Transcripts For CSPAN2 Capital News Today 20090729

stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. (announcer) 36-hour cialis. or cialis for daily use. ask your doctor about cialis today, so when the moment is right, you can be ready.  billy butler went 5-5 i the wilson win -- royals win last night. tonight in the first inning, a two-run home run off jason berken in the first. royals go on to win it 4-3 in 11 getting a game-tying home run by willie bloomquist in the eighth and then the base hit by john buck in the 11th to drive in the go-ahead run. orioles now look to bounce back tomorrow night and get one win in the series. look at this matchup. you have zack greinke who has a 2.04 e.r.a. goes against chris tillman making his major league debut. >> zack greinke has got the best e.r.a. in all of baseball. one of the toughest pitchers in the game to get runs off of. he's looking for his 11th win of the season. i just hate to think about what his win-loss record would be like if he had a team that could score him some runs. chris tillman making his debut. again, another rookie coming up from triple-a ball a power pitcher all the way. good repertoire of pitches. strong fastball. good curve ball, slider, changeup. that record doesn't prove anything about how good this young kid. look at those e.r.a. you don't want to miss this game. it's going to be great. >> exroos challenge back-to- back wins for me, your only leading 5-3. in fairness to you, markakis got robbed twice on the night or that might have been a different story. it was nolan reimold t-shirt night. royals win it 4-3 in 11. we'll see you back here tomorrow night. have a great night, everybody. , followin g statt on the team's pursuit of favre. >> here's rachel nichols from hatties berg, mississippi. >> brett favre's's friends and family says he's really been wrestling with this decision. the issue was can he hold up over the entire season, saying hey, all those proverbs, it's better to do than not do, don't regret the things you don't do. he would retort to them you're not the one out there. as recently as a few days ago he text messaged his old teammate who is now in minnesota and said i'm just worried that three quarters of the way through the season, my body's going to break down. eventually today with increasing pressure to make a decision, brett favre finally made one. now the reaction among the players at first was surprise. since a lot of them thought once he had the surgery he would be joining them. over the last few days they realized this was going to be more of a 50-50 call. jared allen told me when he first heard the news he thought it might be another rumor. so he called brad childress had to confirm with him directly narve wasn't coming. >> in hatesberg, mississippi, i'm rachel nichols, espn. >> tuesday's developments possibly capping a tumultuous off season for favre and the vikings after retiring in february. favre was released by the jets in late april. putting him to sign -- preventing him from signing from any other nfl team. showing interest with the three-time mvp and the vikes, number 4 will remain out of football in 2009. >> absolutely surprised. i was almost positive that he would come back. i saw him as the 40-year-old guy out there working hard in the hot mississippi heat, throwing balls to some high schoolers. to me that was a true indication that he wasn't testing his shoulder, but that he was definitely going to make an attempt to come back and play for the minnesota vikings. >> this was going to be another opportunity for the jets. another new transition. i don't think emotionally, mentally and physically he knew. i can't do it again. >> i'm a year older, and i think that he finally realized that with all that in mind i can't do it. >> for the first time i'm actually surprised brett favre made this decision. i really thought he would come back and play. i wish i was 39, and look at his vikings offensive roster and say, that's what kind of made me the thought to come back. people are trying to be great. sometimes they shut it off unless you have something you're passionate about, you will never, ever get back that same type of intensity at the end. >> more relieved than anything just to know that he came to a decision. and that he's probably going to stick to it. probably. all the hoopla around the whole brett favre thing coming in and not coming in is all over and done with. now we can move on. >> if 2008 is, in fact the last time we see favre in an nfl game, the disappointing final season won't tarnish his hall of fame career. he has virtually every career record for quarterback, including wins, completions, passing yards and touchdowns. jacksonville with the spot to michael vick. the jacksonville sun reporting that vick's name hasn't come up once during any of the club's personnel meetings. vick received conditional reinstatement from the nfl. >> baseball trade winds swirling. he's made the latest pitch to land ace roy halladay. scott kazmir has been the subject of trade rumors as well tuesday. he made his pitch to stick with tampa. >> also, broncos wideout, a hefty 55 without taking part in practice. and the hornets on the take for tyson chandler. count 1 is on the board with the >> the cubs have won 9 of 11. they're down to the astros top nine. ryan dempster started for chicago. he was coming off the d.l. to start. even out with a broken toe. roy oswalt left the game in the second inning with a lower back strain. went an inning and two-thirds. 11-6. houston, miguel tejada with a two-run homer. with five ribbies in this game. >> meanwhile, the cardinals play tuesday night versus the dodgers. half game back of the cubs in the nl central. this game, no score. it was delayed due to rain. chad billingsly, so far surrendering one. we'll keep you updated here on espnews. >> the yanks have won 10 of 11 to open the second half. facing the rays. cc sabathia, lifetime against tampa. longoria, his 20th homer of the year. the fifth active player to hit 20 or more home runs in his first two seasons. rays scott kazmir gave up just one earned run in seven innings. he gets his first win since may 9. and bad news for the yankees. chien-ming wang out for the season. he'll have season ending surgery on his right shoulder wednesday. and joe girardi said there was no timetable next season. >> his name will likely eclipse brett favre in references and anchors and reporters. this, of course, may change to favre unretired. the one man that looms large is roy hal aday. they hope to have a deal in place by tuesday, but it didn't happen. the red sox are not interested in having ryan westmoreland be involved in any deal for halladay. >> updating you on the red sox and the a's. the a's have taken an 8-7 lead. this game is in the top of the 11th. davis, an r.b.i. single proving to be the difference in this one. jonathan papelbon with a 3-run lead for the second time in his career. indians 3-3. in the top of the fourth. >> on sundays, the eagles introducing sean mcdermott at jim johnson's successsive coordinator. when asked what style he would play, he said johnson style. the eagles played in five n.f.c. title games and reached super bowl xxxix. on tuesday, johnson lost his battle with cancer. he was 68. until just recently, he had been andy reid's only defensive coordinator with the eagles. >> it's not an easy thing at all. he's such a dynamic personality. he left this phenomenal legacy here. then he battled right to the end. so all those things have not been easy. >> i think his legacy is the words from the people that knew him best. his family. the steve spagnuolos, and john har baughs, and brian dawkins and the guys that lived with them every day. they know what a special guy he was, and how much he meant to all of us both professionally and personally. >> it amazed me that he had been in this league this long. and he was as old as he was. and he was as feisty as he was. day-in and day-out. you talk about people losing their stinger. his stinger kept growing bigger and bigger every year. it was amazing. >> during johnson's ten seasons, phillie totalled 427 sacks. second in the league over the steelers. phillies defensive unit also ranked in the top 10 in both points and yards allowed. >> broncos wideout showed up for camp on time. marshall did not practice tuesday because of health reasons. had he not shown up, he would have faced a fine of almost $16,000 a day. >> espnews will bring you nfl camp confidential through august 8. daily reports from around the nfl as rookies and veterans report to training camp. espnews, your home for all things nfl. >> coming up, the latest on the plaxico burress case. including how one of his former teammates could be facing charges as well. and here's something you don't see often. michael phelps getting dominated in the pool. and i'll give you a treat. come here. yeah, good boy. here's your treat. ♪ ( neighing, whimper ) ♪ show off. ( neighs ) ♪ it's much easier to find money at esurance. great auto insurance rates and lots of discounts! got insurance already? save more with esurance's "switch & save (tm) discount"! it also pays to shop online. you get esurance's "fast 5 (tm) discount" just for getting an instant online quote. - thanks, professor. - don't forget the good student discount. and there's even more discounts! it's no "secret" that you can save hundreds with esurance. make it your "mission" to click or call esurance today. burress will testify before a grand jury. burress faces up to to three and a half years for a weapons charge. he shot himself in a nightclub in november. and teammate antonio pierce was with him that night. and pierce could also face charges. addressing pierce's legal situation. when this incident occurred, antonio reacted out of concern, for the health and well being of plaxico burress. and his first priority was to be sure that plaxico received proper medical attention for what well could have been a life threatening wound. there was no criminal intent on the part of plaxico simply because he accompanied plaxico that evening, and he made the decision to immediately take plaxico to the hospital. we believe it is unwanted for the da's office to extend criminal d charges under these circumstances. >> the office might want to hide in the cave. but the office finally emerging from hibernation. facing native new yorker jason marquis. luis castillo lucky. that one bounces off second base to score alex cora. marquis, by the way, denied his 13th win of the season. that would have given him the national league lead. new york, 20-2 at home against colorado. since 2003. mike pelfrey runs his scoreless streak to 20 innings, against the rockies. >> with a game between the pirates and the giants, tied at 1. they alleged a solo shot in the second. second career major league home run. five years for the giants. pedro gomez reporting that randy johnson has been moved from the 15-day to 16-day disabled list with a torn rotate ter cuff. he believes he can come back in september. >> paul beaderman, pulling off one of the greatest upsets. he beat michael phelps in the 200-meter freestyle at the world championships. also snatching his record. peterman acknowledged his polyurethane suit gave him the edge over phelps. now peter man is the same swimmer phelps beat by more than 3 seconds en route to winning one of his eight total gold medals less than a year ago in beijing. phelps was a little off his olympic time. but beaderman was an unheard of 4 seconds faster. >> christiano ronaldo scored on a penalty shot in the 48th minute. real madrid won #-2. it was his third game with his new team since his 131 million dollars transfer from manchester united. >> >> mercury and the suns. there is diana taurasi. phoenix up early on. taurasi bombs away. swish from three. then more from the sun. more from taurasi from way, way out. she bears that one. phoenix up by 15. third quarter, time melting aaway, who else? taurasi takes it. 17 boards, nine boards, and phoenix wins 95-80. >> the bobcats and hornets swapped a pair of 26-year-old centers. new orleans gets okafor in return. tyson chandler goes to charlotte. but oklahoma city backed out with injury concerns. chandler played just 45 games last season. his points in rebounds both declined from his breakout season of 07-08. meanwhile okafor averaged a double-double. phil mickelson will return next week. his first tournament since he tied for second at the u.s. open. he's been away nearly two months because his wife, amy, has breast cancer. his mother is also battling breast cancer. as usual, mickelson won twice and finished in the top 10 in half of his 12 events. but that's not quite as good as tiger. the only player he trails in the world golf rankings. >> brett favre says he's officially hanging them up. details and reaction from around the league. undefeated professional boxer floyd "money" mayweather has the fastest hands boxing has ever seen. so i've come to this ring to see who's faster... on the internet. i'll be using the 3g at&t laptopconnect card. he won't. so i can browse the web faster, email business plans faster. all on the go. i'm bill kurtis and i'm faster than floyd mayweather. (announcer) switch to the nation's fastest 3g network and get the at&t laptopconnect card for free. brett favre staying retired. told minnesota head coach to give him the news. favre had surgery in may to alleviate a torn biceps tendon. the nfl live crew weighs in on favre's decision. >> welcome into nfl live. trey wingo here with the coach, herm edwards and mark schlereth. considering the dance that we've had here for two months between brett favre and the vikings. the fact that he had surgery, which he doesn't like at all. are you surprised that the the end result is he's staying retired? is. >> i'm not surprised. it's an emotional decision for him. and i they he made the right decision for himself and the vikings. you're talking about a guy who last year really faulterred toward the end of november. and i they he looked at his situation hard. you're talking about a guy that would played 269 football games. he was beat up. and the career of him being beaten up. having surgery, and his mindset said know what i can't finish for this team and i'm going to retire. >> i'm shocked that he walked away from it. because he went out, he had that surgery. he's been playing this thing for a couple of seasons. i couldn't believe he came two days before camp and said that's it. i'm done, i'm walking away from this. it shows you how his body feels. because he did make the right decision. if you can't get through it physically, it is an arduous task the thing you don't want to do is let those teammates down by not showing up and answering the bell. something he doesn't know about. he's answered the bell every time he's lined up. >> that was the most interesting, perhaps, in the conversation he had with ed werder. it wasn't the shoulder or the arm. it was the ankles, the knees, everything else. so now that we believe, we believe. he's going to stay retired forever, what is the brett favre legacy? do you think this waffling for three or four years will undermine all his accomplishments at all? >> he earned the right to take his time. his legacy will be for everyone that's ever watched brett favre play football. his passion and his kid-like manner when he played. and that is the enthusiasm that brett favre played with. whether you were playing against him, it didn't matter. you wanted to watch the play he played football. >> i'll be honest with you, all the waffling back and forth. i grew tired of it this season. but i guarantee you one thing. to me if you're uneducated about the game, yeah, that would be the caveat about brett favre. but any of those who played this, followed this game and have watched his career unfold, we have nothing but the utmost admiration for what he was able to accomplish, the player that he was. for me he's one of the greatest of all time, and that's the only thing i'll remember. >> he's got the number one next to his name in almost every important statistical category you want for a