategy's move it from within the city is the strategy is all along the borders and other areas. one of the other things that we are doing is spending a lot of time training the iraqi security forces and police. so that they can build the capacity necessary to hold the lid on the insurgency when we leave in 2011. host: steve, republican line. good morning. [feedback] host: steve, you know the rules. you have got to turn down that volume. we are moving on to pennsylvania. murray? debt -- caller: hello. i would like to tie my comments into why we cannot have universal health care in our country. i am opposed to war. i am opposed to my tax is going to support war. especially a war that was based on lie upon live. it was run by war criminals like rumsfeld and bush, who initiated torture. now we have a country that it tends to justify the unjustifiable. i am a quaker from pennsylvania. so i am certainly opposed to war in general. especially unnecessary wars. which is one of the reasons we cannot have universal health care. because needlessly $3 million per day goes to the bloated pentagon budget. it is one of the reasons. the other reason is because the other half goes to the wealthy 1% on wall street. host: we have got the point. general? guest: thank you very much. i understand people's position with regard to war. the only thing i would say is that if you look at the risks to our nation and national security out there, it is important to understand what the consequences of failure are. if we fail in iraq and it becomes a failed state, rather than having some element of a democracy in the least, instead you have a failed state? what are the consequences for not only the region, but the security of our country? that is a question worth looking at. to have strong economic development or generate income to pay taxes that go to those programs, we must have security. the fundamental basis in iraq for their economy is to develop their potential governments with a basis of security. that is what security forces are doing. now we are building other institutions. i think that that principle applies in the united states as well. host: steve, one more chance. guest: good -- caller: good morning. a couple of questions. next year, when we transmission from common -- from combat to support, will the iraqi forces be able to stand up on their own? what is your personal outlook on iraq over the next 10 to 20 years? do you think it will be similar to be a nom, japan, germany? will they have a flourishing economy? guest: i think that as we transition out of iraq, and it is important that we transition in the timeline we said, as i said before, the iraqi forces have the power to keep a lid on the insurgency. they will maintain security gains. there are important things to work on. one, for them to maintain intelligence so that they know where they need to go to conduct specific grades. the second thing, they have got to develop their police. if the iraqi people are living in cities, it will be the police that are protecting them. as i mentioned before, it is important to develop a rule of law. my personal opinion is that i think that this is moving in the right direction. i am optimistic about it. i know that it is fragile, but iraq is going through a critical time in its history and the development of its democracy. the risk of these elections taking place, it is encouraging that they passed election law. we will see a transition of parliamentary government from one to the other, which is important. a couple of other essential things that must get resolved, one is the successful resolution of the disputed land between the kurds and arabs. i think that iraq has the capacity to do that. we will see of this new government has the will and leadership to make that happen. host: general robert caslen has been our guest for the last 45 minutes. next time you are in town, please come back. guest: thank you. host: the house is coming into session. as you can see, they're working on their financial overhaul bill. we appreciate your being with us, enjoy the rest of your day. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., december 11, 2009. i hereby appoint the honorable donna f. edwards to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father coughlin. chaplain coughlin: i waited for you, o lord, and you stooped down to me. you heard my cry and drew me from the deadly pit from this clay. you set my feet upon solid rock and helped me make my first steps into the light of a new day. you put a new song into my mouth, and from the depths, o lord, god, i offered you praise. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, i demand a vote on the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor, please say aye. those opposed, please say no. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. mr. klein: madam speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from new jersey, congressman lance. mr. lance: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: good morning, madam speaker. i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: yesterday, our president mused about the inevidentibility of war, war's instrumentality of war and peace. it's important to reflect on his words because once rebelieve in the inevidentibility of war, war becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. once we're committed to war's instrumentality and peace we begin the orwellian journey where war is peace, where the momentum of war overwhelms war for peace. we can easily legit mate the whole slaughter of innocence. the war against iraq was based on lies. and the wars in afghanistan and pakistan was based on flawed documents. sometimes it's just war. and our ability to rethink the terms of our existence, to explore the possibility of peace without war may well determine whether we end war or war ends us. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. lance: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lance: madam speaker, i rise today to congratulate the summit hilltoppers who captured the new jersey group ii, north ii state sectional football title on december 3 at giants stadium. coached by john, the hilltoppers won a 28-19 victory over the orange tornados. on offense, the hilltoppers were led by the quarterback and running back. for the game, the running back ran for 119 yards while completing six pass attempts for 134 yards. reyes finished with 167 yards on the ground and two touchdowns on 16 carrieses. the summit defense was led by michael steinberg, mike watts, ryan o'mali, danny feeney, held the orange to just 19 points. i ask all of my colleagues to join me in congratulating the coach and the entire summit hilltoppers football team for their victory over are orange to win the state sectional title. