bill. the clerk: h.r. 4505, a bill to enable state homes to furnish nursing home care to parents any of whose children died while serving in the armed forces. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 420, the nays are zero. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the house will come to order. will members please take their conversatio

to be complete the bill must suggest that. in its current form this bill does not necessarily help us rein in these programs. for example, just last week in our information policy subcommittee we held a hearing in the national historical publications and records commissions, a program that appears to give grants duplicative of grants in the national archives and records administration. i questioned then and ask it again today why should we continue to fund this duplicative program? it costs the committee nothing to find out this duplication. why if we cannot trim $10 million of federal spending without -- why should we authorize $150 million to be spent? what exactly do we expect for it do bring in return? the congressional budget office estimates this bill will cost the federal government to spend $150 million to determine what many people already know. we have federal government programs that are not performing and duplicative, but the bill before us leaves wasteful programs intact. as we came to the floor, one of the amendm

that's what this bill is about. this bill, the small business lending fund act, invests capital in community and small banks that were not the problem that caused this financial meltdown. invest in those community and small banks under terms that become more favorable to those banks as they make more loans to small businesses. in other words, carrots for getting money to small businesses. and the c.b.o. tells us all the money in the small business %% lending fund will be repaid with interest and that taxpayers will actually make $1 billion profit over the next decade. now, that's not too hard to believe, i think, when you understand that in terms of the dollars that the bush administration asked us to put on the table to stabilize the economy back in 2008, that to the extent that the money has now been paid back, not all of it yet, but to the extent that we have gotten repayment, we have made some 12% on that money. unfortunately 45% of small businesses seeking loans to expand or even just stay afloat were turned do

i voted against that bill. i said it at that time if we gave him -- give them that money we needed to o the reform right then. we have done some of those now. we passed the fha what are two days ago we passed it out of the house. there are things we can do. it is a disappointment. is an awful lot of money. ps a republican, maybe i cannot say this with the elephants in the room. republicans like to see fannie and freddie become in the future. should they be private entities? should they be split have government and half private lacks -- half private? where do you stand? >> i do not think they should be public utilities. that is saying the puulic will guarantee themm the private market is not there now. i think we all agree. it will need to be a slow transition. i think we can make that transition. it may take 10 years. it may take 15 years. in our bill, we have a three or four years of thing. i think that is oveely ambitious. some of our colleagues felt we could do that. i do think the problem was not in the sec

we need this bill to hit them where it hurts and i urge my colleagues to vote for this bill today. i yield back. ms. ros-lehtinen: thankkyou, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i'm proud to yield to mr. garrett, the ranking member on government sponsored enterprises as well as a house conferee on this measure. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognizeded for two minutes. mr. garrett: i thank the gentlelady. many have urged me to ensure congress enacts strong sanctions. we are all too well aware of the existential threat that a nuclear powered iran would be. but today we are about to pass a conference report that was supposed to protect americans and our allies. if that was our goal, i believe we only have partial success. as a conferee representative, i do admit that the sanctions themselves have been approved. i was pleased to see the legislation would cut off the connections between the u.s. financial sector and foreign financial institutions that do business with iran. yet the conference report, ye it does add addition

that's what this bill does. it does exactly what the supreme court says that we could do and should do, and that is to require disclosure, to require transparency. in the past transparency has been a bipartisan issue. senator mitch mcconnell was quoted in april saying we need to have real disclosure. why wod a little disclosure be better than a lot of disclosure? republican leader john boehner in twetch said, i think we ought -- what we ought to do, we ought to have full disclosure and went on to say i think that sunlight is the best disinfectant. this measure, the disclose act, has been supported by government reform groups including common cause, league ofomen voters, and public citizens. senate majority leader harry reid and the chairman of the senate rules committee have released a letter indicating their strong commitment to senate action on the disclose act. the white house strongly supports the disclose act. the president says he'll sign this bill when it comes to his desk. now, i ask my colleagues, will

you believe there should be and will be a separate dairy bill prior to the farm bill that will address the dairy price issues that you're concerned about? >> we put this council together and charged them with coming wup a proposal that is is a consensus proposal by the end of this year. my hope is they will meet that deadline. and if they do i think it's something that congress needs to discuss in 2012 before the farm bill discussions get started in earnest. >> mr. secretary. >> we don't have any time to waste on that. >> you talked about the administration creating a different framework for relating to rural america. and revitalizing the economy. one of the things that some lawmakers have criticized you for is too much emphasis on rural economic development, not enough on productive agriculture. how do you respond? >> well, i would like to sit down with those lawmakers and explain some of the things we are doing at usda so they are ensured. one of the things i would talk to them about is our renewed emphasis on trade. we just announced an upgrade of our trading numbers for this fiscal