quarterback. they say records are made to be broken, i'd like to see the person who will break that record. >> monday through friday, 4:00 o'clock, espn. >> home run on tuesday. evan longoria became the second race player to hit 20 or more home runs in his first two seasons. adam dunn hit his 26th for the nationals. rye ab brawn has hit five home runs in his last eight games. and chipper jones went deep for the fourth time in his last nine games. adrian gonzalez also hit his 27th. >> this reminder that the mlb trade deadline is friday. espnews has you you covered all day long. "baseball tonight" insiders like peter gammons and steve phillips will be a long way as we sort out the rumors and react to the deal so far. roy holliday still a toronto blue jay. we'll see if there is any talk. >> my sources tell me it will be a dandy of a show. >> it's been a great career for me. it's over. as hard as that is for me to say, it's over. as they say, all good things must come to an end. >> there will be no viking adventure. brett favre calling it a career. espnews begins now. >> coming off his perfect game, mark buehrle retired the first 17 batters he faced against the twins. by the way, johnny vandermeer, only guy ever to throw back-to-back no hitters. in the fif ghts book's lure gets cuddyer swinging. smiled against jencks. he retired jencks consecutive batters at 41. next batter, joe crede grounds to short. buehrle has the new record, 42 in a row. he was perfect through five. perfect through 5 and 2/3. in the sixth, alexei castillo walks. so there goes the perfect owe. buehrle retired 45 straight batters. the visiting fans applaud the effort. history not lost on them. then span breaks up the no hitter. he was the next batter. so finally a hit against buehr buehrle. very next batter, joe mauer, in the span aof three batters, perfecto gone, no hitter gone. with that, the shutout is gone. now you've got to think about the game. it's 1-1. nick pune toe, 2-1 single to right. buehrle started so well. he ends up giving up five earned runs in 6 and a third innings pitched. got a nice ovation from the twins fans. >> jim barr was the first pitcher in big league history to retire at least 41 in a row. did it over consecutive starts in august of 1972. bobby jencks matched barr in 2007. buehrle eclipsed both on tuesd tuesday. >> thanks for tuning into espnews. he's will selva, i'm anish shroff. mark buehrle was stringing us along a little while but not as long as brett favre did. >> it's been a little while there. the vikings report to training camp on thursday. and favre won't be there thursday or any time this summer. favre is staying retired. favre spoke to ed werder about his decision. saying it was the hardest decision i've ever made. i didn't feel physically i could play on a level that was acceptable. i'd like to thank everyone, including the packers-of jets and vikings. and most importantly, the fans. so, ed, is this it? >> as far as him, you know, reconsidering this and playing again if somebody lost their start. if there was a tom brady situation, i guess you can't really rule it out with him. but i would just say that i know he thought the vikings were a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. he wanted to play there last year. the packers forbid it. put it in the trade agreement with the jets to make it almost impossible for him to play there. when he got released he saw this as something that was probably too good to be true. and i guess that's exactly what it proved to be. >> viking coach brad childress released the following statement on the team's pursuit of favre. >> here's rachel nichols from mississippi. >> brett favre's friends and family tell me it's been an he motional few days for him as he's been wrestling with this decision. the issue was can he hold up over an entire season. and can the more he said to him he would retort that his old teammate, the kicker in green bay who is now actually in minnesota said i'm just worried that three quarters of the way through the season, my body's going to break down. with increasing pressure from the vikings to make a decision. with reaction from the vikings players, they thought once he had the surgery he would be joining them. but over the last few days he realized this is going to be more of a 50-50 call. jared allen told me when he first heard the news he thought it might be another rumor. so he had to call brad childress and confirm with him directly that favre wasn't coming. longwell texted favre. and favre texted back and said he appreciated the support, but couldn't do it for another season. in mississippi, rachel nichols, espn. after retiring in february, favre was released by the jets in late april. free to sign with any other nfl team. despite mutual interest between the three-time mvp and the vikings, number 4 will apparently remain out of football in 2009. teammates, legends alike on favre's decision. >> absolutely surprised. i was almost positive and definite that he would come ba back. i saw him as a 40-year-old guy out there working hard in the hot mississippi heat. throwing balls to some high schoolers. to me that was a true indication that he wasn't testing the shoulder, but he was definitely going to make an attempt to come back and play for the vikings. >> this was going to be another even though easier than the jets, another new transition that i don't think emotionally, mentally and physically he knew. i can't do it again. i'm a year older. and i think he finally realized with all that in mind i can't do it. >> for the first time i'm surprised brett favre made this decision. i really thought he would come back and play. i wish i was 39. and looking at that offensive roster i would have thought man, i'd love to come back to this group. that's what gave me the thought that brett would come back. >> people were trying to be great sometimes don't know when to shut it off. and it's just again, unless you have something that you're passionate about, you'll never, ever get back that same type of intensity again. >> more relieved than anything to know that he came to terms and came to a decision. and that he's probably going to stick to it. probably. all the hoopla around the whole brett favre thing coming in or not coming in is all over and done with. so now we can move on. if 2008 is the last time we see brett favre in an nfl game, at this point in the final season it certainly won't tarnish his hall of fame career. he holds virtually every career record for a quarterback. including wins, completion, passing yards and touchdowns. >> jacksonville off the list of potential landing spots for michael vick. the sun reporting that vick's name hasn't come up once during any of the clubs personnel meetings. vick received conditional reinstatement from the nfl earlier this week. >> still to come on espnews, baseball trade winds swirling. who made the latest pitch to land ace roy holliday. >> tuesday he made his pitch to stick with tampa. >> also, broncos wideout brandon marshall avoided a hefty fine without taking part in practice. >> and the hornets trying a takeover of tyson chandler. how that's going to help them on the court and with their checkbook. >> cubs have won 9 of 11 to take over first place. facing roy oswalt and the astros, bottom two, oswalt misses outside to soriano after the pitch. pudge rodriguez comes to the mound. motions for the trainer and would leave in the second inning with a lower back strain. >> top 5. miguel tejada off ryan dempster. tejada, home run. five ribbies in this game. houston goes on to win 11-6. for tejada, his first five r.b.i. game since 2007. the cubs see their five-game win streak snap. dempster falls to 4-11 lifetime against houston. >> cards enter play tuesday night versus the dodgers. a half game back of the cubs in the nl central. right now, it's all cardinals. 6-0 in the bottom of the sixth. ryan ludwig, a two-run single. molina, a two-run single. and adam wainwright. an r.b.i. single. 6-0 is where which stand. >> yanks are 10-1 in the season's second half. second of three against the ra rays. c.c. sabathia is starting for the bombers. 7-1 lifetime against tampa. bottom five. evan longoria. he has the power. 20th of the year. fifth active player to hit 20 home runs or more in his first two seasons. tampa wins 6-2. scott kazmir gets his first win since may 9th. joe madden said that is as good a game i've seen out of him in about a year. meanwhile chien-ming wang will have season ending surgery on his shoulder. >> his name will likely eclipse references from reporters. of course, it may change should favre unretire. the one name that looms large is roy halladay. if the bluejays wanted to have a deal in place by tuesday. but it didn't happen. peter gammons and the red sox are not interested in having their top outfield prospect, ryan westmoreland, be involved in any deal halladay. jim rice getting his number retired will inspire boston's best versus oakland on tuesday night. top nine. a's down 7-6. davis visiting jonathan papelbon. and davis with the grounder to short. nick green fields it but throws the ball away. mark ellis scores his second of the inning. game tied at 7. move to extra innings. top of 11 to be exact. one out for davis. davis the r.b.i. single to rig right. and boston has lost 7 of 10 games overall. they happen to get 14 hits on the same night jim rice's number 14 wins retired. 18 blown save of his career. first blown save of his career with three runs given up. >> updates from the west coast. the indians with the 4-3 lead on the angels. tribe has won five straight. a season high for them. despite rumors of victor martinez and cliff lee being shot. the angels one of the teams believed to be interested in lee. >> on sunday, the eagles introduced sean mcdermott as jim johnson's successor as defensive coordinator. when asked what style he would play, mcdermott said, johnson style. the eagles earned seven playoff berths. played in five n.f.c. title games and reached super bowl xxxix. on tuesday, johnson lost his battle with cancer. he was 68. until just recently he had been andy reid's only defensive coordinator with the eagles. >> it's not an easy thing at all. he's such a dynamic personality. he left this phenom national legacy here. then he battled right to the end. so all of those things have not been easy. >> i think his legacy is the words from the people that knew him best. his family of the steve spagnuolos, john har baugh's, and brian dawkins, and the guys thatt lived with him every day. they knew what a special guy he was, and how much he meant to all of us professionally and personally. >> it was amazing that he had been in this league so long. he was as old as he was. and he was as feisty as he was. day-in and day-out. you talk about people losing their stinger. his stinger kept s growing biggr and bigger every year. it was amazing. >> during johnson's ten seasons at the helm with the eagles defense, phillie totalled 426 sacks. second in the league over that span behind the steelers. phillies defensivet unit also ranked in the top 10 in boths and yards allowed. >> as he said he would, bron he cos wideout brandon marshall showed up for camp on time. rookies and players recovering from injuries. marshall coming off a hip injury last season. but did not practice tuesday because of health reasons. hadp he not shown up, he would have faced a fine of almost day.00 a bring you nfll camp confidential through august 8. daily reports from around the nfl as rookies and veterans report to training camp. espnews your home for all things nfl. >> coming up, the latest on the plaxico burress case. including how one of his former teammates could be facing charges as well. >> and here's something you don't see often. michael phelps, getting dominated in the pool. stay tuned to stay >> plaxico burress will testify before a grand jury wednesday morning. burress faces up to three and a half years in prison for a weapons charge he shot himself at a nightclub in november. teammate antonio he pierce was with him that night. and pierce now could also face charges. giants president released a statement addressing pierce's legal statement. when the incident occurred, antonio reacted out of concern for the health and well being of plaxico burress. his first priority was to make sure plaxico received proper medical attention for what could have been a life threatening wound. there was no criminal intent on the part of antonio who was thrust into this incident simply because he accompanied plaxico that evening. we believe it is unwarranted for the da's office to press criminal charges against antonio under these circumstances. >> to the diamond. mets offense starting to emerge from hibernation. 25 runs in the last three games. facing jason marquis who is seeking his n.l. leading 13th win. sometimes it helps to get a good bounce. luis castillo played alex cora with a base hit off second base. mets go on to win 4-0. >> the giants trail the rockies by a game in the nl wildcard. giants hosting the pirates right now. tied up at 1. bottom of the fifth. barry zito still in there. five innings pitched. a walk and five k's. by the way, bad news for san francisco. pedro gomez reporting that randy johnson has been moved from the 15-day to 60 day disabled list with a torn rotate ter tough. bebelieves though he can come back in september. >> paul beader man pulling off one of swimming's greatest upsets. he beat phelps in the 200 meter freestyle at the world championships tuesday. also snatching his world record, beaderman acknowledged that his suit gave him an edge over phelps. now peter man is the same swimmer phelps beat by more than 3 seconds en route to winning one of eight total gold met medals in the 200 free at beijing. beaderman was an unheard of 4 seconds faster. >> christiano ronaldo scoreless so far as a member of real madrid. remember, he came over from manchester united. in that 131 million dollars transfer. second half, nice foot work. tripped in the box. the referee shows the yellow card. subtle. sometimes they really throw it up there. do it with emphasis. take one more look. ronaldo, yeah, that's a trip. he will get a penalty kick. and there it is. his first goal as a member of real madrid. >> wnba, mercury sun. die not aataurasi playing her first game back since her two-game suspension. and early on, taurasi, bombs away. mercury up 7. third quarter, mercury up 15. taurasi wants the 3. and she wants one now. mercury up 18 now. later in the third. it's guess who? taurasi. 17 points and phoenix wins 95- 95-80. tyson chandler goes to charlot charlotte. pack with injury concerns. chandler only played 45 games this last year. his points in rebounds both declined from his breakout season. meanwhile okafor played all 82 games while averaging a double-double. >> golf, phil mickelson will return to the pga tour at the bridgestone invitational. his first tournament tied for second at the u.s. open. mickelson has been away nearly two months because his wife, amy has breast cancer. mickelson's mother is also battling breast cancer. as usual, mickelson has been spectacular this season. winning twice, and finishing in the top 10 in half of his 12 events. that's not quite as good as tiger woods. the only player he trails in the world golf rankings. tiger leads the tour in wins, top 10 in earnings. >> brett favre said he's officially hanging them up. details and reaction from around the >> i'm christopher harris. let's look at a few starting pitchers. pineiro has a scary matchup against the dodgers. but if i'm not looking for starting pitchers, he is someone i would try. he has a 2.59 e.r.a. not going to get a lot of strikeouts. chris tillman takes on the orioles. ha perfect situation for the big righty to make his big-league debut. he has 99 strikeouts in 96-2/3 triple-a innings this year. manny parra, i'm giving him the start. he has 12 strike outs and three weeks. espn.com has the best fantasy analysis around. check out our articles, videos, podcasts and chats chats and do bettsery under league. >> braves and the marlins. stepping up, stepping out. two-run shot. that's it. walkoff job. bottom ninth. marlins win 4-3. his third career walkoff hit. florida has won six of the last seven games overall, chipper jones now has four home runs his last nine games. >> nats and brewers. adam dunn flashing the strength of his. off of carlos villanueva. you have to work through each case of one at a time and figure out which you can do would. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> let me get the numbers trade and a couple of days, you indicate that you will complete the review of the detainees at guantanamo this fall? >> as the expectation to make and that to date the summer were significantly higher than the 50 of the 240 you anticipate transferring to other countries are relocating? to make substantially more than 50 approved. >> already approved. and that there is a significant number that you are already pursuing article three picks a criminal prosecution to have been referred by doj as being an avid that protocol. >> it could be article three or military commissions. >> for in some cases ultimately can be prosecuted and get thrown back but essentially, yes. >> has there been any determinations and of those that will be recommended for indefinite detention? >> no, there is no detainee put in that fifth category. >> will of the decision to put someone in the fifth category also be made by the attorney-general consultation with the secretary of defense? >> that is not in a shoe that is covered by this protocol. that is probably a broader cabinet level permissible level or a presidential decision that wouldn't necessarily be confined to the two of those pemex of that decision has yet to be made of the than the president's statement there would be due process of review of individuals place in this category. >> is conditional if we end up with people in that category. >> anger san that you recommended and that the military commissions in senate bill noam be amended to include a sunset provision. could you explain my believe there should be a sunset provision in this? >> well, the main reason i guess is that traditionally military commissions or use in the context of a particular conflict. this particular conflict may be unlike most others and all others we have dealt with respect to how long it may endure. and so if you tie the commission to the duration of the conflict and have a relatively open ended, and made sense that after some number of years congress come back and take pressure look and see whether we have lent something of things need to be changed and that is the man thinking behind that. >> i generally support them but this seems to me we do want to get a process for military commissions one emplace with some degree of confidence and predictability. if the conflict, if there is no longer a need in regard to this particular conflict to continue military commissions and your recommendation would be to allow the sunset to take place? >> i don't necessarily want to go that far but all i am saying on behalf of the administration is a sunset is a mechanism that would compel and allow congress to look again at commissions and maybe they should be continued and shouldn't be reformed in some way. i think we will learn things going forward and after a certain number of years it may be a per prefer congress to stick the second of but i wouldn't want to judge and now come, it would depend on what we find. >> as you go for the like you to keep the judiciary committee informed as to the numbers that are likely to be referred for prosecution of article three and the military commissions and what procedures are being used and the advent that you will have be determined people need indefinite detention and obviously i know you'll have to submit a plan it as a winning individuals will be maintained if there is no guantanamo. >> thank you, i meant to ask and i understand senator hatch may have asked the question about give and then went to return to have a presumption for article three or try else it would not necessarily increase the situations in which miranda warnings are given, but my understanding was the answer was the case by case analysis and in the even does not occur until after what questioning by the military intelligence or other related with the promise might be a and if that is true will if that is true even though you could have an article three trial despite no warning it makes a dovecote and therefore doesn't that diminished the number of cases inuit of resumption could result in in her article three court trial? >> if you want to restate your understanding. >> i thank you understand, is serving in the case i think as mr. johnson said that we need to take care of immediate intelligence and for as protection first and nobody wants to sacrifice the safety of our troops. second is a need to be strategic but but if we learned that from what we have information is valuable but wasn't preceded by randall warnings and obviously that will be a factor. actually odd, follow and would depend and this is the same i keep returning to depend on all of the attacks of the case. >> one of the key tax will be whether it was given because that will have a lot to do with whether it is admissible. >> i thought you were talking to him. >> whichever one of you want to answer is fine, the question is no. let's do it in order, is it true that in august to get an article three prosecution it is a whole lot better to have miranda warning if you rely on statements given by the defendant? >> it will be better and there are exceptions like the public safety is important to put it take your basic point. >> the presumptuous for an article free trial of their four going to override what i for you just say was the preeminent concern which is what ever battlefield intelligence questioning these two ochre will occur verse without regard to how the cases ultimately will be disposed of? >> i think the answer is clearly not, we would want to gather intelligence and protect our troops as the paramount concern and then to see what we can do. >> if there is an order of hierarchy the first value would be secret ever information in the beginning to protect the troops in gathered important intelligence and seconds is a change in the hierarchy of values and after that the next possession is that the case should be an article three case of possible. when. >> i think at understand where you're going in my only quarrel with this is is sort to be, a little too rigid for what i think is the very and complex ground truth that we encounter out there. out of the way i would put it is we are interested in presenting national security using whatever tool is best for the situation and that low. five a lot, there are some principles i can state in the one we talked about for protection and intelligence gathering by is dangerous to start adopting these abstract principles to match in advance because the reality is more massive than that. >> i understand that what we are getting is is going to be hard to get article free prosecution if you don't get miranda warnings and if the presumption is the case will be article free not military commissions them by definition you have to give miranda warnings and most of them. >> if that is the case that directly conflicts with the first brigade which is getting military intelligence because once you give them a warning you'll get a whole lot at least in most cases so does in this change in presumptions work its way up the chain and conflicts with the first prayer in it which is to get military intelligence? >> let me try to into that, by agreeing to use a portion of the protocol that has been worked out between tivo j nco g there is a resumption where feasible and preferred cases will be prosecuted in article three court in keeping with principles nonetheless where other compelling factors make m.r. appropriate to prosecute a case in a reformed military commissions and may be prosecuted there and go on to presets of lazarus to evaluate with each case and i will just read one of the three sets strength of interest and the practice of reconsidered of the major advances to be charged or any pending charges and the nature of the conduct of and the identity of victims of the defense, the location and context of which have never apprehended and the manner in which the case was investigated and evidence gathered including the investigating entities and the other two sides of rafters go on in similar vein. >> isn't it likely though that if there is not a change in procedure in the original intelligence gathering whether the question is by the military or intelligence services or whoever might be if there are not routinely giving miranda warnings and even though there may be a presumption to try to get prosecutable cases into articles records the reality is without them and given in those cases the presumption is probably going to be overridden on that factor alone. and perhaps the majority of cases. i would hesitate want to try to predict how the case is going to shake out in response to your question. i do know this protocol was worked out with sufficient flexibility to take account of that and other issues so that we have both avenues of prosecution available for dealing with international terrorists. >> i think everybody is in favor and i'm not arguing whether priority is, but i'm having trouble understanding how you can get to the situation where you have a military commissions as opposed to commissions if, in fact, there is not a fairly early miranda warning given in this situation. >> if you have a situation in which the guide does not talk it doesn't talk all you got plenty of other evidence on video and eyewitnesses and there may be a situation where the don't make a difference and the other while we do want to be strategic travis and tries to have been in the game of the process we will that is only sensible, i think the concern you are getting at is you don't want to tell to end up finding the dog and i think that's a legitimate concern but i think have enough flexibility and in this protocol to take that into account and guard against. >> in the interest of time anything else to live like to end in to the record that rather clear rise in rethink it is necessary would be happy to receive because it is an interesting question and we should perhaps answer questions our colleagues have about this if there's anything you want to supplement the record with. >> this is an evolving issue and one of which is certainly challenging to the department of justice and the permanente events of thank you career service and has money here will rely may introduce that the second panel. first we have a mr. laufman, a former assistant u.s. attorney in sivas staff to the deputy attorney general as tears as partner with kelly, white caller crime litigation practice and as assistant u.s. attorney we specialize in prosecuting terrorists of the and other national security cases in 2005 research does lead trial counsel in the government's successful prosecution bois, and virginia jihad case and this involves american citizen who was convicted of providing import resources and conspiring to assist and hijack aircraft and other charges and he was sentenced to life imprisonment. our second illnesses ms. pearlstein, she joined the public international affairs at princeton in 2007 as an assistant research scholar and a lot of public affairs program in 20031 he served as a founding director of programs where she led the organization's separate and research advocacies running u.s. interrogation of operations and among she led them the first. in an multiple reports on the human rights impact of u.s. national security policy but the american anbar association of long and national security and our third is counsel to the washington d.c. office of gibson dunn and crutcher and from 2007 to 2009 he was a wide has legal adviser to president bush's national security council and assisted in coordinating the response to national issues and controversies and it was on national security related to litigation and oversight and he previously worked in the office of legal counsel. we welcome all three of you in the committee and appreciate your willingness to testify and it is the tradition if you please rise in minister in the of someone to you live from the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? >> please have a seat, we will start with you. >> thank you senator kyl who, yesterday morning in alexander karma a few miles from here that i know i've played out and embodies many of the issues before the subcommittee. one in the case to assist record judge increased the dividend is centrist, 30 years to life in prison for providing some apparel and will support and just try civilian aircraft and other crimes. he will now be transported back to the administrative and floors where he is serving his sentence other highly restrictive conditions of confinement prosecutors and former prosecutors love to talk about the big case but the case is a prime example of what the new challenges of brain terrorism cases in the system and have this challenges can be overcome. in the debate about alternatives that case is highly instructive. of homeland security sound points it is our worst nightmare , he was almost designated as a combatant in that would confessions obtained by four security officers in a country with problematic human rights record which they claimed were the result of torture and the physical evidence tying him up to the al qaeda cell have been seized by saudi security officers located in saudi arabia. to prove the case and the but his claims of torture and fabricated it was essential to obtain testimony of security officers and saudi governments never permitted its offices to testify in criminal proceeding outside saudi arabia the community pervez information to the case in chief one and a torture claims but on a willing to will use the information in criminal proceeding. these are overcoming food unprecedented one cooperation and resourceful prosecutors in court willing to apply well settled jurisprudence and intelligence agency willing to meet them half way and with eight other case of firm is a proven ability of courts to resolve the most challenging procedure and issues presented by terrorism cases and without compromising sensitive intelligence sources or the one of will to process rights and that record and judicial achievement is well-documented over 2000 an update to the human rights said in pursuit of justice prosecuting cases from federal courts which was released last week in an initial them i would ask him that day he would be updated and the record and will. >> the piven of type of this of criminal prosecutions of cases is reason alone to ensure the ability to bring the cases in the courts is not hindered but there are additional benefits braincases and there will establish constitutional standards and procedure and evidence confer great there prosecutions who both here and abroad and by revealing thing underlying fax one, criminal proceedings play in the parole and educated the people in the nature of the threat reface. in my judgment never should be commended for establishing a presumptions were visible that guantanamo detainees will be prosecuted and at the same time will i submit restrictions in on the ability to transfer it detainees to the u.s. are ill advised him contrary to the national interest and should be eliminated. no these restrictions appear to be based on the myth that they cannot be saving incarcerated in the u.s. and, in fact, both before and after nine, none of these was attacked on terrorism charges and those has ever escaped. the most dangerous are simply serving their sentences and then printable silber max facilitating in the letter represents employers, colorado. congress has ignored this and but ignore the department of justice regulatory authority to tighten security who either been detained on terrorism related charges or convicted of such the attorney-general has broad discretion to have measures that severely restricted detainees ability to engage in conduct while incarcerated at