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. dicks: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. dicks: madam speaker, it is with great sadness that i come before the house to note the death of a leader in the civil aviation industry and the man familiar to many here in congress. mr. ed simpson, who served as president of the general aviation manufacturers association for 19 years, died in his home on november 25 in boise, idaho. many of us in this chamber recall that he was the driving force behind the general aviation revitalization act, which altered the liability of small aircraft manufacturers and led to a reinvig ration of the small aircraft industry in the united states. after he retired from direct leadership of the association, he took on a new project, the be a pilot campaign that was designated to increase the population of student pilots in the united states. it was a great success. not only in enlarging the number of citizens capable of flying light aircraft but also in providing a technological boost to the manufacturing industry that rilted in the design and con-- resulted in the design and construction of new aircraft. he was part of the national aviation civil organization. he served in that post as ambassador through 2004. and he was one of three ambassadors to be reappointed by president george w. bush. his reappointment was indicative of the bipartisan approach that he brought to all of his endeavors. he was the recipient of the wright brothers memorial trophy for lifetime achievement. he was a great leader, a great friend to many of us and he will be greatly missed. also, madam speaker, i'd like to have a reflection that was published in seattle last week by a long-time friend of his, mr. ted van dyke. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. gingrey: madam speaker, to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. gingrey: madam speaker, yesterday, this house voted on a 2,500-page spending bill with a price tag of almost half trillion dollars that we will have to borrow. the majority in this house just don't seem to get it. we are in the midst of a recession, 15.4% unemployment -- excuse me -- 10% unemployment, 15.4 million people out of work. our federal deficit is over $12 trillion, and the democrats will vote next week to raise that another $1.8 trillion. yet, this half trillion-dollar spending bill which combines six into one represents a 12.5% spending increase over 2009 and a 24% increase over 2008. 24% over 2008. i ask how much of this is real needs of our citizens versus just once of spend thrift politicians. madam speaker, the democrats must stop this reckless spending spree. we need to have the ability to make tough choices to get our economy back on track and pass legislation that helps american families looking to make ends meet in these tough times. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. gingrey: and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i -- the united states has the safest, most plentiful and most beneficial food supply in the world. this abundant food supply wasn't by accident. they put practices in place which allow us to continue to feed the world at affordable prices. however, agriculture and those production practices are under attack. some in congress would ban the use of antibiotic. as a farmer and former chairman of the live stock subcommittee, the use of antibuy ottics is something i have been involved in. they have developed a responsible use guidelines. producers didn't develop these guidelines because congress told them to do so. they developed the guidelines because it was the right thing to do for their animals and consumers. those that would ban antibuy ottics have -- antibuy ottics have a goal. -- anti-biotics have a goal. they are looking to penalize an industry without data to back up their claim. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio rise? ms. schmidt: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. schmidt: this country's a.a.a. credit rating will go down if we can't help this unsustainable deficit. we ran a $1.4 trillion deficit last year and we are on track to do the same this year. this house passed six appropriations bills in an omnibus package with almost half a trillion dollar price tag. 13% more than the prior year following a bloated stimulus package. we all want to return our nation to economic prosperity, but we can't do it and simultaneously run our nation without fiscal responsibility. my grandchildren will not be able to afford the mountain of debt we are accumulating. moody's has warned us to stop it and stop it now or lose our a.a.a. credit rating by 2013. this congress must get the message, get the message now. stop the unnecessary spending. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, today when we pass the wall street reform and consumer protection act, it will take a huge step toward the protection of the american citizens, the american taxpayer and the american business. never again will wall street take massive risks with the expectation that they will be bailed out when they fail. never again will mortgage brokers sell mortgages that they know can't possibly be repaid. never again will the credit card companies make billions from selling confusion amongst american consumers. i've been struck in this debate by how closely what we're doing today mirrored what happened in the 1930's when this congress created a regulatory structure. the opposition said this would be the end of capitalism, the end of markets and instead that reform led to 60 or 70 years of the most intense prosperity the human race has ever seen. word for word those charges have been repeated. they were wrong then and they are wrong now. what this house does today will be a tremendous step forward for the american people and the american economy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: madam speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: madam speaker, this week i stood with my colleagues to introduce a bill to audit stimulus funds. it's time for congress to demand answers on behalf of the hardworking taxpayers that we represent. the misnamed stimulus is one of the largest spending bills in our nation's history. it is critical that american taxpayers know the facts. this is the people's money, not the government's money. it is wrong that a well-connected democrat pollsster received $6 million to preserve just three jobs when we could provide jobs for dozens of families. i urge speaker pelosi to consider our legislation to ensure full accountability of every dollar spent. i first sent a letter to the president asking him to implement the recovery panel that the stimulus bill provides. the request went unanswered. therefore, i introduced a national commission to investigate how many jobs have actually been saved or created. taxpayers should know where's the jobs. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. klein: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. klein: mr. speaker, creating jobs in south florida is one of my top priorities in these challenging economic times. we must find ways to create good jobs in our community and assure that our small businesses are growing and expanding in order to provide opportunities for work in our local neighborhoods. there are great success stories that we can build on. one example is t.b.c. corporation which is located in my district. after working closely with the business development board of palm beach county, t.b.c., a leading national supplier and retailer of auto tires, will expand their headquarters and data center to create 50 new high-quality jobs in our community. congratulations to the management of t.b.c. these are the business models we must support and encourage, and i look forward to working with other local businesses to continue to create good jobs in south florida. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize those men and women who give so freely to serve this great nation, men such as captain shawn welsh, united states marine corps. in november america celebrated 234 years of having a united states marine corps that defends our precious freedoms at home and serves as the world's 9/11 force around the globe. we are fortunate to have men and women who are willing to answer the call of duty time and time again, especially in the midst of two years. this year i had the pleasure of having one of the finest to serve in my office as a congressional military fellow, captain shawn welsh. it's an honor to work with him who lives in quan could he, virginia. as -- quantico, virginia. the society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and the fighting done by fools. we don't have to worry about that distinction. he has enthusiasm that was clearly apparent during his year on capitol hill. he serves as a role model and superb example for society in the marines he lead. so today i thank captain shawn welsh for his leadership, his service to our nation and his performance this year as a congressional fellow on capitol hill. with that i yield back, mr. speaker. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 4173. will the gentlewoman from maryland kindly resume the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 4173, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to provide for financial regulatory reform, to protect consumers and investors, to enhance federal understanding of insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivative markets, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose on thursday, december 10, 2009, amendments en bloc offered by the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. frank, had been disposed of. it is now in order to consider amendment number 15 printed in house report 111-370. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: i rise to support the amendment before the body. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 15, printed in house report number 111-370, offered by mr. cohen of tennessee. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 964, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. mr. cohen: thank you, madam chair. i would take as much time as i may consume. i want to thank chairman frank for working with me to include this language in the wall street reform and consumer protection act of 2009. this amendment would strip a provision permitting the securities and exchange commission to delegate regulation of investment advisors to the financial industry regulatory authority. in its present form, the bill would give them sweeping rule making authority over investment advisors which has been under the sole domain of the government regulatory agencies. this far-reaching provision would extend jurisdiction to federally registered investment advisory firms that manage almost 80% of all advisory firms aassets under management. fenerty does not have the expertise to -- with the investment advisors act anti-s.e.c. is best position to oversee the investment advisors act. there is inherent conflict of interest in having a self-regulatory group organization that funds this agency and has always been on the side of broker-dealers. we cannot afford to outsource key regulating functions solely in the best interest of their clients. in his speech earlier this year, the s.e.c. commissioner noticed his opposition to establishing a self-regulatory organization for investment advisors because the s.e.c. should not outsource its mission and because the s.e.c. is the only securities regulator with the necessary experience in dealing with the principal based regime. i am concerned that the high level of investor protection provided under the vidsor act will be dean mished if they were to obtain additional authority. we should not extend the authority to the advisory profession. again i urge passage of this amendment which would keep the s.e.c. as the proper independent regulator of investment advisors. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. bachus: to claim the time in opposition. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. bachus: thank you. let me say to the gentleman from tennessee, let me explain the purpose behind the provision which your amendment seeks to strike. and i say that -- i would be glad to work with the chairman and with the member in at this time striking the provision that i inserted in the committee that you object to. and we'll asker for a recorded vote. -- we'll ask for a recorded vote. let me explain the background behind this amendment. i think we -- if we can all work together we can -- i think we can make investors safer. and make a better system. the body will recall and the chairman on december 12 of last year, about a year ago, bernie madoff was arrested for committing the largest financial fraud in the history of the country. tremendous scam. $65 million ponzi scheme which defrauded you nonprofits, universities, pension funds, and wiped out the savings of literally tens of thousands of families and citizens. now, to do this bernie madoff operated two separate entities. one was a broker-dealer, and one was an investment advisor. the fraud occurred in the investor advisor. that's where the fraud occurred. the investment visor was registered with the s.e.c. the s.e.c., the investment advisor, madoff's investment advisor, was subject to examination by the s.e.c.. but i would point out the chairman of the full committee and the gentleman from tennessee, they never examined the investor advisor. they never examined it. madoff operated a broker dealer in the same premise -- premises and under the same name. and it was examined, subject by examination by the s.e.c. and by fenra who i was saying let fenra go ahead and examine the investment advisors. these dual operations where you have both. fenra, the broker dealer, at least every other year, they inspected them. but the fraud didn't occur there. it occurred in the investment advisor. fenra lacked the authority to go in and examine the investor advisor. they couldn't examine it. and my amendment was -- my provision i put in the committee said, let them be able to, as they examine the broker dearly, let them go in and look at the books of the investment advisor if you are operating a dualp operation. -- dual operation. had they had the right, they would have gone in and they would have discovered this fraud. the s.e.c. which had the right never did it. now, as i said earlier, maybe there's another solution. the s.e.c. said -- has said we don't want fenra taking over our jurisdiction. what i'd like to say is make sure the s.e.c. starts doing their job. let's make sure that they start examining these investment advisors. someone needs to. the average investment advisor is only examined once every 10 years. bernie madoff's investment advisor was never examined. it's the kind of gap in regulation that causes disasters. it causes scams. it causes bernie madoffs of the world to get along for decades. that's why i introduced this amendment. i mean the provision, which we are now striking. now, going forward we at least need to look at this. we need to know that there are 500 or 600 of these investment advisors and broker dealers, dual operations. we need to make clear that the s.e.c. -- somewhere that they have the authority to examine both investment advisors and broker dealers. if they want to perform that mission. and i know one thing the chairman has done, he's added more money for the s.e.c. and i think that's part of the answer. but i think this committee, this congress as we go forward needs to make sure they do their job. there was a monumental failure of the s.e.c. if they don't do their job, or we find they don't, and they have the resources -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. bachus: let's give it to someone else. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. cohen: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman for his working with us on the amendment. i'd like to yield as much time as he needs to the chairman of the full committee, mr. frank. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i thank both my colleagues. the ranking member is exactly right in the concerns he's expressed. that's why at the committee the chairman of the subcommittee, mr. kanjorski, and i tentative ty agreed to this. we later heard some questions raised in particular, some i think whom we have an amount of respect, the long time texas securities administrator, who really goes back four, five texans administrations in a bipartisan way. on we half of the north american securities administration association, she raised concerns. they were worried that this might at some point be too much of a delegation and therefore, i appreciate the gentleman's comments, we agree with me we do -- always to buff up investor protection. clearly there is a role for fenra. i think we may have gone a bill too far in what we accepted in the committee. we are not talking about getting rid of it altogether. i appreciate the reasonableness of what the gentleman from alabama has said. it will be our role next year if this bill passes to monitor the s.e.c. i look forward to oversight hearings to make sure they are using their authority. and particularly the question of how best to allow the s.e.c. to draw on the resources of fenra be will be on -- high on our agenda. i yield to the gentleman. mr. bachus: if the gentleman would yield. i appreciate that. i think that is a logical solution to this. at this time i will support the gentleman's amendment to strike the provision. as i said when i brought this provision up, i wanted to highlight the fact that this is how bernie madoff -- he got away with operating these two operations in the same premises . and we need to do -- the regulators need to do a better job. someone of being able to look across those operations. the chair: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. cohen: thank you. i would like to thank again the gentleman from alabama. i know it's difficult for him to work with us on this because he is the champion of the s.e.c. the crimson tide of alabama. with that i would like to urge the passage of the amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from tennessee. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 16 printed in house report 111-370. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. peter: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 16, printed in house report number 111-370, offered by mr. peters of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 964, the gentleman from michigan, mr. peters, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. peters: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: without objection. mr. peters: today we are debating legislation that will end the too big to fail doctrine and provide a mechanism for ensuring that in the future taxpayers will not be asked to foot the bill to clean up wall street mistakes. my amendment improves this legislation by ensuring that taxpayers are not asked to foot the bill for wall street's past mistakes as well. my amendment will firmly establish that the financial industry not taxpayers will be responsible for making up any tarp shortfalls. and the tarp program will not add to our deficits or national debt. section 134 of the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008 requires the president to identify a mechanism for recovering any shortfalls in tarp funds after five years so as not to increase the budget deficit