consumers in the new banking bill. a banking bill that will collapse where there's $1 trillion worth of equity and other arrangements that can be made that today fund american businesses and keep small businesses alive. mr. speaker, i think it's time that we change the direction that we are heading. taxing and spending is something that the american people do not want or need for their future. the unemployment rate still stays near 10% and since taking office in 2007 our democrat friends have set a record for deficits, spending, and unemployment. the american people know this and they are speaking out. i encourage americans to visit the website www.americaspeakingout.com. americans speaking out is an opportunity for americans to have a say in their government. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> to address the house for one minute. . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. cleaver

the bill requires c.e.o.'s and highest ranking officials of corporations that sponsor political advertisements to record stand by your ad disclaimers as well as protest taxpayers dollars from misuse by preventing certain government contractors from making campaign related expenditures. the disclosure act also closes a loophole creebate citizens united to ensure foreign corporations and foreign governments aren't able to influence elections by spending unlimited sums through united states subsidiaries or affiliates. by allowing them to make campaign contributions, foreign players could use limitless funds to influence the election. the bill is designed to accommodate nonprofit issues advocacy group who have long participated in political activity of which their members are aware. the bill must have more than 500,000 dues paying members in all 50 states, have had tax exempt status for the past 10 years and derive no more than 50% of its funding from corporate or union sources. it cannot use corporate or union mo

bill. dairy farmers today are faced with significant price spikes. their prices go up for a short time to historic highs and then fall deeply and sharply and stay low for a considerable time, putting a great deal of stress on the farmers. the one consistent message i got in 20 states i attended in the world summit and for was that dairy farmers are hurting. we put together a council representing all parts of the country and all aspects of gary to say to the industry that we have to come up with a consistent -- all aspects of the dairy to say to the industry we have to come up with a consistent voice to maintain the dairy industry for the united states and make it competitive against european competitors and new zealand. that's not going to happen with the 2012 farm bill. that will happen before. >> to make sure i understand what you're saying, you believe there should and will be a separate dairy bill prior to the farm bill that will address dairy price issues you are concerned about? >> we

the house bill has a bailout fund. the senate bill allows the fdic to borrow money to wind down the is a institutions. o ultimately pay for these mechanisms? the taxpayer. enough is enou we c do better by creating an enhanced chapter of the bankruptcy codwith a resolution of 40 to prevent future bailouts and create er transparency -- resolution of failed entities to prevt future bailouts and create better transparency. as we kw in the conservatorship of fannie and freddie, we hav $145 billion of taxpayer dollars already at stake. the time has come for sensitive reform of th gse's. we still have plenty of time. we have the will to tackle the enormous exposure tthe taxpayers of fannie and freddie. i look forward to an open and transparent conference and the type of financial reform that will hold wall stree i look forward to the kind -- >> the chairman of the agriculture committee will be next. the gentleman from minnesota. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your leadership on this issue of financialefor we have b

we had 1,600-page bill. we were told that it would be the senate language, and the 1,600 pages turned out to be lot of the house language too, so it was a mesh of the two. we read the senate bill thinking that is what are we were going to get. plus we got another 400 pages, and in two weeks we have to vote on that. you look at the agenda for tuesday, and you're dealing with three or four subjects that problem at a minimum, the smartest economist in the world woofer to take a

but the tarp bill, british petroleum supported that, the stimulus bill. most people think all these big oil companies, they're all republican. well, if you look, just like wall street, wall street gives four-to-one to democrats over republicans and british petroleum, they were working closely with the administration and with democrats in the majority. as one article talks about senator kerry communicating with, working with british petroleum to try to pass the crap and trade bill at the time the deepwater horizon blew out. it is beginning to appear that british petroleum used a cheap way of drilling in such deep water. it shouldn't have been used in such deep water. that's what is beginning to appear to be the case and that they felt like -- it seems like there was an attitude that we don't have to worry. we are big buddies with the white house and with the majority, they got our backs. we can cut corners. you know, and so we find out minerals management service send out their two-man you unionized father and son team to be the last team to inspect the de