the present national security risk including restrictions on contact with other inmates and a group prayer and with the outside world periwig one as a the obama administration gravel with resolving with prisoners and in guantanamo bay and it is essential to treat the legal architecture that gives to the executive branch flexibility in determining whether and where to bring tears of prosecutions. one option that must be preserved among other with his eye to guantanamo detainees and pitcher cases is criminal prosecution in federal courts parrot known in his preliminary report on july 22nd the detention policy task force recognized the importance of preserving criminal prosecution and military commissions as options for the government in determining whether to prosecute them and accused of engaging in terrorism. a task force identified three broad set of factors the government will employ in the form the frontiers of prosecution. the factors identified in the preliminary report reflects a recognition law prosecutions may be generally desirable certain cases other should not or cannot be brought in the article 3/4. in my judgment is cases include cases where the defendant is accused of committing crimes against to manage your war crimes or evidence in the battlefield by u.s. of foreign military services by the government's key evidence based on sensitive intelligence sources that admission of disclose or not reveal in a public trial or where were obtained through course of means. in such cases with the government has made a finding that the evidence is both reliable high-end that the release refrigeration or adjudication and if your country is not an option and the government must have recourse to an alternative to the legal form such as a military commission summit to oversight to a fair proceeding with the government's when the right to protect security interests. president obama was wise to be two in the commission's pending procedural reforms and in conclusion i commend you for holding the hearing and i urged the subcommittee to follow a chorus to bring detainee and other terrorism cases and criminal courts without restriction of a long green prosecution to commissions where appropriate, thank you. >> a juan thank you, senator kyl, members of the subcommittee, thank you for that opportunity to testify in the semper and subject. the preliminary reports in this task force issued last week announces the intention to use reforms military proceedings to try some fraction of the detainee is currently held at guantanamo bay. as i testified before the house judiciary committee well i continue to down the use of a military commissions is a necessary corps policy i believe is possible recession crimes can win the comport with international law. ensuring that any future responsibility of congress. in his brief statement of like to highlight the recommendations that i believe are essential to help insure process, import compliance with applicable international law and the use in fall both legislative drama, governing the commissions and protocol put forth by the detention policy task force for determining whether to proceed with prosecution or article freeport. the administration is ready to recognize the guidance in these circumstances to constrain the prosecutorial discretion and at the same time the protocol plan for these to be clarified to ensure that discretion is exercised that is consistent with the rule of law. the in recent testimony for the house has offered a series of specific recommendations for how the commissions act to be amended in proceedings comply with the relevant law and i ask that be incorporated in the record if possible. thank you. in addition i think it is critical that any new legislation include a sunset the structural mechanism to ensure that commissions are limited in purpose and duration. such limitations are essential to bolster the legitimacy and also ensure the constitutionality in has the supreme court is recognized our constitutional structure has a preference would be carried out by an appellate courts. under article 3 billion in keeping with this resumption of the extent to the supreme court improve use of article one military course has been limited by the supreme court and as to the court recognize commissions have historically been necessity, not efficiency and recognize only a set of circumstances and a one of which is relevant here is when commissions are in no way of this court incident to the conduct of war and where new commission system functions of that incident to it to recognize one with the evidence is on not war crimes under a law or because the commission appears to extend its mandate beyond evidence within the war is recognized by international law it may be more vulnerable to challenge article one. absent clear formal recognition of the commissions that used the military commissions cannot exercise over every crime committed at any time congressmen have only exceed is constitutional authority but will have driven my judgment he's standing national security corporation and other name. finally let me say a word about the administration's proposed protocol for when the cases should be prosecuted. any such should have two principles and it is unclear from the text to protocol whether it does. first military commission trowels may be considered at home in those cases in which prosecutors have probable cause to believe or crime is committed and evidence admissible will likely suffice to sustain a conviction and an absence of those findings none of the considerations the gravity of the alleged conduct and the front policy and so with of relevant to the prosecutorial decision and choosing an, an independent special question and that is probable cause of a war crime and evidence of mission for prosecution before the protocol is invoked. the administration's stated position and the protocol in favor of prosecution must include kevin's that makes it clear for decisionmakers wide into what extent such presumption exists and how it should be implemented and in my view is consistent with and perhaps compelled by the constitution was recognized on a called records as a default setting for non service members. it is essential as a policy matter to limit damage continued use of commissions seem likely to cause and the president as widely recognized guantanamo has the evidence and extending al qaeda recruits and as with guantanamo detention system general the unfairness extends to the process of the ticker and whenever a tactical they've achieved in trilobite commission will bring with a strategic costs of conducting strauss under a system many likely to continue to see as lacking legitimacy and as the president appears to believe the u.s. has suffered the significance strategic losses in the global struggle and other national security interest to minimize the loss is going for a. of the single biggest threat to legitimacy of the commissions is the danger they will function and perception of reality as a second class from of justice for cases involving evidence to prevail in prosecution in traditional article three's setting and adhering closely to sanders of evidence and there's a protecting prosecutorial independence is are indispensable to move forward without the chain of illegitimacy that have so affected commission trellis to date. thank you can i thank you very much, mr. edney kim i thank you china wants to make thank you the opportunity to address this information today. you have my reinstatement and i wanted to highlight a few key points before does started with the questions here after the president's may 21st speech to the nation is becoming clear that there's an emerging consensus between two administrations that someone of military commissions is necessary for the prosecution of members of the al qaeda specifically the ones of the guantanamo facility and at the same time. then six months the president's deadline for closing guantanamo will a ride and we have not heard from the task force on how that will be handled but what we do know when there are more than 220 detainees at guantanamo today and about 15 fewer than there were when this administration started and almost inevitable that al qaeda detainees maybe hundreds of them will end up in the u.s.. some of the here held as enemy combatants, some will be tried in federal court and some will be tried by military commissions and that's the topic at hand today. he topic at hand today. an issue that congress will have a significant role in. i want to address briefly the considerations -- the legal considerations that would help in choosing between federal/criminal trials and military commissions. first that choice needs to address classified information. classified information is the forefront of any trial involving al qaeda operatives. our nation's military intelligence services have conducted significant surveillance, especially against the highest level individuals in the al qaeda organization. these are the people we're talking about down at guantanamo. and they've done this to protect the american people. so classified information, any way you look at it is going to be either using the government's case or be relevant to what the defense wants to say. the fundamental principle here we hind the military commission rules on this is to avoid forcing the government into a very difficult choice between revealing classified members -- information to members of an enemy force during the time of armed conflict and holding them responsible and accountable for violations of the law of war, including the 9/11 attacks on this country on the other hand. the military commission's act allows for an important check by the judge on the reliability of underlying intelligence sources and methods. without revealing every intelligence activity behind the evidence. the same time the defendant receives every piece of evidence that the jury sees. and he is entitled to all exculpatory evidence, classified or not, unless there is an adequate substitute for him to prepare his defense. these are special procedures for a continuing war. the rules and criminal trials identified by the classified information procedures act are not that. they aren't tailored to a continuing armed conflict. that law was passed for very different circumstances. if you go back at the -- look at the history of that act you'll see it. it was to try u.s. government officials for espionage. these people were walking repositories of classified information and we wanted an orderly system for the government to have notice when they intended to bring some of this classified information out at trial. dozens of guantanamo bay detainee's in federal court we need to take a critical look at these rules that are now in federal court under the classified information procedures act. it is no answer to save federal courts are ready because of a ball past 29 years ago for very different purpose. second, they're has been significant discussion today as the primary focus of the testimony earlier about how we sort guantanamo bay detainee thank you criminal trials. this is a crucially important topic. the administration says there will be a presumption of federal court trials unless the evidence is too weak or the classified information is too important and which case a move back to the military commission system may be considered on a case by case basis. this approach i believe may be a threat to the integrity of both of the military commissions system and federal criminal justice system and this is something senator feingold pointed out earlier. it sends a message the rigorous procedures in federal court for criminal trials matter until the matter or in other words they will be followed until they make a difference in the particular case at which point will move to another system of justice. for military commissions the message would be that those proceedings are a type of secondary justice not to be respected, and i think we could have no doubt when it comes to defending the military commissions system in the appellate process that message will be taken by the judges that review it with a better approach would be to designate a class of cases for one system or another the quality of evidence in any particular case aside. trial members of al qaeda who are aliens who have finally the law of military commissions. justify that on history, tradition and the necessities of armed conflict or try all of those individuals in federal courts. but the least preferable option is to sort them on the strength of evidence to come up with a compromise solution, a sliding scale that applies to particular cases as we move through the process. further, congress needs to consider the legal consequences of where military commission trials are held and this is something that is a pending issue for this body because unless the president changes his deadline these new military commission trials will be heading the united states, not guantanamo and when the military commissions act was passed while that was a possibility it was not at the forefront of the consciousness of this body. one legal consequence of holding those trials in the united states is the scope of the constitutional rights that apply. the more constitutional provisions applicable to the fewer options available to the congress in developing rules for these trials. in the united states territorial arguments against application of certain constitutional provisions would be wiped away once these military commissions come here and that will have all sorts of consequences. everybody on the panel today talked up the need for special rules for hearsay and i think there's a broad consensus on that but i think those would be the first to fall of the trials were held here in the united states and the constitutional guarantees apply to those proceedings. if the constitution will supplies the supreme court's recent decision in crawford versus washington would suggest the safety valve for here say depends on reliability assessment by a trial judge would be invalid. another consequence would be taking away congress exclusive discretion as to whether guantanamo detainees are released inside the united states. the power to allow entry into the country rests exclusively with this body under the constitution's naturalization walls and oracle one section 8 of the constitution and the court would be extremely unlikely to order entry after a military commission acquittal outside of this country but once guantanamo detainees are here it's no longer a power congress will have. it will be up to other branches. thank you again for the opportunity to testify and i look for which the panel's questions. >> thank you all three for your testimony in addition to the record. i want to start with the first point where there is a difference between mr. edney and laufman. if we bring the detainees to the united states and is difficult to argue this is not a problem the united states can avoid being part of the solution. we are not going to be altogether countries to handle the people of guantanamo bay. we have to assume responsibility for bringing these individuals to justice. and if we use the article 3 courts there are going to be here in the united states. i feel it is clear that we can safely detain and incarcerated as individuals here and the united states. i don't really think that is an issue as we have been pointing out by my colleagues there are hundreds of convicted terrorists currently in the prison system. the issue, mr. edney then you raise is if they are found to be not guilty or there is insufficient evidence and they are here with your it is a military commission or trial article 3 court what do you do if they are not convicted or one day they are -- to complete their sentence whatever that might be and they are released? do we give up our ability to require the leave our country? i don't think we do. i think the immigration law these are such that there is no responsibility for them to be allowed to remain in the united states particularly when they finally did any of the standards we allow