or national debt. however the mechanism for recouping any shortfall is not identified. h.r. 4173 already empowers the fdic to make risk-based assessments on the nation's largest and most systemically risky financial institutions that will be used to create a systemic dissolution fund used to seize and unwind any failed nonbank financial institution in the future. ensuring there will be no more ad hoc bailouts of too big to fail institutions. my amendment would give the fdic authority to make additional assessments to these same large firms whose excessive risk taking caused the current financial crisis and use those assessments to pay off any tarp shortfalls and ensure that the taxpayers are made whole. my amendment gives the american taxpayer certainty that all tarp funds will be recouped from the large financial companies that caused this financial crisis. it would allow congress to show that we have the -- a plan in place for the recooperate of any shortfall consistent with the promises made during the debate over the emergency economic stabilization act. it will also ensure that the american public understands that we are not turning the page on tarp, but instead that we have a clear and decisive planner for making sure that taxpayers are made whole. i reserve the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? helkshelks to claim time in opposition. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. hensarling: if this body really cares about protecting the taxpayer against losses in tarp, they will have an opportunity to show it later today. and that is vote to end the tarp program. now, we can have a debate about what tarp was, but the more relevant debate is what tarp is. and today tarp is nothing more than $700 billion of walking around money for the administration. it's a $700 billion revolving bailout fund to advance the administration's political, social and economic agenda. and if you're concerned about protecting the taxpayer, why, why would you have a provision that raises tarp for yet more taxpayer funded foreclosure mitigation programs which have been proven to be abject failures. -- failures? so if you are really serious about protecting taxpayers, put your vote where your sentiment is and vote later today to simply end the tarp program in the bailouts. but given that the whole reason for being for this bill is a perpetual wall street bailout, i'd suspect, unfortunately, that will not occur. the second point i'd make, madam chair, is some of the companies that receive funds under the capital purchase program have now repaid them back with interest. so now we're in position to tax companies that are proven successful and paid back their funds, tax them for failing companies that didn't pay back theirs. you know, chrysler and g.m. received funds under tarp and ford didn't. so under this i suppose that we can assess ford a tax to pay for losses the taxpayers will incur on g.m. and chrysler. and we know that g.m. and chrysler were defined as quote-unquote financial institutions under the tarp statute so therefore, ford can be taxed under the gentleman's amendment. is that smart? is that fair? the answer is no. this is yet another tax to go on capital. you can't have capitalism without capital. and so we have $150 billion tax for the revolving bailout fund. we have an unlimited tax by the new czar to ban and ration consumer credit products that can touch small businesses throughout our nation. every time you increase the cost of taxes on capital, you get less lending, you get less credit, more expensive credit, and less credit is fewer jobs. i would think, i would think at a time when our nation has the highest unemployment rate in a generation that this is an institution that would be trying to create more jobs, trying to create more capital, trying to have small businesses access pools of capital, and all we do is see more legislation and more amendments to make capital less available and more spencive to our small businesses. this -- expensive to our small businesses. this amendment must be rejected. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. peters: thank you, madam speaker. i'd like to yield a minute 30 to the gentleman from michigan, mr. shour. -- mr. shour. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> we were told what's good for wall street is good for main street. the benefits are supposed to trickle down. the only people the gentleman from michigan has seen is it trickle out of reach. it has left my state with a 15% unemployment rate. last fall wall street said they needed to borrow $700 billion from taxpayers to pay for over their losses. michiganers were supportsed to open up their wallets to wall street banks. they have stopped lending to michigan homeowners and michigan businesses. employers can't get loans they need to bring employees back to work. tarp has performed better than expected but they still expect to lose taxpayer dollars. we still do not have a guarantee that the bailed out financial industry will actually repay taxpayers for their loans. mr. peters has offered an excellent amendment to ensure american taxpayers will get their money back and that those that created this mess will pick up the tab. this amendment enables the fdic to make additional assessments on the nation's largest, most systemically risky financial institutions to pay back this tarp money. this amendment finally puts in place a plan for wall street to pay back its loan. this is common sense. those institutions responsible for the collapse should at least -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. schauer: i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does -- the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. peters: madam speaker, i'd like to yield one minute and 30 seconds to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connelly. the chair: the gentleman has one minute remaining. mr. connelly: thank you, madam chair. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. connelly: the house will enact the most significant reform of our financial system since the great depression. these are not decisions we take lightly but the prolonged recession and the near collapse of the financial market in the fall of 2008 have compelled us to respond. it will also end the era of taxpayer funded bailouts. madam chair woman, this amendment offered by my friend and colleague, mr. peters of michigan, seeks to build on this legislation and will authorize the fdic to make further assessments in the financial industry to ensure every penny of the tarp loans made to the banks is repaid and help reduce our nation's debt and burden on the taxpayers. i urge adoption of the amendment, madam chair woman, and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: the gentleman reserves. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan has 30 seconds remaining. mr. peters: thank you, madam chair. the amendment before us is a commonsense attempt to make sure we coup to the taxpayers the money that has been london to the financial industry. the gentleman from texas mentions that we should just end tarp, but that doesn't relieve us of the fact that we got $140 billion that needs to be paid back. and so it's not a liability on the taxpayers. this is a way in which we can recoup the money from the financial institutions, the very institutions that were responsible for bringing this financial meltdown to our country and the problems that have impacted my state and states all across this country. this is a commonsense approach, and i urge adoption. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: madam chair, what is common sense is to terminate tarp, stop it before it can spend again. and i hear all this wonderful rhetoric about, well, somehow we're going to tax wall street for all of this. but look at the tarp program. look at the taxpayer-funded foreclosure mitigation program, all of which have been abject failures which the taxpayer receives zero, zero of his money back. and so this again is just one more way to assess a greater tax, a greater cost on capital. when small businesses have seen their credit lines shrunk, withdrawn. jobs are being lost all over the nation. and so here's one more idea to frankly keep tarp going and again if people want to put their sentiment -- put their vote where their sentiment is, they'll have an opportunity to do it later today. and it's a fundamental difference between the two approaches. and that is our friends on the other side of the aisle still want a perpetual bailout. as i've said earlier, if there was truth in advertising, the bill before us would be named the permanent wall street bailout and increase job losses through credit rationing act of 2009. the best way to protect the taxpayer is to end tarp, stop the grab for other programs, not to increase taxes yet again on capital that is vitally needed for our small businesses -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. hensarling: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. all time having expired, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. hensarling: madam chair. on that i -- the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? mr. hensarling: i ask for the yeas and nays. the chair: does the gentleman ask for a recorded vote? mr. hensarling: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 17 printed in house report 111-370. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina rise? mr. watt: to claim the time in support of the amendment. the chair: does the gentleman offer the amendment? mr. watt: i offer the amendment. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 17 printed in house report 111-370 offered by mr. watt of north carolina. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 964, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. watt, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. watt: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself 3 1/2 minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. watt: madam chair, let me say at the outset that is my intention that the end of the short discussion and i ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment, but i thought it would be enlightening to colleagues and to whoever else might be listening at this time in the morning to talk about some of the practical problems that you have even when there's broad agreement on an issue. and i'll describe the process. both mr. campbell, who is a member of the committee, and i agree that automobile dealers ought to be exempt in their primary duties from the cfpa, the consumer financial protection agency supervision and what have you. and there was broad bipartisan and philosophical agreement on that general proposition in the committee when mr. campbell offered his amendment. and there was broad agreement that there was some practical problems with the way the amendment was written. and the chairman delegated to me and to mr. campbell the responsibility to try to find the right language. and we set about trying to do that. and we have been diligently trying to do that. then, the practical problems intervened. other people get their fingers in the pot and suggest different issues that need to be resolved. mr. campbell and i on a friday night with him in california and me in north carolina on our cell phones having conversation and we are right at the verge of reaching an agreement, we think, and we're quibbling about words. and then he gets called away to the u.s.c. football game the next day and i get called the following day to the carolina panther football game. and then we're right up against a deadline and then we find out that the chairman has offered a manager's amendment that teels with part of the problem -- deals with part of the problem and not all of it and we both submitted amendments to the rules committee. mr. campbell withdraws my amendment. mine is still standing, and we're still talking about the amendment. and then the automobile dealers, because they don't like my amendment, decide that they need to lobby against it and make it sound like i'm opposed to what i was in favor of all along. so we've been at this for a long time. and finally yesterday, mr. campbell and i sat down and talked again and decided that we should not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. what we have in the bill with the manager's amendment substantially advances the process. we are not the end of the process anyway. the senate is going to have to deal with this. and both of us are still intent on the philosophy that automobile dealers ought to be exempt from cfpa. we agree on that. and so here we are and we thought it would be helpful to have this dialogue and with that i'll reserve the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. campbell: thank you very much. i yield myself such time as i may consume. maybe i shouldn't have gone to that football game because they lost. so that was rather depressing. i don't know how the carolina panthers did. they lost, too. all right. both of us didn't have a particularly good weekend. as the gentleman from north carolina, mr. watt, described