we don't know what they are going to do with this energy bill. we don't know, we are trying to figure out how this new health care bill is going to impact our business. how it's going to impact our bottom line. and then i went over and talked to the lenders, many of the lenders are sitting on record amounts of cash and capital in their banks. they are looking hard as they can for lending opportunities. what they said is unfortunately some of our customers are not creditworthy. that the economy has hurt their sales and so it wouldn't be prudent to loan those businesses more money. others say that our good customers, customers that are creditworthy, are not coming to us and borrowing any money because, again, of this uncertainty. so again our opposition to this bill is that it's not really addressing the real issue in our economy and that is bringing some certainty and leaving the capital in the companies, leaving the capital in the economy instead of the federal government continuing to create uncertainty and taking money out of the economy. with

th bill provis such actions. provides access to credit for small businesses who desperately need it, i think amecans are frustrated and sll business people share therustation. that after aancing hundredof bilionof dollars to banks, manyf those dollars don't seem to fi their way into loans to small businesses. the unrlying bill beginso dress at probl in a very signifint way. it ea prtice that this chairman and his predessor ben of extendingax cs to small bunesses, a small business that bu a laptop truckr some other pie of uipment, they can expense that, can effect cut their taxes binvesting in their business within the economy. and then whave theroc statemt by the minority leader th in order to help all businesses, hwants to repl a law at helps small businesses for the first time buyealth care. what the new hlth care l says is this, that a person running a small software compa or a restntr -- restaurant should bable to buy health sunce ith the same volume discothat locheed martin small business people have be king

there was a difference in this bill. when we were debating this in the house last year, house -- health care was getting all the attention. it was not as strong a bill as i would have liked to and been able to bring out because we were not getting public attention. my initial thought was that it was a much tougher job. once we passed health care, the american public began to focus on this through the media. this is a better bill than it would have been because the american public focused on it. in addition to the substance, i hope people will get a sense that we worry about big money. it is reassuring to know that when public opinion gets engaged, it will win. our staff is full of the most extraordinary people, i agree with the senator. they put in an enormous amount of time under stressful conditions. the majority? we i Ñ with the republicans on the senate floor and0f6a who supported the bill coming out of the senate. there was daily communication with them to inform them as to how things were perceiving. -- proceeding

taxpayer foots the bill. i look forward to working with my colleagues to craft the best possible bill. let me briefly mention a few points that i think are worthy of note. first, this legislation establishes a new office of financial research. it represents and the sport -- an important step in understanding the threat to our system could it will provide early warnings -- our system. it will provide early warnings. second, we are required that hedge funds register with the securities exchange commission. this will shed light on an important aspect of our economy, the dark pools of today. thirdly, we will bring economy -- accountability and transparency from regulators who supervise derivatives in the first place. we also must make as many swaps as possible, transactions that are traded, cleared, and reported to regulators and the marketplace. firms should be required to put sufficient capital to engage in these transactions, which should help rein in the excessive speculation we have seen in the past. we must

by the bill. states could create a patchwork of differing laws and requirements, thereby, frustrating the stated goal of creating a uniformed national standard for formaldehyde emissions and composite wood products. in addition, the e.p.a. is currently considering a regulation under tasca addressed by this bill. if the e.p.a. completes its current rulemaking process, any resulting formaldehyde standard would preempt state regulation as provided in tasca. the bill would require the e.p.a. to issue the mandated emissions regardless of whether they ultimately prove technically feasible or reasonably affordable. congress lacks experience of these standards in the real world. we have learned through the consumer products improvement act that it can comply with them. we learned the hard way that well-meaning bills can lead to unemployment for small manufacturers and we should not repeat that mistake with almost 10% unemployment. this bill does not provide the e.p.a. with any discretion if ppone or more

or is the bill silent? the bill is silent. even though we know we need additional agents at the department of justice and, yes, this bill is coming out of the financial services committee, but the bill doesn't even have a finding that references the importance of adding financial fraud agents at the department of justice, at the f. -- s.e. cremplet because these wrongdoers were set up at the highest levels, but the bill remains silent on that. what about -- i mentioned capital margins a little bit earlier. this is really an important issue to get at the question of pursuant lending. and -- prudent lending and how much power we grant these institutions and the instruments they create to create money and to check it against the value of the underlying asset. the bill is quite weak on that. finally, i'd ask the question, does the bill create truly an independent systemic risk council or does it merely politicize risk evaluation through the u.s. department of treasury which has caused such confusion in the markets? credit is seize