someone to come into our country so i think we can ask them and require the leave our country. so i think we are not getting that up. congress has spoken to that and we are waiting to hear the administration's plan. we expect that will be addressed somewhere in their plan as to what ultimately what happened to individuals who are either found exonerated by the court system or have exhausted their sentence. the united states would be the administration's position as to where they ultimately would be released. i don't have the answer to this but i just think this problem is solvable. if you want to comment on that, if any of you want to comment that's fine. >> i am happy to comment on that. i think it is an important point you raise, senator, about the ability to remove them from the country after an acquittal. they are aliens after all, and you can develop procedures that would reduce their standing to stay in the country. i think it's important to keep in mind that one of the challenges of reducing the guantanamo population has spent finding countries willing to take these people because the assessment of those third countries, the assessment of the third countries of the dangerousness of those individuals and perhaps more importantly, finding places for some of these individuals or they would not be mistreated. once the war in the united states we actually have a legal obligation under the torture statute and conviction against torture not to return an individual to a place where he or she will be mistreated -- >> that's part of the commitment. i acknowledge that but let me take issue with one point. i've talked to representatives from other countries concerning this issue and one of the points they raised to meet frequently is that fine, we are willing to do our part that is like united states willing to be, to take on responsibility within its justice system? and i'm talking about nations which there is no question they would respect international human rights in regards to the manner in which they would handle these transfers. so, i think it is an issue that the united states has to be prepared to deal with as we are. we are transferring some now for trial. i think it's going to happen. but you raise a legitimate concern and it may well be we need to change law to deal with what happens in the evin schiraldi that these individuals ultimately are released from the criminal-justice system strengthen bill law in regard to deportation. >> if i could just -- >> once they are here their rights will attach and be difficult to take them back. >> i guess i would differ slightly. i agree with your premise this particular problem is solvable and in fact to the extent i defer i think it may already be solved and that is let me just highlight to distinctions. first of all, the u.s. obligations not to send anybody back to a country where they are likely to face torture and so forth is an obligation under the treaty and so forth and it attaches already in guantanamo bay and whether they stay in guantanamo or come back here we are under that obligation, and i think the evidence of that is reflected in the fact the last administration just like this administration thought they can't send the guantanamo bay detainee's back to places like china or where ever to face persecution. so, those obligations exist whether they are in guantanamo or whether we bring them to the united states. that doesn't make a difference. with respect with what to do if a detainee is brought to the united states for trial, is acquitted were is convicted and served a sentence under immigration law has understand the exist that person is certainly deportable and not only are the deportable we can continue to detain them while deportation proceedings are pending. so there is in my view simply no risk that a federal court would then immediately order the release super maximus in colorado. >> that is the concern of people in our country, there is the concern that the terrorists that are currently at guantanamo bay could be released in the united states and i think that risk isn't there if we follow the procedures we are talking about. so, yes -- >> to make clear the alien removal statute is the authority that ms. pearlstein is talking about of the attorney general in his discretion to obtain foreign international security risk. there is no specific time limit to buy small how long the government can detain people for national security reasons. there was a supreme court case a few months before 9/11 record even need faith out or the necessity to detain the national longer under the statute where there were nationals to the grounds to do so. >> i just want to say about that if you go back to the case that held the question open i don't think we know how the supreme court is going to rule on that and the decision places a heavy thumb on releasing people who can't be deported within six months so that is a risk we are running constitutional litigation. >> i would make this observation. i think there is no opposition at all in the congress to making of the laws as clear as can be that terrorists are not going to be released in i united states. we need to strengthen the law, strengthen the law. we can pass that without difficulty so i think that issue can be handled and i understand some of the other points that have been raised. i agree with ms. pearlstein. i think it is already clear whether we have to make it stronger we will make it stronger that assuming we go through trials and assuming that there are detainee is that become incarcerated in the united states either awaiting trial or during trial or after conviction ultimately if they're comes a time they are eligible to be released they are all going to be released in the united states one way or another they will not end up in the country. they are not citizens in the country and don't have right in that regard. let me turn to senator koschel. >> let me ask if you can a yes or no answer if you need to expand do it. on this last point do you agree that, with senator cardin statement just now that the united states brings someone from guantanamo to an article 3 court and for whatever reason they are at some point released -- deemed no longer in prison will, case is dismissed, the sentence is served, but for the situation. at that point there is no constitutional issue having them brought to the united states and being in the united states that the united states could hold them indefinitely in the event that we couldn't find a place to send them, that there is no constitutional issue, no constitutional right for the detainee to be released after a period of time. do you agree with that? >> make sure islanders and the senator's question. >> would there be a constitutional claim someone inside the united states having served his sentence, for example, with the existing immigration law that allowed us to hold an individual who is the portable? >> if it is a foreign national i don't believe -- if it is a foreign national i don't believe the and it would have a credible claim he cannot be detained under the alien statute. the boundaries how long the detention could take place may well be litigated because they've left open the question. >> do you agree with that? is pearlstein? >> i agree it's an open question after the case that without legal authority to continue to detain somebody they just need to be deported and we have no place to send them. could we continue to detain them be on six months, a year, so forth the supreme court has never had occasion to rule on that question. when it left the question open in the case it said it may be that terrorism and security cases are an case that came before 9/11. >> mr. edney? >> there is a substantial risk they would have constitutional claim in the united states and it is a constitutional claim we can pass all the legislation in the world and we can do anything about it. >> thank you. mr. edney can you add on the statements made earlier that there have been three convictions and the military commissions out of guantanamo. what are their reasons for that? >> well, i go over this somewhat in my written statement this is a long history behind this when the military commissions really got started in earnest after captors they got started in about the 2003, 2004 period, and they were immediately caught up in constitutional challenges for almost three years, well over two years resulting, resulting in the supreme court decision in ramadan versus rumsfeld in 2006. then it took time for the congress to respond, pass the military commissions act, develop rules under military commissions act which were not completed until january, 20074 work by both executive branch and congress. after that, charges started to happen and by january, 2009, nearly 24 people had been charged by military commission under the mca. even in that period there was at least seven or eight months held up in yet another jurisdictional challenge that got resolved by court of military commission review in september, 2007 so because of all the higher court litigation, the military commissions haven't had a chance to get working on till the very end until they were suspended on the day after president obama was inaugurated. >> are you familiar with how many of the guantanamo people that is to say alleged enemy combatants detained at guantanamo have been tried and article 3 courts in the united states or successfully convicted i think was the claim. >> could you run that by me again? >> how many detainees at guantanamo have been successfully convicted under article 3 court? >> non, and i think i listened to senator durbin's commentary on this and, you know, they're have been a lot of people convicted in article 3 courts of terrorism offenses. the people at guantanamo are a little bit differently situated. we have down at guantanamo now al qaeda leadership, and one feature about al qaeda leadership without telling anything that should come as a surprise to anybody is that they are heavily surveiled and that makes things awfully complicated when it comes to trying to them. they are in a kind class by themselves and add on top of that many of those prior cases that come during the time of continuing the conflict whether you want to continue those measures to protect the country and be on the offensive against a terrorist organization. >> mr. laufman have a question on your testimony you had a statement that the existence of guantanamo likely created for terrorist around the world and every eliminated. i was intrigued by the allegation when the president made on may 29 so i made a letter to the national security adviser general johnson asked for support on the statement. i haven't received any response from the administration and since he referred to it i wondered if you could provide factual support for the statement or codified in some way how many or who you are referring to. >> i am not sure that was in my statement but i will say to the senator that it's been my observation from talking to people in the intelligence community and i even had the opportunity in saudi arabia 19 months ago to meet some detainees released from guantanamo and in a saudi jihadist halfway house program if you will to speak to them about what had led to the radicalization, what had helped form them as extremists and some of them talked about abu ghraib. some of them talked about guantanamo bay. and it's hard to form any hard and fast conclusions that have any statistical empirical value but i think it is fair to say that guantanamo became a jihadists propaganda tool to recruit people to the cause and to that extent it has become a national security liability for the united states. >> i miss stoke the was in ms. pearlstein's statements i apologize for asking. my time just expired but i think i could ask ms. pearlstein could you answer -- could you provide enlightenment on the basis for this statement? >> sure, the bases on the president's statement is what you're asking. obviously i don't have any personal knowledge with the president in particular was basing his statement on. the reason i believe this statement is several fold. and i would caution it's difficult to quantify, you know we don't have any way of having any knowledge worldwide population is of al qaeda members currently, but the evidence i found most persuasive in this respect were at least threefold. first is testimony in the last few years by people like albert gough, former general counsel of the navy under president bush and senior leadership of our military who sit on the battlefield at this time in particular to single things they thought were putting their troops most in danger were guantanamo bay and abu ghraib. that's one piece of evidence and the testimony the individual testimony of those folks on the frontline found quite appalling -- >> the assumption is people who wouldn't have otherwise been recruited believed the american system of justice at guantanamo was insufficiently rigorous therefore decided to object by becoming terrorists? >> i don't think -- i think the short answer -- >> this kind of a stretch isn't it? >> if you look at -- >> if somebody in saudi arabia tests or reaches the conclusion we are not here? >> that is a bit of this statement will mischaracterization i would say. i think the argument they were making, and if you look on, you know, jihadist websites, recruiting web sites, the pictures on the web sites are pictures of abu ghraib and guantanamo bay. i don't think they are making -- i don't think they are necessarily making a specific argument about the procedural rules the military commissions are. they are making this -- >> with that would suggest is anything they object to about the western way of life we should compromise because of might be a reason for them to recruit each other. >> absolutely not. i absolutely disagree with that statement. >> you may -- >> i would argue so many respects they are wrong. the problem is we don't get a choice in the united states about what our enemies decide to do. what we can do to the extent possible, and i think in this case the case of the treatment of detainees and trial process it is incredibly possible to minimize the risk what we are doing is going to make us more enemies than we already have. >> let me just raise one or two points very quickly. first in regards to the use of oracle three courts with terrorists in the united states there's been no effort made by the previous administration to use, to prosecute detainees at guantanamo bay under article 3 courts so the numbers raised earlier dealt with terrorists who were apprehended outside of guantanamo bay. some americans, some of americans have been prosecuted successfully on the article 3 trials. i want to just ask a question. if you have a person that want on a day-to-day who is not eligible for a military commission under the war crime issue, so there is -- it could be tried in article 3 or military commission than the evidence to proceed either way you want to. what do you think should be the preference? should we try that person in a commission or article 3 court if we have the true option one way or the other two we believe successfully prosecute that person for criminal actions? what is your preference? and why? >> my preference as a general rule of thumb is to bring the courts in article 3 court cases for policy reasons i believe they belong in a military commission case involving crime -- >> the reason why? >> my preference for the article 34 ms. i believe it holds us to the highest standards. it confers greatest legitimacy on the outcome of those cases. it is an enormous educational tool by virtue of the constitutional right to public trials for the elimination of underlining evidence regarding the conduct. it produces a result that i think stands the test of time. our courts are familiar with applying the rule, procedural rules to novel sets of facts we have an enormous empirical body of the to rely upon over the last ten years going back before 1911 in the case is starting in the district of new york and coming through my on district. we don't have to