i think judd gregg is absolutely correct about this. this is going to be a skyrocketing cost, in particularly the aging population. we've got to deal with it. but i know several other members. in fact, in my own state from the other side of the body have come to me and asked if i'd be willing to add some specific disease or illness to this bill. i've respectfully had to say, no, i couldn't do that because i felt it would start an endless request, in which case, if we started saying dwros some and no to others we'd end up playing a game here that -- not a game. these are all serious issues. but i think the idea is to try and leave out of this particular bill those very legitimate issues that involve specific illnesses and areas of legitimate interest and concern. and so aside from the jurisdictional question, which we've -- it's been pointed out, we're stepping all over each other's jurisdiction in these bills. that's an argument. but the more compelling one that i'd make to my colleagues on this matter is that i can't very well sit in t

judd, do you have any further ones on this one? this section? >> on this title? >> so we have four -- >> we have four more. we will come back. i will aim to reconvene at 5:30 but ask the senators to keep me informed, if the meeting goes longer, let me know. we will try to come back in. if we finish up that and if the members are prepared as well, we may take a break for dinner. i will leave it up to the advice of my colleagues or just go straight through and deal with the fraud and abuse. >> am i correct we will reconvene at 5:30? and we will have four coburn amendments and that is the remaining amendments? >> that's what i have been informed, four remaining amendments in this section. then we will go to the fraud and abuse section for this evening and leaving open tomorrow based on the ability to have scoring on the question dealing with the long-term care issues. >> mr. chairman? >> senator whitehouse. >> just one technical question. i thought i heard the clerk say the vote w1b

and judd greg and i have worked on countless issues over the years and i have great respect for him. i think virtually every one of you at one point or another we have worked on something together. i'm not going to rush anything on you. to try to get it done but i do want to keep working at it. if we could just hear on your amendment so we can move along. >> i will, but let me just express my concern. if we pass the wrong bill, if we're not thoughtful and think about all the contingencies we're going to do, we neert going to help health care, we're going to hurt it. the presumption on this bill is we're going to spend according to president obama $1.3 trillion over the next ten years, add 8% to the cost of health care, add 8% to the cost of health care every year to, in fact, fix health care that doesn't fix it. i know you've got things -- we haven't seen it yet and i know the goals is to get the numbers to where it doesn't cost anything, but the fact is we're only going to get one shot. and then people are going to make decisions that are going to have tremendous ramifications and t

. >> also on tuesday, judd gregg talked about the tarp program on the senate floor. >> i want to talk about two issues, i know the senator wants to continue this discussion. but there are a couple of things of their significance. -- phares significant -- fair significant. -- significance. the number of banks will repay the money that has been put out by the administration. now, when tarp was originally structured, the understanding was that we would buy assets in banks, or from and that at some time we would get the money back. as taxpayers. and you get back with interest. this is what is happening right now. money is coming back because the banks are restoring fiscal strength, this is coming back with interest of $4.5 billion. this is what will be paid back on the interest, relative to the preferred stock. the financial system was stabilized, during a time of cataclysm -- the cataclysmic time and the investments that remained, with the taxpayer money is being repaid, and the issue becomes, what will we do with the money? i think that this should go to reduce the debt. and the adminis

senator enzi who may have opening comments, mike, and i know that senator gregg has some comments, right, judd? and with that we will go to senator harkin has the senate agreement for two amendments we have reached agreement on already. >> i will refer to senator gregg since he is ranking member on the budget committee looks at these scores for us, and would give us comments on where we are to date, and where we are going. >> good. >> well -- i appreciate the chairman's decision not to go forward the class act because we don't have joint tax and of course we don't have jurisdiction over the tax section, but it is important to put in con text the cbo's score in context, because what the class act is creating is a brand new entitlement and brand new major entitlement for long-term health care and yes over the first ten years, it is logical to score positively, because premiums will come in and people who are able to take advantage of the long-term care coverage will not have moved into long term care facilities over the first ten years, the majority of them. so it is very unlikely that there is

altman did judd -- mr. ahmadinejad is very polarizing figure, as we would say about some figures in american politics, you either love him or hate him. you were not neutral about him. i think he probably did win the election. he still has his operate -- his opposition very polarized against him. a good part of that opposition believes that mousavi either one the election or the should of been a second round, a runoff between mousavi and ahmadinejad. you're saying the frustration. you see that in the street protests we have witnessed in tehran. it is also worth noting that mr. altman did jot can mobilize large crowds -- mr. ahmadinejad ought can mobilize large crowds where mousavi support would be stronger than elsewhere in the country. but he can mobilize support outside teheran, as well. host: you see no evidence of foul play in the election. what is driving this part of the story, the fact that the religious leaders agree to a partial recount of the ballots. guest: i think the supreme leader is trying to