the house bill. the republicans think we went too far in this legislation. >> what did you think about what some of the senators said about going with the house bill? >> we will have to work through that. >> the differences between these two late -- major pieces of legislation are small. people differ about what the languages. >> can you resist changes in your bill? >> there is a strong vote in the senate. i don't think the house will try to resist that. it may be subject to further amendments, but we will try to get a bill would 64 senators voting for that. >> chairman frank, -- >> i will not get into the specifics. >> i agree with the chairman. i think there will be some modifications, but basically this underlies provisions of that are needed. >> >> there will be votes each day on the provisions. >> thank you all very much. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> our public affairs content is available on tel

tax bills. they won't name it but there are -- there will be only certain organizations that can qualify for a language. ear marks. they may not necessarily name a company or the -- that gets an ear mark but the language will be structured in such a way. what was interesting on this is that you have very progressive liberal leadership, speaker plosey, these are progressive liberals, not right wingers. this is the second time in months they've had to acknowledge the real power of the n.r.a. to swing votes. it was on the d.c. voting bill. and they ended up pulling that bill because there was language in there the n.r.a. opposed. i had one say to me 260. that means the n.r.a. can mobilize 260 votes in the house so if the n.r.a. wants to come in on an issue, that's an issue that is something that the leadership is going to watch. also if you remember back to the membership in 1994 and they swept away 40 years of democratic rule, one of the groups behind the rep can takeover was the n.r.a. they were

while that bill passed the house, i can tell you if you brought that bill backing from brought that bill backing from of the house today,

reform bill. it is an important bill and we'll debate that and talk about that quite a bit through the next two days. what i've heard over the last week when i was home for district work period is that people are really concerned about the spending and overspending that's going on here in washington. folks in west virginia are tightening their belts and making difficult decisions but they don't see that happening here in washington. and right today we have before us in this previous question vote we are going to have an opportunity to make a cut in government. it makes a lot of sense, and over 315,000 americans have voted to perform this cut on government spending by voting to reform fannie and freddie. we estimate that we could save approximately $30 billion over 10 years. that's significant by ending some of the government conservatorship, shrinking their portfolios of fannie and freddie, establishing minimum capital standards, and bringing tans pearnsy to taxpayer exposure. -- transparency to t

speaker, ironically the bill before us today uses the same bill number as the democrats' health bill that passed the house in november of last year. it's ironic because republicans argued for months that the democrats should address the flawed medicare physician payment formula in their health care overhaul. after all, if they could find more than one-half trillion in cuts to medicare, you'd -- trillion dollars in cuts to medicare, you think they could find a couple of dollars to fix the s.g.r. except they didn't. allowing them to shield the true cost of their trillion-dollar government takeover of health care. it's one of the many reasons we should replace that flawed law with reform americans can afford and then we can address a true long-term fix for our doctors. thank you, mr. speaker, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. >> mr. speaker, i rise in support of this suspension. after all is said and done, no one can say this is a great bill. mr. waxman: it's a disappointment. it's an embarrassment that

guest: -- climate bill? guest: a little bit before the house passed its greenhouse gas bill the senate and natural resources committee passed a bill with republican support to require power companies to buy more electricity from renewable sources like wind farms and solar farms, geothermal plants and things like that. there is a benefit in terms of greenhouse gases. if a power company purchases electricity from wind farm for a coal-fired power plants, you would not be directly imposing a limit on greenhouse gases. for some members of the senate right now at this moment it might be easier to accomplish that rather than something similar to an economy wide cap and trade bill. host: are there enough votes in the senate for this legislation? guest: reporters asked senator kerrey that yesterday and he was quite frank that he did not have the votes now but he felt that they were close enough that he wanted to keep pushing. they certainly feel that the president's speech last night would have an emphasis put on cle

i have appointed a bipartisan commission to look into the causes of this bill. if laws are inadequate, laws will be changed. if oversight was lacking, it will be strengthened. if laws were broken, those responsible will be brought to justice. over the last few days, bp has played with their wealth. they are -- has plugged that there well. -- has plug theige their well. we are prepared for the worst, even though we hope the peace efforts will bring better news. regardless of this attack, there will be slippage until the relief wells are completed. there will continue to be a these are hard times in louisiana and across the gulf coast. louisiana has seen more than its fair share of trouble. i have seen communities determined to fight to this disaster, as they have before, to preserve not just a way to make a living but a way of life. we will fight alongside them until the awful damage that has been done is reversed, people are back on their feet, and the great natural bounty of the gulf coast is restored. >> president barack obama promised he would not stop fighti