we have had discussions on this thing, but i -- he has been very helpful and worked very constructively on this. in fact the amendment that is the language that is in the bill now reflects a number of discussions that the gentleman from north carolina made which clarified some things that were, frankly, confusing and conflicting in the bill. i appreciate mr. watt's constructive work on this and all that he has done with this. yes, he's right. sometimes these things get very complicated and you sit down and try to figure out what exbe actly does this say? i think we now have reached agreement that what is in the bill is the right thing. there is broad agreement as the gentleman from north carolina suggested with myself, with him, and broad agreement in this house that automobile dealers in the normal course of their business do not lend money and are not financial institutions and should not be subject to the additional regulation of the cfpa. if, however, they do lend money and act like financial institutions, then they will be subject. that's what this bill says. it is the right thing to say. i think we have reached a good conclusion on this. i thank the gentleman from north carolina very much for his very good and constructive work on this. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from north carolina. mr. watt: i yield one minute to the chair of the committee. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i'm very appreciate whyive of two of the most constructive members of the committee, the gentleman from north carolina, the gentleman from california have been working together on this. we have a mix here of policy difference, but then also some technical questions. clearly there was a difference on whether or not auto dealers should get certain kind of exemption. the majority of the committee felt the auto dealer situation was such, i would think probably particularly because of the stresses they unfairly have recently been subjected to by the chaos of the auto industry, they did deserve something. one such question was resolved of. i was in the minority on that. there was technical issues about how to work it out. i'm very pleased two of more thoughtful members are continuing to collaboration on this. the manager's amendment had some improvement in the situation that was mutually agreed to. there is room, i believe, for further conversation and refinement. so i want to express first my appreciate. secondly, my willingness to the extent my role as chair of the committee would be relevant to try to effectuate what they work out. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. campbell: i'll continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. watt: madam chair, i'll just say in closing one of the other wonderful things that's come out of this, prior to this, mr. campbell and i never really had an opportunity to roll up our sleeves and work on issues together. it's been a joy to work with him. and he's been very constructive. i want to reserve myself enough time to ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment. i don't want to do that before he has the last word. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. campbell: thank you, madam chair. yes, i enjoyed working with you as well. i'm glad that we are able to be where we are on this and look forward to working in the future as the bill moves forward. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. mr. watt: with that i ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment. the chair: without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. it is now in order to consider amendment number 18 printed in house report 111-370. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. kanjorski: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: does the gentleman rise as the designee of the gentleman from massachusetts? mr. kanjorski: yes. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 18, printed in house report number 111-370, offered by mr. kanjorski of pennsylvania. the chair: pursuant to the rule -- pursuant to house resolution 964, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. kanjorski, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. kanjorski: madam chairman, i rise in support of this amendment. nationally recognized statistical rating organizations are those credit rating agencies that are registered with the securities and exchange commission and therefore regulated. most often the phase is shortened to its initials, nrsro. however in formal contracts and statutes, the words are spelled out and each word matters. unfortunately an amendment to change one of these words was inadvertently accepted during the markup. we switched out the word recognize for the word register. if enacted into law, such a change would put thousands of contracts in default and upset numerous federal and state laws, rules, and regulations. although well intended, such a seemingly minuscule change could have disaster's unintended consequences. we must not put contracts in default or undermine other laws and regulations. therefore i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and reinstate the correct word in this important legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, i yield myself four minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. gare rest: i thank the gentleman from pennsylvania for his amendment. more than that i should say i thank the gentleman for addressing this larger issue of c.r.a.'s for a number of months. i claim time in opposition just on the amendment because i think we could probably work this out in a different way. the gentleman and i worked for a long time trying to address the issue of credit rating agencies because both of us realize that when you lay out the reasons why we are in this financial mess that we are in right now, we may disagree on this point or that point as to exactly how we got here. but both of us, i believe, came to conclusions that c.r.'s -- c.r.a.'s played a huge part to bring us where we are today with this financial mess. the reason it did was because so many people failed to exercise what we would call proper market discipline when they made their investments. whether that was a small investors, middle-sized ininvestors, or the so-called knowledgeable investors on wall street failed to use what in normal times they would have inside them to say what is the proper decisionmaking i should make. what risks should i take here or there. why was that, though, is the question. we looked at a whole bunch of things and