. >> let me just say about this and then invite others to comment, i think judd gregg made a good point yesterday. he is not here but made a good point i thought in talking about how the bulk of the prevention of this leak or to incentivize individuals to change lifestyle behavior in all make a huge difference so it is sort of a bottom-up approach and i agree with that. is a critical component of this to encourage people to change live some behavior. it is not easy. it only one of the more difficult things to do when they incentivize changes in behavior was to get people to duet. the idea that sounds great and easy enough but if you are addicted to smoking or addicted to a certain kind of whose real-life some of what the people to shift in as a lot more difficult than people assume and so just saying it or even when you are putting out awards for doing it and all companies provided additional vacation days where days off and as we heard from steve deberg and safeway reduction in premium cost is so even then it is hard to get people to make those ships. i'm sure tom coburn will tell you

senator judd gregg of new hampshire tried to have that money taken out of the bill but his amendment failed. here is 20 minutes of that debate he meant. >> mr. president, i think the majority leader for his statement and another is controversy involved in the so-called cash for clunkers which is a kind of humorous name for a very serious proposal, let's be honest about where we are in america today. we have seen the largest decline in automobile sales and 50 years. sales down 29% and production down 46% from where it was 17 months ago. plummeting on all cells have reduced production and had a ripple affect across the economy forcing factories to close, we have lost 280,000 american jobs in the automobile industry. that is what this is about -- 280,000 american jobs that are lost and more than it will be lost if we do nothing. sum would have us do nothing. while the automobile industry is reeling from job losses and declining production many consumers in the market are waiting, they're holding back. purpose of this legislation is to put some movement into the purpose -- purchase of ne

judd sotomayor thank goodness will not be denied that opportunity and i think that is the right way to go. >> senator cornyn's-- in awe in. [inaudible] are you going to press him and others to back off of that? >> i think everybody brings their own individual views to the table and certainly we will be talking about that as members of the judiciary committee, but my own view is that we ought to come with an open mind and be, and do their research, do their reading of 17 years of judicial opinions, and speeches and the like and to then be able to ask the nominee about them. i think it is really, i don't think it is wise for myself to be making decisions before the opportunity to ask her questions at a hearing. >> can you tell us about the questionnaire that is coming out shortly? >> i just read the my blackberry that apparently she had turned it in but i have-nots in the answers to a. certainly it is a very conference of questionnaire so we will be going over that carefully. it may give rise to questions we will have to ask the hearing. of course as you know there's also a throw at the

in february of this year, after senator judd gregg, a republican was nominate by -- nominated by president obama to be the secretary of commerce, the white house announced a control of the census bureau and the 2010 census will be removed from the commerce department and placed in the hands of the white house staff. senator gregg eventually withdraw -- withdrew his name from consideration in part because of his concerns about taking control of the next census out of the hands of the commerce department and putting it into the hands of political operatives at the white house. contrary to democratic claims, there was no historical precedent replacing the -- for placing the census under the control of political operatives on the white house staff. according to former census bureau director bruce chapman who directed the census bureau from 1981 to 1983, under president reagan, he said, quote, the white house and its congressional allies are wrong in asserting that the census in the past has directed to the -- reported directly to the president. directors often brief presidents and their staff

senator gregg, the fact is that the transfers of these monies, judd, are subject to appropriations. so it is subject to appropriations every single year. it will be outside to be kept -- >> i didn't hear that, what? >> it will be outside the 302b cap. you will get this allocation and get this on top of it. >> yes, but it's still subject to appropriations transfer. >> when you're outside the 302b cap you're funding this outside the budget. so this becomes an off-budget event for all intents and purposes. >> senator enzi, i think that's right. i thought we'd worked that out. i thought we'd worked that out. >> so you can actually score this. >> that's right. but before, i still congratulate the creativity of the staff. >> if the objection is to mandatory spending, well, then, i plead guilty. of course, it's mandatory spending if that's your objection. i thought you had a different type of objection. my objection is it's mandatory. you'd think as an -- that i would be opposed to a mandatory funding, but sometimes i think it's necessary, and i repeat for emphasis sake why it's necessary.

other cosponsors are senator dick durbin, senator judd gregg, ted kennedy, richard burr, chris

i think judd gregg maid, either there are one of recessions have some strong-- >> i think we got that worked out. >> so there will be a good opportunity to have not in abbreviated or truncated debate on the critical issues. so, we will do that. we will meet tomorrow by a the way in dirksen one of six. this room is being used for another event in the aft discipline would mind blowing for a day to another room and i agree to do that. we agree to do that on wednesday. center gregg. >> first off, let me associate myself, and i think folks on our side are totally committed to having a very strong and robust prevention title. i know senator enzi has been driving us in that direction. and, i think the senator harkin for his attention to this. there are a couple of areas where we think prevention, the pressure prevention and a healthy lifestyle can be incentivize. and, especially in the area of hipaa we think the federal government disincentivizes bergen the area of the ability for people to pay cash rewards for folks who live healthier lifestyles we think there's this incentive in our system