that with all the talk and senator kerry and global warming bill and the bill they were trying to get done. it makes it so outrageous that they got sloppy. lots of safety problems. and this thing happens, because it deficient states not just -- the worst tragedy is the loss of life and there are 17 others that were severely hurt and our thoughts and prayers go out to them and i know my friend says that it's almost comical. and you know what a personal loss of life and me including, losing a brother and cousin's funeral i attended yesterday and nothing like that kind of heart ache. but then the next tragedy is what's being done to this country, what's being done for us to be energy independent and be dependent on countries that don't like us and who are our enemies. there are tragedies. most tragic the loss of life, injuries and what they have done to our future is also really devastating and we have got to take a step forward. and our friend from the navy made it clear, you got to take charge. people are looking at you. i know when i was in the army, it made an impression on me when a

i don't know if john morton read the bill, but he didn't want to enforce the bill. posner had no business sticking his nose in it whatsoever and carried it all the way to the chinese. i can't stand here on the floor of the house of represtatives without raising anssue of president calderon back behind where i'stanng now spoke to a joi session of congress and had to lecture us on how he strongly disagrees with arizona's immigration law. if he does, he also disagrees with the federal united states federal government's immigration law. it mirrors the feral immigratn law. and so we are in an era where the administration, the highest raing officials within the administration aren't compelled to check the facts before they misform the amerin people. they might cck a left-wing website, butar ecking the facts. and the amen people, who are they going to trust, shouldn't they tru the voicef the president of the united states? who's briefing him. who is telling him was in the bill? codn't anyone have given him an objective analysis. what kind of a shop is being run at thwhite

the bill requires c.e.o.'s and highest ranking officials of corporations that sponsor political advertisements to record stand by your ad disclaimers as well as protest taxpayers dollars from misuse by preventing certain government contractors from making campaign related expenditures. the disclosure act also closes a loophole creebate citizens united to ensure foreign corporations and foreign governments aren't able to influence elections by spending unlimited sums through united states subsidiaries or affiliates. by allowing them to make campaign contributions, foreign players could use limitless funds to influence the election. the bill is designed to accommodate nonprofit issues advocacy group who have long participated in political activity of which their members are aware. the bill must have more than 500,000 dues paying members in all 50 states, have had tax exempt status for the past 10 years and derive no more than 50% of its funding from corporate or union sources. it cannot use corporate or union mo

they've cut the bill down dramatically. it started out as a $two00 billion bill. they got it down to nearly $100 billion. and theor paying for a lot of this-- or proposing to-- by using unexpended funds from last year's economic stimulus package which the republicans had been calling for. >> woodruff: but you still have in here, or always have, the element of politics and each side is always thinking not only about the substance, but this is an election year. >> expectly. and the republicans, you know, we don't really know if they truly believe that we shouldn't spend this money, that we should cut the deficit or if this is trying to build a case to prevent democrats from accomplishing some of their goals. >> woodruff: meanwhile, democrats are saying we may be able to use the fact that republicans voted against it in the fall. >> well, that's the thing because they could have moved an emergency unemployment benefit piece separately, but they're choosing not to do that. >> woodruff: why not? >> because they want to keep the entire package together. they don't think

speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill house bill 5611, a bill to extend the funding and spending authority for the airport and airway trust fund. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5611, a bill to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to extend the funding and expenditure authorities of the airport and airway trust fund, to amend title 49 united states code to extend authorizations for the airport improvement program, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from georgia, mr. lewis, and the gentleman from kentucky, mr. davis, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. lewis: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, may i ask for unanimous consent to give members five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill, house bill 5611. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. lewis: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized

many would fit that bill. i think the president has several tauruses and all of them good. >> i want to -- several choices and all of them good. >> i want to talk to you about your own race. republicans seem to be going for your district. i wonder if you could talk about the political battle back home. what is the environment when you go out and talk to folks? what are they asking you, and what is your sense of this election season? >> jobs, work, and the economy, no question. i have 14 counties just south of charlotte, n.c. and the unemployment rate in all 14 has been in the double digits for some time now. there is one district of a cyclical unemployment layered on top of structural unemployment. the structural unemployment coming from the demolition of traditional industries on top of the cyclical effects. we will probably be the last recovering. i have people very much concerned, very worried. in small towns, large cities, whatever it maybe, they are concerned. and secondly, when you get down to the man on

now, let me say that i voted for that bill. i was wrong. the gramm bill. we didn't need to regulate derivatives. by the way, there were a number of democrats, leaders who said that as well. and mr. greenspan said it as well. he admitted he made a mistake and he was distressed by that mistake. now, we can't erase that crisis. but we can work to rebuild what we lost as democrats have done every time we've been supporting job creation, to the recovery act, for cash for clunkers, for tax relief for small businesses. frankly been instructed by the minority party and the other body who have made a high stakes political bet on recovery's failure. that would be a shame. we can also, just as any responsible family would, ensure ourselves against a repeat crisis and protect america's jobs from another devastating collapse. the wall street reform and consumer protection act, which mr. frank and mr. dodd have led to this point, means an end to the irresponsible practices of the big banks. and i want to say the community banks, which i think mr. royce referred to, he's

added to the bill. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from idaho. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the aye vs. it. the amendment is agreed -- the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number five printed in part c of house report 111-506. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. perlmutter: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk, made in order by the rules. amendment number 5. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 5, printed in part c of house report number 11-506, offered by mr. perlmutter of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1436, the gentleman from colorado, mr. perlmutter, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: mr. chairman, i yield myself such tim

this bill is 1500 pages. on thursday we began our hearing. when it got to make, i asked for a show of hands of anyone who has read all of the pages. nobody raised their hands that they read the bill. host: have you read it? guest: i have read the sections we are dealing with. if you have not read it, how can you say it is a great thing? host: the conference committee will deal with corporate governance? is that the first issue on the agenda? guest: i believe cell along with executive compensation. the funding mechanism for the sec. there were all of these failures where they did not see the bernie madoff situation and the institutions that failed there. we are one to reward them for that. they will be self-funded and not go through the normal appropriation process and oversight in the future. they can get as large as they want to without any more oversight. that is what they sec has always wanted. to be rewarded this behavior? i do not think so. this behavior?e host: california? caller: it sounds as if you are saying the new administration is

tax bills. they won't name it but there are -- there will be only certain organizations that can qualify for a language. ear marks. they may not necessarily name a company or the -- that gets an ear mark but the language will be structured in such a way. what was interesting on this is that you have very progressive liberal leadership, speaker plosey, these are progressive liberals, not right wingers. this is the second time in months they've had to acknowledge the real power of the n.r.a. to swing votes. it was on the d.c. voting bill. and they ended up pulling that bill because there was language in there the n.r.a. opposed. i had one say to me 260. that means the n.r.a. can mobilize 260 votes in the house so if the n.r.a. wants to come in on an issue, that's an issue that is something that the leadership is going to watch. also if you remember back to the membership in 1994 and they swept away 40 years of democratic rule, one of the groups behind the rep can takeover was the n.r.a. they were

tax bills. they won't name it but there are -- there will be only certain organizations that can qualify for a language. ear marks. they may not necessarily name a company or the -- that gets an ear mark but the language will be structured in such a way. what was interesting on this is that you have very progressive liberal leadership, speaker plosey, these are progressive liberals, not right wingers. this is the second time in months they've had to acknowledge the real power of the n.r.a. to swing votes. it was on the d.c. voting bill. and they ended up pulling that bill because there was language in there the n.r.a. opposed. i had one say to me 260. that means the n.r.a. can mobilize 260 votes in the house so if the n.r.a. wants to come in on an issue, that's an issue that is something that the leadership is going to watch. also if you remember back to the membership in 1994 and they swept away 40 years of democratic rule, one of the groups behind the rep can takeover was the n.r.a. they were

bill, i'm here.