reinvent the wheel each time. >> ms. pearlstein. >> as a policy matter which is how understand the question i think the preference should be article 3 koret for the reasons i was getting at a moment ago in my statement. with a prosecution and article 3 court to get the tactical benefit of the successful almost always successful prosecution without any of the strategic town site using a form that is still perceived and hopefully the new conditions will be better but generally the military commission form is perceived as a second-class system of justice. there's a tremendous amount of work to be done to overcome that perception and reality. we are on the right track now but in the meantime there is no more powerful tool for securing the long term tension of terrorist suspects the prosecution and article 3 court. >> mr. edney. >> well, it is hard for me to say that i have a policy preference because i am just used to getting wiglet vice on this question but i think that my legal advice would be the following. if the premise is right it's been recognized by the two administrations now that you need some military commissions system for some members of al qaeda to hold them to account for their crimes against law of war i think it's important that you think very seriously about putting all alien members of al qaeda who finally did fall into that military commissions system because what you can't have -- i do feel this relatively strongly, you can't have a situation where you go to the military commission system when a federal court trial on a particular case gets too hard and i think there's lots of history, lots of tradition, lots of strong arguments for using military commissions for a class of individuals, members of al qaeda during a continuing time of armed conflict to hold them accountable for their violation of the law, which i don't think -- i don't think it's possible to argue the september 11 attacks for example or one of the violations of law of the war and part of the armed conflict against the united states. >> thank you. >> i think this is an intriguing argument. if the claim all three be made this .1 way or another that you don't want to be accused of a double standard in effect of what mr. edney talked about that the oracle three cases are great until they become too hard and until they are very protections what precludes prosecution then you turn to the second class justice. clearly we want to avoid that kind of construct here, and so mr. edney's suggestion as try rather than a case by case analysis which necessarily will hang essentially on that question they try to decide in advance some are appropriate for some and some are appropriate for the other. now, contrast that with the fact of course one of the justifications for military commissions is that you do not have to deal with some of the protections guaranteed in the article 3 courts the use classified information that would become deleterious to the national security and so on. let me just ask you, mr. laufman does mr. edney have a point here that to some extent you're almost conceding that military commissions or a second class kind of justice if you start out with the presumption then you should start with article 3 prosecution. >> i start with that presumption only with respect to the cases i feel whose policy matter don't belong in military commissions. there are some categories of cases i do believe the long and i might go so far as to agree with mr. edney that the case could have properly been brought in a military -- >> he would both agree that there are some cases you ought to just put off in the corner and say these are military commission cases in respect of a case by case analysis and then get to the case by case analysis for a large number of remaining cases? . cases? >> there are some cases for policy reasons that properly belong in the military commission. >> right, okay. but then as soon as you start doing the case by case analysis, and most of that will hang on how easy or how tough it is to get the prosecution, won't it, then don't you get into this dilemma that mr. edney discussed? >> there will be tough judgments, there's no question about it that have to be made. those kinds of judgments are made whether to bring criminal prosecutions. >> so let me just ask you this. suppose you're responding to an intellectual argument rather than a sort of recruiting argument that miss pearlstein was talking about earlier, somebody criticizing our system except when it gets to talk then you revert to military commissions and you're defending a case by case analysis of which too near to by saying what? >> it will depend on the specific facts and as mr. kris said these are fact intensive cases. what is the admissible evidence in this case, what can the government meets its obligations under the principles of federal prosecution and sustain a conviction to map all of those who get to how easy it is to get the prosecution. if you begin with a presumption in favor of oracle three prosecutions is propelling down that road. >> i think that as part of mr. edney concern or question. >> but i'm not troubled as a policy matter if we all began in from the position of doing everything necessary and proper to protect national security if we have to some cases and some cases to military commissions to ensure that actors receive justice there can be no controversy as to do the same kind of have a problem with that. >> your response is a practical one and, yes, it may be one can argue relegating the situation to a second-class to racing, but to respond by saying, first of all, is not second class of have procedures bills and a specialist with the legislation i propose as a matter of national security there are some things which do deserve to be protected above all. >> i don't know if it's necessarily fair to refer to the military commissions as a second-class, it is a different system which has a rich history which has been discussed at length today. >> mr. edney kim and maybe i could put a finer points thomas. if given a choice between the senate's resolution that was passed the other day to say this entire class of individuals alien and privileged and may belligerence should be trying by military commission and, on the one hand, in the proposed prison action that could be deviated from a case by case basis i think we have to go with the senate resolution and this is really not just because of both to in the military commissions system of protecting the integrity of the federal justice system and stiffens the system by the protections are cast aside on a case by case basis and something the supreme court thought a lot about in considering the constitutionality of proceedings and a series of cases and receives a proposed we should be able to retain a somebody severely and dangerous and the supreme court said you can't use this as a safety valve not because of a civil commitment but because of her as a criminal justice system and i think that is what this committee needs to keep in mind as they evaluate the proposals of soren and the individuals and the various process ongoing right now. >> it's an interesting question. let me ask all of you we talked the first panel about whether if the for resumption of that is two go to our club records of necessity you i'm going to increase the requirement for giving miranda warnings much earlier the processing of these detainees. the answer from the first panel seemed to be that because you have to start with the assumption that the interrogation is going to be initially for the purpose of national security and, after that has been accomplished to you then confront the question of now what to do with this person who could be tried in our call three courts and that is a presumption so that perhaps a memorandum warning still would not be given so early in the process that it could interfere with the acquisition of intelligence information, that's a summary and then be interested to hear your evaluation. >> these are considerations that have been employed for years now in cases where individuals are arrested and detainee sometimes by u.s. military forces and sometimes by other countries and read the imperative is to gather at simple intelligence without grafting into the process in ways that could have a chilling affect on the solicitation and a criminal justice base policies like miranda and take the case of the man held by the saudis for many months and the fbi was and given access to him for many months and in september 2003 is a special team of fbi agents went in for the purpose of and conducting intelligence and now we knew there was nothing we could use from that into a bow and i went over to talk to saudi officials and hope to have a crack i knew i had to have a miranda warning with a. aide did not affect what had gone on before i wouldn't have affected their efforts to listen more information afterward but the minute i came in as a prosecutor with the idea of a information for use in the criminal prosecution we had a memorandum in mind. >> if i could add to that there are two critical points on the miranda finding, the first is as spike bowman told me and use a big counter-terrorism to rector in the fbi, if something doesn't want to talk they won't buy the new mirandize them are not so if you have to pick a pay high value detainee are any that doesn't want to talk on the battlefield you can't lawfully coercing them to talking with the assistance of brent are not as a mecca dissidents and in his experience the vast majority of detainees you do mirandize in any other context and up talking inuit if you have effective interrogation timing so i think the fear of it miranda as somehow the end of the acquisition is substantially overstated. the second thing i would say to emphasize this point, the courts have held in the course of it terrorism that have been successfully brought in before that it is possible if somebody is held by foreign intelligence service by our own intelligence when that are detained, for example, even up to some lakes and interviewed for intelligence purposes that information is not necessarily voluntary given but once he added that given a miranda warning the information use subsequently obtained can still be deemed depending volunteer enough to then be admissible in criminal court so and this is another example of a a sellable problem, i would make three quick points about this. first i think if the presumption is in favor of criminal trials and provided and rice in the department of defense i would advise any statement the two of its use in court you'd want to mirandize and there is an interesting thing in mr. kris testimony on this, he was to introduce its voluntariness to that process and the prior providing legal advice without i would then rise simmons even for people that in the military commission because it's the same inquiry. iran became of the voluntary standards and the court decided it was too difficult to manage and wanted the prophylactic rule i think that's probably where we would be headed in a military commission process and there was a voluntariness standard and simply live to the knowledge of the detainee as to his rights and stop talking and various things like that. and a second point i would make and this is an important one, if you are moving to a system where you don't want to have the attention of and make a buttons at the end of hostilities which is the old system but instead you want to use federal child and commission chiles for the vast majority of these cases for incapacitation purposes making sure that the initial statement from a detainee is done under conditions of voluntariness becomes a crucially important for the military and there will be pulled into different directions, gathering intelligence and to save their lives and looked down the road wary don't have to release these folks in a year or two because the statement was improperly taken in the battlefield. that is a dangerous conundrum to put our nation's armed forces into so these considerations need to be kept in mind and the choice between federal trials of military proceedings but in their roles that this mr. kris is urging upon the committee with regard to the specifically the military commission trials but. >> thank you, i want to thank all three of you. it's been a very helpful, these are not using issues and there are going to continue to be of interest to the judiciary committee as well as on the services and every member of the senate's. it will not going to solve it today and are waiting upon the administration's detailed reports on of the closing of a guantanamo that which we don't have a but i think in today's hearing prepares us to be better prepared as we go forward to developing the policies necessary to protect the security of our country and chairman leahy was unable to attend today's hearing. he had other complex but he adds that his statement be made part of the record without objection it will be in the committee record will remain open for seven days for additional questions by members of the committee which i would urge of guinness's of such questions or, please, respond promptly and without the subcommittee will stand adjourned. republicans in the u.s. house him by the several small-business owners to the capitol today to talk about health care. in the middle of your screen is house minority whip eric kanter, he leads in this half hour discussion. >> to date we have brought together small-business owners from around the country to really hear from them as to whether concerns are about the health care reform proposal that has been proposed by the majority and frankly what we are hearing it is lots of what we have been saying and these are the faces really behind the opposition to president obama's and speaker posies health care reform plan. noam we talked about this of form planet being an attack on small-business these seven individuals that are going to feel the brunt of the nation's payroll tax and when we say that a surtax on those making over $200,000 a year will hurt job creation, the senate individuals that derive their income from small businesses that will have now at a cost to hiring anyone and that is the purpose we are here is you talk about what they're sensing may be in store for them and his proposal passes and to hear from them as to what can work so joining us today we have a majority minority leader john boehner, the chief deputy whip kevin mccarthy of california and the ranking member from the small business committee samuel graves jazeera so i ask the leader if you like to say some remarks and then will turn over to the small business owners. >> i would like to say we're glad that you're here and all came out of small businesses and i used to run and packaging plastics firm and was a subchapter s corporation and so i know what these mandates of this bill of the surcharge and what it means in terms of taxes and your raise the cost of employment and raise expenses and will have less numbers of employees so i'm interested in which you have to say and i'm glad you're here. >> let's hear from michael collins, from some maryland, the owner of this before a piece of located on the eastern shore. i know he has a great deal of concern about the mandates and fears of that his business may not able to survive another crippling tax if such a reform bill were to pass. i know he has been forced to downsize already but he does provide workers with insurance and most of them can't afford some michael. >> controlling costs is something we always want to do it in small business and when you make it impossible to make any profits at the end of the. making, as business owners we wonder why we will be there and over the weekend i took a pile on my best and that these are benders' the samite pay on a weekly basis and some on a biweekly and quarterly basis, but i took the list and made a list of how many different companies i can't really cut back my staff and i have and run an effective business and the five fed to cut back and wonder what i will be your unlike many of their if i have to eliminate it my business