tried to come up with changes to the regulations of the c.r.a.'s, credit rating agencies, and we made a lot of changes that were improvements. i think we came down to one point is there was much reliance upon credit rating agencies. just because the c.r.a. came out and said this particular security or this particular financial product was rated triple-a, regardless of what was actually in the package, regardless of the fact maybe it was just a compilation of subprime mortgage was no likelihood, whatsoever, they would be paid off, they got the triple-a seal of approval and people invested in it and of course the rest is history. one of the reasons why we think they got the seal of approval and why investors looked at that and said it was ok was because they had the seal of approval from the federal government. they were listed as the c.r.a.'s were listed as nrsro's, registered. merely they were registered. no seal of approval. no stamp of good housekeeping seal of approval. just they had gone through the motions and simply registered with the government as being nationally registered statistical rating organizations. that is why i think it made good sense to take away that seal of approval and that is why also i believe that this legislation, this amendment in committee, passed in a bipartisan manner out of committee. now, i recognize i'm actually on the floor now oddly enough depending the -- defending the actions of the committee for a change and i understand the potential problems. i would suggest that perhaps other things could be done other than just stripping this out and going back to the way it was before. i would suggest that we leave it as nationally registered as we go forward through the process if we find the -- maybe its minutia, maybe not, as far as some state's regulations or other federal regulations that refer to this, i bet you there is another simpler way to -- i bet you there is a simpler way to correspondent this -- correspond this back. i look forward to working with the chairman. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. can jor -- kanjorski: i yield such time as he may require to the chair of the committee. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i agree with what he said about credit rating. i for the record would like to make an assertion i know he agrees with. when he talks about our agreement on the c.r.a.'s and role, we are talking about the credit rating agencies, not the community reinvestment act the other c.r.a. with which we deal. sometimes people don't pay full attention. i don't want to get anybody too agitated. he's right. he and i collaborated on the legislation to remove the statutory assertion. he's also correct, we fully agree, i think it's very true unanimity, with the purpose he articulated. telling the average investor, pay attention on your own. don't rely on the rating agencies. don't subcontract your judgment to them. i am frustrated. i would hope that people out in the economy would take advantage of the full legal rights they have to create some buy site ratings agencies. that would be helpful. we checked. there were no obstacles to doing it. i had frustration we weren't able to do more. i think we have done as much as anybody could think of. i have seen articles saying why didn't you do more but they were absent of any suggestion. i think it would be better if we had rating agencies. in the interim we have told people use your own judgment, as the gentleman acknowledged and i think we can work this out. going forward, the problem we got was from a number of states and private institutions that have embeded in their statutes the old language. i am pleased the gentleman said let's work together. i think it would mean meeting with various of the state agencies and pension funds to see if there is some legislative fix we could adopt short of going back to the old way. i agree with him as to the purpose of changing the same so that we can alleviate this problem there. so with that i would be willing to say there is no need for the amendment even though we have an agreement. we'll ask our hardworking and very creative staffs that can often work very well together to meet with those who have raised this issue to see if there is something else we could do that would meet their concerns so they wouldn't have to all amend their statutes, etc. with that i think we have come to a conceptual agreement and is often the case we the members will come to a conceptual agreement and the staff will do the hard work of making it a reality. the chair: does the gentleman reserve? mr. kanjorski: i do. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. the gentleman has one minute remaining. mr. garrett: do you have other speakers? mr. kanjorski: no. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has the right to close. mr. garrett: do you have any other time? mr. kanjorski: we yield back our time and ask-- the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: i appreciate the chairman's comments and look forward to seeing how this can be dealt with -- if this bill finally does pass and goes through over to the senate and the conference. mr. frank: the gentleman would yield. mr. garrett: yes, sir. mr. frank: i would say, if there were to be a no on the voice vote, i think that would be a reasonable end to this particular discussion and we can then continue on the level we talked about. mr. garrett: with that comment and also with the understanding that we are not talking about the other c.r.a., ou

Related Keywords

Vietnam ,Republic Of ,Louisiana ,United States ,Nevada ,Alabama ,Vermont ,Brazil ,Minnesota ,China ,California ,Boise ,Idaho ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,Connecticut ,Mexico ,Arizona ,Kirkuk ,At Ta Mim ,Iraq ,Quantico ,Virginia ,South Carolina ,Massachusetts ,Iowa ,West Point ,Pennsylvania ,Haiti ,Norway ,New York ,Canada ,Japan ,North Carolina ,Germany ,Afghanistan ,Texas ,Iran ,Philadelphia ,Florida ,Indiana ,Wisconsin ,Georgia ,Reno ,Capitol Hill ,Tennessee ,Michigan ,Taiwan ,London ,City Of ,United Kingdom ,Pakistan ,Denmark ,Baghdad ,New Jersey ,Nebraska ,Maryland ,Oslo ,Ohio ,France ,Italy ,Hawaii ,Americans ,Iranian ,French ,Iraqi ,American ,Texans ,Canadian ,Iraqis ,Britain ,Canton ,Hawaiian ,Michael Steinberg ,Donna F Edwards ,Alison Schwartz ,Nancy Pelosi ,Allyson Schwartz ,Shawn Welsh ,Bernie Madoff ,Las Vegas Sun ,Harry Reid ,Barack Obama ,Al Qaeda ,Michael Walsh ,Eleanor Roosevelt ,George W Bush ,Sarah Palin ,Danny Feeney ,Ben Nelson ,Al Gore ,Loretta Atlanta ,Newt Gingrich ,November America ,Dan Hyde ,