this bill requires c.e.'s to certify under penalty of perjury that their companies are not foreign nationals. under the newlyy+ expanded standard of the bill. but the bill does nothing to ensure that when labor unions are spending money on elections, that money did not come from people who are themselves prohibited from spending noun influence american elections. again, we offered an amendmeet to treat corporations and unions equally under the bill by requiring the same certify scation of labor union chiefs but again, it was rejected. mr. chairman, a third example. i point to the centerpiece provision of this bill. the so-called disclosure requirent. the bill requires organizations to disclose information about the individuals who gave more than $600. but the federal election committee asked everybody else to do it at $200. as one of the majority members of our committee -- the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. lungren: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. the chair: the gentleman is recogni

this bill, this bill is an opportunity through the p.q. to be able to cut, cut the excess federal properties. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: i remind my friend, the height of the iraq war we spent $141 billion. as we draw down troops, down to $65 billion. a savings of $76 billion a year. that is money. these things we can find other places to save where there is wasteful spending, $76 billion in iraq. that's what this congress is finding. that's what this president found. instead of going into a war and not paying for it, $76 billion. with that i yield two minutes to my friend from kentucky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. yarmuth: i thank the gentleman from colorado. i know the american people who are watching this month have their head spinning because all we have heard for a year and a half now from our colleagues on the other side is, tarp was a disastrous program. tarp was a disastrous program. they are running ads in our

that are outlined in the bill. will you be required to take a certain number of medicare or medicaid patients? if you're going to see them in the exchange. again, nobody knows the answer to those questions, or at least i don't know the answer to those questions yet. >> the experience of other nations, i used to do business in a lot of countries which had state run systems, i suppose it was forbidden to operate outside them. but ullimately, patience the man of it and positions and providers met met the test. as aned a juct to the system. when you get rationened out, someone decides you can't have care so you seek it out and find it. it might be that same sort of thing happened there foo the reason you gave. >> my political awakening occurred during the clinton health care debates when their fear of a two tier system was so strong that they in fact outlawed the private practice of medicine outside the system. i think that's where myself and many other doctors got engaged. >> governor, i was hoping you could talk to u

i believe in this bill. i believe that this amendment will help with transparency and accountability. and i also believe that it is time for us to do all that we can to help the small businesses in this country. i believe that this is something we can do and i believe that it is something that will make a difference. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i appreciate the gentleman. i still go back to the point and i think that's where we get kind of in a -- we live in wally world here in washington, d.c., where you still have to have $33 billion if you're going to go loan -- or invest in the preferred shares of these banks, you still got to find the $33 billion. and the truth of the matter is, for every dollar we're going to appropriate or allocate in this country this year, we're going to have to go borrow 42 cents of it. so i just guess the question -- begs the question, should we go out and hawk another $33 billion for a program that

about five bills on the agenda today . including one that honors the late explorer, jacques cousteau. the house in at 2:00 p.m. eastern. coming up this afternoon at 3:00 on c-span3, senate foreign relations subcommittee will focus on the activities of hezbollah and the middle east and the officials testifying include the counterterrorism coordinator for the state department and as well as former bush administration ambassador ryan crocker. live coverage at 3:00 on c-span3. >> we have three new c-span books for you. "abraham lincoln," "the supreme court," and "who's buried in grant's tomb." to order go to c-span.org/books. each one also a great gift idea for father's day. >> the republican voters here in las vegas are among those across nevada taking a nominee to challenge senate majority leader harry reid. republicans also have to decide whether to nominate the governor for a second term or choose a former federal judge who opposed the democrat, rory reid, the son of the u.s. senator. one of 12 states holds primaries and r

my hope is that they will see a bill, a stronger bill than the one we came out of the senate with. and a bit more, because we were able to work on some of the ideas that were controversial. i want to thank the house members and chairman frank for understanding that and being supportive of many of these proposals. i feel like we're in good shape, but i will reserve judgment until i have a chance to talk. that is a good point, chairman frank has made that point, maybe not often enough. the bill is not done yet. the president is probably on his way now to meet with the g-20. the harmonization of our rules and those in the european community, the pacific rim, it will be awfully important. in having completed this work, we can offer some leadership to the world on what needs to be done to harmonize these efforts that we talked about this evening and over the last couple of weeks. there is some strength in the hand of our president going to toronto, and we believe in the passage of this bill that we hope will occur next week. we can make that case to our fellow parliamentarians, legislat