from the field the last time it was 30 a different vendors i deal with. in all of these people will be impacted in could be some of these will be going at a business to. it is a used, a fantasy start putting mandates on small business and say this is what it's meant to be and i don't think it will end with just my business, it will and a lot of different businesses. >> thanks for being here. beverly mccauley from fairfax, virginia, that are employed by false construction company in fairfax and is currently owned by her father and i know that she hopes to assume control upon his retirement and the business has 172 employees and pays health care benefits for them and really concerned about the impact of what is being discussed in washington. >> that mr.. we are costs run about $300,000 a year for health care and have about 40 percent that participate in three different levels, we have an hmo, and hsn and we pay 50 percent across the board and some people choose not to have held airbase on the fact it is not cost-effective for them and are sending money overseas to family members and are worried about pooling for housing and i think it is very important to look into the fact that if there is a surcharge on top of that we have cut our staff of 300 employes to 172. your vendor this was 38m -- 475 and if we fail to exist not only to take our employees with us but we take a tremendous amount of our suppliers with us. we are the biggest purchaser of blocks from ernest mayor which is a local product for one of the largest as well and if we take is out of the puzzle and take that at of the peace we no longer can manage because of the bottom line because of the surcharges, it is cost prohibitive for a lot of different companies. >> thank you very much for being here. next we have a stephen steve rosenfield, the owner of ohio rockies, he he owns a 50 groce to new locations in six different states from california, colorado, georgia and wyoming and incarnation with his partner he provides employment for several thousands of workers in six states. >> exactly 115 restaurants and we do have a thousand employees and we are an industry that is an anomaly because it is a high employee low profit industry the fast-food industry so if we have a payroll of $40 million and we have to pay a percent payroll tax that gets us over $3 million and impartially as a make anywhere near $3 million over not sure how we would pay for it to. is quite a problem and quite a challenge. i think the bigger issue is that as everyone said there is a tremendous rippling of fact when a business goes under and we like to say in existence and succeed in their working hard to do that. no would like to see an atmosphere and the washington that says let's help the small businessman bought an atmosphere that says we have to pay for something for instance health care, have been trained and sat around, let's have the businessmen, let's hit small business because small businesses are closing up. it's a big concern and we have to stop this cancer right now. we have to give businesses back on track and get business is prospering because we of the ones hiring, the ones bringing in outside services and vendors and if we're not going to do that then where do they go, we go under it, we have to terminate our employees and all our vendors until major services anymore and the economy keeps tumbling. the backbone of it small business, we have to return for small business add of washington to make sure that our rights are protected and are not always the answer to paying the bill and hopefully we can work together to make our companies strive and small businesses thrive and in the economy also. >> thank you for being here. next up is lisa from queens, she is president of peoples accident information service doing business as secure a license private investigation firm in multiple use coups states including pennsylvania, florida and virginia and new jersey. hurt small business surprise hiring investigation services and and of that she also is a sham and concerned about the employer mandate and the proposal on the part of a speaker post a, waxman and the cost of additional payroll tax. can i think a very much. really i have 124 employees and will be hiring 154 more because we just got another contract semi payroll is going to double and less to my payroll was 3.7 million gross, the net was 2.8. the difference was payroll taxes just shy of a million dollars in payroll taxes is what we paid a. that a percent penalty on top of that would equate to summer close to $340,000. and at the end of the day we don't take, $340,000 in profits and what we do is at the end of the year because we are a subchapter, the money flows through to your k1 personal income and its attached to your personal income so my personal income and my husband's, i don't get that money by myself a yacht or cottages summer, i take that money and reinvest it in my corporation because i am in seven states and have to have other offices and have his support apparel and equipment and training for minors and they would definitely out of have to really pause and wonder why i do this if that is what is going to happen. no it just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. thank you very much for that. next we have a maureen oconnor from the bronx who york. the owner of a center sheet metal located in the bronx and has a small business owner pays a premium for her employer's health care coverage and no cost for nonunion workers and is concerned keeping the healthcare plan to truly offers would be even more expensive than a penalty tax. >> thank you. i agree with lee santos said and although they% penalty on payroll right now my premiums that i paid to provide the health care really are between 10 and 20% of the wages of my employees and the 5.4 percent surtax would be a i don't get that money when it is put on my k1, it is not in my checking account waiting there. so for me to afford it if i buy 4% tax which would put me in a 64% bracket i have to put my employees on the government planned and i don't want to. we are a family business, i have a employs her beauty and 20 years and i want them to have the health care they're like, they go to the doctor they want to come and get the tests they need and i'm willing to pay that no charge, not one of them contributed except for the company of the doctor's office but i read that checks every month to do that to them and i'm willing to continue that but not to invite a charge of 5.4% on the phantom profits that are actually still in the business buying machinery to keep everybody working. that is a concern to me and a concern to my employees, to lose that coverage. and then perhaps not even a opt into the universal coverage and if it doesn't work in the first year the 5.8 it's doubled to 10.8. so when is it going to end it? taxes into a negative cash flow, we suffer and the employees suffered. the only thing to do is reduce your staff, to more with less people and help for the best, but it also meant. >> thank you very much for sharing with us, next is lesley hottinger from newark, ohio. she is a wife and mother of two and a small business owner in ohio and atherton erasing kentucky fried chicken franchisee. she was born into the business and i am sure ca has hopes of being able to retire in the business. so well, can i thank you. yes, i am a third-generation franchisee, i was born into it and my grandfather was one of the first franchisee in ohio. i always thought i had job security, the business race may, we had 11 stores growing up in ohio and sold them all but one that when i was in high school because of some problems. just recently bought another restaurant. my mother and i are partners. i do have two small children. i always thought my job was secure in and do i was going to do this the rest of my life, i love it, and the faster years have been tough on us. we have had to decrease sales, minimum wage going up federal interstate and our commodities have gone up, we are making no profits whatsoever. i have had to downsize my career tremendously, i've had to watch my raises. i do provide 100% health insurance coverage for my management and my salary managers, my hourly employees can't afford it whether i play partial or not, they tell what it's the same as yours. if they can't afford it and would rather have that money goes towards something else and if i have to pay 8 percent payroll tax is going to basically kill me and my children's future. that i have lined up for them hopefully. and in my opinion of congress and the president's current year is something to create jobs and they're not to in their job, that's the way i look at it. can i thank you very much for sharing with the challenges you are facing a leslie banaa, please linda who is partner with law firm and owns solutions consortium, if you want to explain where you come from an amateur challenges are as well. >> i am a partner in a business as struggles in multiple businesses to make ends meet but i also have a personal stake in this issue and we want our employees to be done to it and am concerned about the quality of care and access, and a two-time cancer survivor and come from a family of cancer victims that have linked long and hard because we have a system taking care of them and have many employees with health care problems in children with special these getting great care but it is specialize in the system. i don't mind paying for good quality care to get them that access to the care because it gives them a better life and also makes them and families more productive employees and the parking of employees in the system is additional gatekeepers and the inability to get the care we think there is a value their and our system and are happy to pay for it so we do want to pay the surcharge because we can't afford it but we don't toupees and have the access to care and productivity go down and in this time and quality of life but also a time spent in a our workforce performing hours and lawyers were jobs to the secretaries were jobs and people at kentucky fried chicken work jobs when they're not they're they're not working and when they are not working we can be productive and they can earn a living in time spent sitting try to go through a bunch of gatekeepers and to have sold well assembly makes the second decision about my doctrine is firmly where my family is time that delays quality of care probably costs risk to live in a lot of time up the job. out rather pay the money to get the care and move on down the road and let the system pay for it to my thank you. we have been joined by the chairman of the house republican conference mike pence as well as of former republican whip of the house and the current head of our healthcare solutions working group roy blunt from jazeera. and i want to ask of the chairman if he has any remarks he would like to make. >> i wanted to thank you, eric, and more and were laid this very distinguished group of americans they've gathered together. there will be real world cost of a government-run health care plan that is paid for with nearly a trillion dollars of tax increases. i couldn't be more grateful to those who have taken time away from their productive enterprises to come here and help to american people counted the cost as congress considers what amounts to a government takeover of health care in this country. >> i like to ask kevin if he has concerns and wants to share and asked the panel assembled today to make the only thing is i want to thank you for your input as and note thing and take away from this is concerned about the quality of health care and providing for equality and going in would have to plan and a government run program and not knowing that goes umpire but the idea where we are in this economy if i go back to the pizza place, michael, if this goes through do you currently have 35 employees and at the high 45, will you have to lay people off in the process? >> my example is i am one of 100 of leo -- ledo's in the business in the question is would be able to say open with 35 people i don't think i can run it effectively to the business within the more than s. of the province of there for me and my american dream to own my own business and he my own in, the question is why do i. >> is beyond laying off, is shutting down completely chemically are down 15 employees from what we were last summer. >> the ranking member of the small business committee, thoughts? >> i want to thank everybody for being here. you on the faces of those folks will get hit hardest. it is on the small businesses packs that this will be paid for and it's frustrating because we keep hearing about the administration and about employees in these plans favoring the taxpayers millions of dollars by spending trillions of taxpayer dollars and it is ridiculous. i mentioned earlier in a washington think call not been in the curve in misery recall attending the truth and that is what it is, this is a fallacy that is being promoted and unfortunately it is not going to work and i appreciate you putting this together. >> i know you have been hard at work on the the republican plan and as we began to near the end of this session and i think we really appreciate your efforts in trying to proffer good policy that make help these folks who are the job creators. >> we are trying to do that from the biggest untold story is how actively we've tried to be on the door and sent lesson into things that create access for everybody regardless of pre-existing conditions that really do work to create a bigger market place of them have now to the people have more choices in every one of your businesses as you understand that the competition plus choice equal quality of price and frankly the current system doesn't have all the competitive elements that needs to have but we would like to work to create a marketplace that everybody can get into even if you have insurance at work you have another option beyond that and if your work place is so small you can't offer insurance to access to any market place and then look at the healthcare system is self and things like lawsuit abuse reform and more hulk i.t. and laurent transparency particularly those in that many business he would not sell much of all the higdon have a listen to offer and what it costs and i think health care providers ought to have the same thing and a list of how they do, there was a steady out today on various hospitals in the country how quickly you're resuscitated if you have been in hospital hartack and obviously makes a big difference if you're resuscitated quickly and why shouldn't everybody in america know that, why shouldn't evidence drive for better quality but also why do we work to be sure everybody can get into this system and have those elements in there that you have to do with every day that make the system more affordable. access and affordability are keys to our plan apparently spending money is key to their plan. and sam was talking about, there are talking about $2 trillion plan over 10 years. we talk about trillions of dollars here, nobody really has any idea how much money that this. is so out of the realm of reality that you can get in a terrible situation, expecting small business particularly to pay the bill to find out the bill is literally so big it is on payables that is a bill that can be paid some matter how much of a burning you put on the small business and job creators of the country, but when you're talking about a percentage of payroll and what that mean to the payroll all of you suggested that there is not a percent of profits in a lot of small businesses that can suddenly go to the government not to solve a problem. this doesn't solve the access problem where the affordability problem and those that we're working hard to try to find the resolutions do. >> thanks very much. noaa i guess now we will open up if there are any questions for the press. >> mr. boehner, i understand some of the blue dogs have been your meeting with republicans on talk of health care, can you tell us how that came about? >> there are a number of our members