you have a marina waiting on a check for their electricity bill and water bill. i am not going to cut their gas off. that is the things we are going through. the booms do not work, and mr. senator from florida, this is a wake-up call. what you said earlier, what we went through ssven reduce several weeks ago, you are just opening your eyes this morning. we need some help. we need you all to push. we need some money down there. our people do not want a free check from the government. they do not want ood ssamps or sba loans.+ they want to go out in the water and put float booms to scoop up that oil. as we speak right now, it is coming through our passes. when i get back tomorrow morning, i will have one of those passes blocked and have four left. i guarantee you, i am going to make it happen. i am going to block the five passes, get out of there in 45 days, and i will stop with low pressure and protect five parishes. we are not waiting. we do not want to be on food stamps. we are not used to that. we do it -- we want to go to work and save our communities. i still

tax bills. they won't name it but there are -- there will be only certain organizations that can qualify for a language. ear marks. they may not necessarily name a company or the -- that gets an ear mark but the language will be structured in such a way. what was interesting on this is that you have very progressive liberal leadership, speaker plosey, these are progressive liberals, not right wingers. this is the second time in months they've had to acknowledge the real power of the n.r.a. to swing votes. it was on the d.c. voting bill. and they ended up pulling that bill because there was language in there the n.r.a. opposed. i had one say to me 260. that means the n.r.a. can mobilize 260 votes in the house so if the n.r.a. wants to come in on an issue, that's an issue that is something that the leadership is going to watch. also if you remember back to the membership in 1994 and they swept away 40 years of democratic rule, one of the groups behind the rep can takeover was the n.r.a. they were

the coast guard has set sent the peak two bills the first of  was for $8.9 million d second bill has yet to be paid. the white house has invited tony he were to meet with president obama. republicans in congress have criticized the president for not speaking directly with bp officials since the explosion more than seven weeks ago. the bp chairman is based in britain but will be here next week meeting with the president and testifying before congress. we will have those hearings live for you on cspan 3. the resident as a meeting this morning on the oil \ spell. he will make a statement about small business and we will have that live for you on sees that it also at 2:30 eastern today, the assistant attorney general for national security will be talking about u.s. counter- terrorism policy. that will be live from the brookings institution. prime minister david cameron will take questions on electoral reform and the british mission in iraq and afghanistan. you can see the exchange sunday night on c-span. this weekend, the chicago tribune lit fest. two days of panels and collins. --call-i

house bill. let me briefly mention a few points that i think are worthy of note. first this legislation establishes a new office of financial research. there represent an important step toward understanding the factors which threatened to rip holes in the financial system. it will provide early warnings to act on the information more preemptively, something that was clearly missing. we are requiring hedge funds and private pooos of capital. this will shed light on these ddrk pools of unregulated money. we're bringing accountability and transparency to the derivatives markets by overturning the law that prevented regulators from surprising derivatives in the first place. we must bring transparency to the marketplace [unintelligible] to regulators and market participants. we must make as many transactions that are traded, cleared and reported to regulators and thh marketplace. firms should be required to report sufficient capital to engage in these transactions which should rein in the speculation.

someone said the we should rename the bill to the franc/dodd bill. he does combine that to the broad bill to describe exactly what we have here now. it amazes me that in this day and age when our constituents are going through such hard times and americans are asking for congress to do the right thing, smaller government, less spending -- here we end this bill process with doing the exact opposite, a larger government, increased spending, and increased taxes. there is no other way. there are no other alternatives. we are in a catch-22. really? there is no other way? when it the novel if just once from the viktor departed the we would hear the idea of cutting spending, reducing spending, finding some offset some place. in my state in new jersey, we did just that. we did it in a bipartisan manner would take governor chris christie reaching across the aisle taking a budget -- a $30 billion budget, reduce spending by $11 billion, 9.2% over time. bipartisan without any tax increases like we are talking about here. can you do that here? the answer from the

>> the energy bill. any version of the energy bill. we have not seen the bill. like i said earlier -- i use the verb "jammed." it is getting larger as we go. i will let you guys handle it. >> um, so, i guess, i would start by making the obvious comment. i'm not sure i would hear myself saying this. i'm not going to negotiate in public. >> good quote. >> that is why i have never used it. there are lots of things in terms of mechanisms and so forth that can be decided. we're going to look at what the bill would result in in terms of reductions in carbon pollution, like the movement toward renewable energy and energy efficiency. what affects would actually be likely to have on the ground? -- what effects would it actually be likely to have on the ground? will this result in genuine, measurable results that matter? we're also concerned that it not roll back environmental protections. people have been negotiating for years on this. there are ways to negotiate bills. the house showed one possible way of doing that. there are other things out there. there are issues of