who have been informal conversations with the blue dogs and we have been hoping for a race they would become a bit more formal, but i think the american people want us to work together to solve the health care crisis and i have encouraged our members to reach out to their friends across the aisle to see if we can put in a bipartisan solution together. >> any specific topic? >> mr. kantor, how confident are you that if this bill came to the floor as is, all the republicans would vote against it? >> as you know, we never divulge whip counts and obviously we have not had a bill to even look at it when you say if it comes into current state really. as you know the committee process is broken down so i am confident right now that the members of our conference reflect the faces and the people of you see here today that are concerned, deeply concerned with a negative impact propose health care bill would have on the priority we should be about witches job creation and the economy still hangs over every community of this country and we ought to be focused on that and not to be about a health care reform bill that not only accomplish is lower costs and better access and quality care but it does not threaten and harm the job creators and the engines of our economy that you see sitting at this table. anybody else? thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] the centers for disease control hosted a conference on treating obesity. in this part of a conference panel of health experts share their insights on overcoming the bears for preventing obesity a community schools in the workplace. this form less than our. >> good morning, welcome. [applause] my name is janet collins in an m.a. and you representing health care -- cdc to welcome to the conference. this is a bit of a foe introduction at this time because we are going to do this all over again when on the national live broadcast so what i want to do is give you a few instructions of that we can get through this and find a corner and then i will do a proper introjection for all of you. in respect for our speakers in the morning will you, please double check that your cellphones on silent or offer me a year ago very important that we not interested months the events in anger way. and also very important is we are asked for security reasons that the remaining in your seeds and seated until the time the president clinton exits the round so if you will take that to heart and remain seated from this time to the ending of the session. and now we are going to wait just a minute or two and there will be a video introduction that will initiate a live feed for the national broadcast and after that portion and shows i will do my official welcome para el ♪ ♪ ♪ my name is janet collins and on behalf of cdc it is my great pleasure to welcome you to the wake of the nation conference. we are thrilled you are here to participate in the cdc inaugural conference on a obesity and healthcare added joining cdc in planning and hosting this conference are the robert wood johnson foundation, the association of state and territorial public health and nutrition directors, the directors of health promotion and education, and the national association of chronic disease directors. many thanks to these organizations and to their leadership for cosponsoring this conference. and many thanks to all of you for joining us here to contribute your considerable expertise. represented in this room are leaders at the local say in national level all of whom are critical to reverse in the epidemic of obesity and achieving the best possible health for all americans. let me expand a special welcome to a vip guests including leaders from the white house, the domestic policy council, the office of management and budget and at the department of health and human services, we are so pleased to have you here with us. if you are aware meetings like this do not come overnight although plans for nearly a year we do not have asked for better timing. this conference takes place this leadership and the white house and hhs and cdc is solidly in place to provide the vision and commitment to prevention and health. we have three speakers to exemplify the leadership that will be required to tackle the obesity epidemic and ernest. following comments from our distinguished panel we will welcome former president bill clinton to address the conference. to get us started it is my deep pleasure to introduce our new director at cdc, dr. thomas frieden. dr. thomas frieden became director of the cdc and prevention and administrator of the agency for toxic substances and disease registry, in june 2009. no wild he is especially well known for his expertise in tuberculosis control he has for domestically and internationally on a broad array of critical health issues. his extensive list of accomplishments include serving as commissioner of the new york city the permit of health and mental hygiene, one of the country's oldest and largest public health agencies. and his leadership the number of adult smokers in new york city declined by 350,000 and teen smoking rates were cut in half. and his leadership new york city became office location in the u.s. to eliminate trans fats from restaurants, too rigorously monica diabetes epidemic and to require selected restaurants to post prominently their caloric information. now as the director of of the cdc and dr. frieden is focused on bringing his considerable expertise and his passion to achieving cdc vision, healthy people in a healthy world of prevention. please join me in dividing dr. frieden to the podium. [applause] >> thank you very much and thanks to the staff of cdc who worked so hard to organize this conference of our partners with it johnson foundation and others critical not just to this conference but to push in that effort to address obesity as a public health crisis that our country must face i would like to discuss this morning in public health approach to addressing obesity. the problem of obesity is familiar to all of you i believe in it that dramatic increase in that obesity over the last several decades is something i think none of us would have likely predicted it 30 years ago. we know that not only as mrs. severe problem of the of the country but that there are severe problems with health disparities. obesity and with diabetes are a major health problem that are getting worse and problems that are further exacerbating what are all pretty unacceptable health disparities in this country. so what is the weight of the nation? the average american adult is about 22 pounds overweight. if you add that up that comes to more than four and a half million pounds. that's enough weight which converted into energy with power washington d.c. for a. seven months. [laughter] and i think it is reasonable or who to make frank estimates of the economic impact of that not only in costs and you'll hear more about economic cost of obesity this morning with new data showing a genetic increase in the cost to our health care system for this bill an epidemic but also the fact that for every additional time that has to be maintained in more food has to be purchased and more food being purchased means more revenues for industries that sell-through. i'm going to talk a little more about that later but that is just to feed the excess weight of america is probably about $50 billion a year and south of the the obesity is also epidemic and it it has tripled in just a generation. we know that our genes haven't changed this fast. with that our preferences have not changed this fast. we are hardwired to like sweet and salty foods. what has changed is our environment and if we are to make a change in the obesity epidemic we're going to have to change the environment again in order to gain control. obesity of? virtually everybody system, the loans, a vascular disease, that a liver, stroke, cataracts, hypertension, diabetes, of course, pancreatitis and increased risk of various cancers. so the health implications of obesity are major and this really represents a dramatic change in the nature of society as depicted in the next slide. [laughter] thinking about how we can address this epidemic we think about how we address any public health problem or any health problem. the pyramid of intervention can be portrayed starting with those at the most fundamental level of society which most fundamentally of its health and has the biggest of times and going up to those that have the least impact. at the base of this our socioeconomic factors. poverty, education, housing coming inequality and reno that party is a powerful predictor of obesity. and there are lots of very good theories for why that should be and i'm sure that's something that will be discussed in the conference but the definitive answer to that i think remains to be determined. one step above that the traditional public health measures and that changed the context whether it is fluoridated the water or chlorinated water or iodizing salt removing artificial trans fat from the food supply. one level above that are long-lasting protective interventions, things that only require a light touch of a mechanical system classically immunization the also things like brief intervention for alcohol use that reduces its long-term or colonoscopy which is needed every five or 10 years. one level above that to consider more difficult to do all of these are effective in all of them may be the only measure we have to address some health problems. clinical interventions require long-term care such as treatment of high blood pressure and high cholesterol and diabetes. and at the top of this pyramid lot requires often great effort on an individual basis but may have the smallest impact on the societal basis our counseling and education to eat less and exercise more. although many people think of public health as being in the business of exportation and that the need to exert people to behave differently it is a symptom of the failure of public health to a range societies would tip from a societal structures such that in the healthy choice is the default value. there are examples of the public tell them things that change the context for health. these include the elimination of artificial trans fat and a significant health benefits for this and with a face in there and a significant problems with supply, there has been no significant increase in commerce or a change in tastes and the experience in new york city was sought not only was artificial trans fat completely eliminated but in doing so saturated fats were also reduced by 10 to 20% with the introduction of new oils. it's important to have a face in time but certainly possible and it sends new york city an attack of that effort more than 50 national chains including many of restaurant chains have completely eliminated artificial trans fat from their food supply. this is not likely to do much for obesity, it is likely to do quite a bit for cardiovascular disease. and is an example of a winnable battle and nutrition, no one in new york city new the reading our initial chance filled and before nobody asked for a plan artificial trans fat. [laughter] cost about nobody in new york city knows it now knocking trans fat and therefore was much less risk of developing heart disease. so reduction is a second example of a winnable battle. he'd related hypertension may not be inevitable. experience from anthropological studies of traditional or preindustrial societies suggest that there is no increase and blood pressure with each and populations which have very low salt intake. there are lots of other factors and obviously in those societies that may account for this but it does indicate that our experience that two-thirds of people who are over the age of 65 have hypertension is not inevitable, is not natural and normal and a very significant contributor to it is our chronic overconsumption of salts. we consume salt that something like 10 times the minimum requirement in this country. there is an interaction between calories and salt and the more calories to consume the marks of she will consume a and a more solid fuel consumed has every bartender knows the more things you would drink and you don't only drink water and 0-calorie beverages, you also drink things with calories that you will consume. 50 percent reduction in salt in 10 years is feasible and would have significant health benefits experience from the united kingdom shows a that concerted action by industry in partnership with government is capable of achieving a significant reduction in salt intake without significant loss in sales to industry. it's not easy to be done but can be and is important is done. i'm going to go through some lessons from the tobacco control experience for obesity prevention and control. if you look at what has worked in tobacco control fundamentally the things that have a move to the needle on prevalence of a three -- price and the exposure, and damage. however, despite having a very robust evidence base for what works and tobacco control much more robust we have to admit that what we have for obesity prevention and control, tobacco remains the leading preventable cause of death nationally and globally. there is a large gap between the existence of proven means of reducing tobacco use and the implementation of these measures and implementation gap if you will. and we know that pre-emptive laws which at a national level prevent states action and a state level prevented local action can be very important in preventing effective progress. we also know that political commitment is and the scintillating predictor of effective action and tobacco control. what tobacco control leaders have done is establish a policy package which outlines of a comprehensive approach known as the empower strategy, this includes monitoring for tobacco use prevalence and prevention policies, protecting people from exposure to secondhand smoke, offering help to quit to tobacco use, warning people about the dangers of tobacco, and forcing it bans on all advertising promotion and sponsorship and raising taxes on tobacco products. where do we stand globally? despite the existence of a well-defined set of interventions which incidentally are a very cost-effective or and to a cost of gaining for government in the case of a taxation had become a less than 5 percent of the world's population is covered by any one of the strategy. out when these were implemented in new york city the results were reporting for 10 years using a a three-year drilling average, there was not changing the rate of tobacco use in new

Related Keywords

Princeton ,Colorado ,United States ,Chad ,Pune ,Maharashtra ,India ,Madrid ,Spain ,China ,Beijing ,Minnesota ,California ,Crawford ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,San Francisco ,Freeport ,Virginia ,Wyoming ,Newark ,New Jersey ,Chicago ,Illinois ,New York ,Tampa ,Florida ,Iran ,Kentucky ,Boston ,Massachusetts ,Georgia ,Toronto ,Ontario ,Canada ,Mississippi ,United Kingdom ,Saudi Arabia ,Phoenix ,Arizona ,Pennsylvania ,Houston ,Texas ,Mecca ,Makkah ,Maryland ,Ohio ,Americans ,America ,Saudi ,Saudis ,American ,Floyd Mayweather ,Tom Brady ,Charlotte ,Joe Girardi ,Roy Halladay ,Carlos Villanueva ,Bryan Ludwig ,Al Qaeda ,Janet Collins ,John Boehner ,Barry Zito ,Roy Hal ,Herm Edwards ,Brett Favre ,Adrian Gonzalez ,Thomas Frieden ,Zack Greinke ,Jared Allen ,Luis Castillo ,Adam Dunn ,Phil Mickelson ,Eric Kanter ,Jim Barr ,Anish Shroff ,Andy Reid ,Chris Tillman ,Gibson Dunn ,Adam Wainwright ,Steve Phillips ,Lee Santos ,Miguel Tejada ,Silber Max ,Brad Childress ,Brian Dawkins ,Abu Ghraib ,Joe Mauer ,Edney Kim ,Jason Marquis ,Joe Madden ,Rachel Nichols ,Beverly Mccauley ,Buehrle ,Randy Johnson ,Michael Vick ,Christopher Harris ,Pedro Gomez ,Stephen Steve Rosenfield ,Troy Holliday ,Evan Longoria ,Ryan Dempster ,Michael Phelps ,Ryan Westmoreland ,Roy Oswalt ,Chien Ming Wang ,Alex Cora ,Billy Butler ,Victor Martinez ,Cliff Lee ,Yorker Jason Marquis ,Trey Wingo ,Kevin Mccarthy ,Albert Gough ,Leo Ledo ,Michael Collins ,Brandon Marshall ,Jim Johnson ,Alexei Castillo ,Tyson Chandler ,