the way senator kennedy's efforts to pass the minimum wage tied senator dole up on the senate floor and sunk his presidential campaign. the senator is largely unknown but very important roll in the passage of the affordable care act, the genuses of the ryan white a.i.d.s. care bill and much more. before i introduce doris kearns goodwin i'd like to close by reading from the conclusion of the book, few paragraphs, which i think says what we thought as we really -- when nick undertook the endeavor and we finished it. kenneled's life and legislative career are the stuff of history. but the challenges we faced as we make our own history never end. as senator kennedy said in his speech to the democratic convention in 1980, the work goes on, the cause endures, the dream shall never die. there can be no greater tribute to his memory than to continue to fight for that enduring dream, and no better model for success than his example. [applause] >> now, let me introduce doris kearns goodwin. i think most of you here today know that doris the author of seven wonderful books, including the fitzgeral

again, senator menendez, senator gardner, senator cardin, senator corker. i wanted to add one more thing, madam president, just another minute, as i try to do every day, as does senator shaheen, to address the issue of the ambassadors to norway and sweden. it has been 864 days since we've had an ambassador to norway. it has been 468 days since the president nominated azita raji to be ambassador to sweden. i appreciate senator corker's leadership on this issue. we are working very hard to get these two ambassadors confirmed. these countries are the 11th and 12th biggest investors in the united states. senator cruz is the one holding up a vote on this. we are hopeful that at some point we will be able to move ahead. this has been going on way too long. some of our best allies in the fight against russian aggression -- senatorway actuall norway aca border with russia -- we have to be on their side as they take in thousands and thousands of refugees. we have talked about the need for a strong europe. yet these are the two major countries in europe that we don't

again, senator menendez, senator gardner, senator cardin, senator corker. i wanted to add one more thing, madam president, just another minute, as i try to do every day, as does senator shaheen, to address the issue of the ambassadors to norway and sweden. it has been 864 days since we've had an ambassador to norway. it has been 468 days since the president nominated azita raji to be ambassador to sweden. i appreciate senator corker's leadership on this issue. we are working very hard to get these two ambassadors confirmed. these countries are the 11th and 12th biggest investors in the united states. senator cruz is the one holding up a vote on this. we are hopeful that at some point we will be able to move ahead. this has been going on way too long. some of our best allies in the fight against russian aggression -- senatorway actuall norway aca border with russia -- we have to be on their side as they take in thousands and thousands of refugees. we have talked about the need for a strong europe. yet these are the two major countries in europe that we don't

i thank again senator mcconnell and senator reed for allowing this to -- senator reid for allowing this to come up in this manner. i commend chairman royce and ranking member rangel. they send the -- sent the bill over. it was a strong piece of legislation that the senate by passage later today will strengthen. this is a collaborative effort. i hate to even use words like that. i know people hear it back home, but it is, it is a collaborative effort by two bodies of congress and two committees and ultimately by the end of the day i think two bodies fully passing this. it's going to become law. and this is going to begin to make a difference in the way north korea is behaving. it is abhorrent what is happening there. one of the greatest humanitarian crises continues because of the way people are treated, and this bill addresses that also. so thank you for your comments on the floor, thank you more importantly for your efforts in bringing -- helping bring this piece of legislation to the floor with your leadership on the committee in designing this. i look forward to us having a very succ

it says the senate has a job to do. the senate has a job to do. but the president and the senate have a constitutional duty to protect the supreme court's ability to function and have justice. not tell the supreme court what to do, not to dictate the decision but to make sure they're simply able to do justice. this means they must be fully staffed and have the justices in place. it also means they should be funded. those are our our jobs. according to our constitution the president replaces vacancies on the supreme court. that duty does does not end as i noted in the presidential year. just as duties of senators in their states and nation do not end in a presidential year. for 332 more days the president is the democrat elected president of the united states. democratic democratic elected as in a democracy, as in howard democracy functions. he has an obligation to all americans to dutifully execute his oath of office. the president has not yet announced a nominee to fill the current vacancy on the court, when he does it will be the constitutional

an opening by senator kennedy, rebuttal by senator humphrey, and then a rebuttal by senator kennedy. the sound of this buzzer will indicate that your time is at an end. i ask your cooperation in observing the limitations placed upon you. senator humphrey, we begin with your opening statement. you, myhumphrey: thank fellow americans. we should learn and become informed. i have learned that in west governmentou want a which never rests in this all important and vital effort to build a secure and enduring peace. i have learned that you want a government that cares and ask for the people and understands the needs of the people. you want a government that isn't blinded by budget balance and slogans, but rather, is deeply dedicated to a balanced nation in which the pockets of depression and unemployment and poverty are erased. now, the problems of this wonderful and beautiful west virginia are much the same as those in other states and, indeed, of the world itself. and, mind you, these problems are growing and spreading like a cancer throughout our very land. there is one thing to me that

so, the senate voted him out. he is rejected from the senate. naturally they want to know why the senator was kicked out of the senate. you get this growing public feeling, we want to know what happens when the senate meets. and obviously, they have guys sitting in the balcony watching the house. is they want guys watching the senate, because that is news. and i'm sure there are people in the house of representatives going, why do these guys get to meet and private while we have to meet in front of all of these people? finally after five years of meeting behind closed doors, the senate relents and builds a small balcony and starts to meet in public. that's one of those long-standing traditions. but when you go back to our earliest days, this is where you are seeing they do not have everything that is set in stone. the constitution is only four pages long. these men have to figure out what they are about based on a few lines. george washington basically invents the job of the president going off a few paragraphs of the constitution. what do i do

i thank senator mcconnell and senator reed. i think to thank the chairman and others who sent the base bill over and it was a good bill, a strong piece of legislation that the senate by passage will strengthen later on. this is a collaborative effort. i hate to use words like that but it is a collaborative effort by two bodies of congress, and two committees, and ultimate by the end of the day two bodies, i think, fully passing this, it will become law and this is going to begin to make a difference in the way north korea's behaving. it is a port what is happening there. one of the greatest humanitarian crisis continues because of the way people are treated and this bill addresses that also. so thank you were your comments on the floor. thank you more importantly for your efforts in helping bring this piece of legislation to the floor but your leadership on the committee in designing this and i look forward to us having a very successful day here in the senate. >> will the gentlemen yield? >> yes. >> to the gentlemen from the t

quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. a senator: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. a senator: i ask unanimous consent that proceedings under the quorum call be vitiate the. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. coons: mr. president, i come up to the floor today to talk about our relation relatioh iran and the enforcement of the u.s.-iran -- the international nuclear deal. but let me first start with just a few observations to reinforce an important point, that iran is neither our friend nor our ally. just last wednesday, as the international community marked the 71st anniversary -- the 71st anniversary -- of the liberation of auschwitz, on that very day in which countries come together in solidarity, united in a shared commitment that the atrocities of the holocaust must never happen, iran's supreme leader ayatollah khomeini issued a very different proclamation. it came in the form after video in which the narrater condemns the world and questions the legitimacy of the holocaust. just a few days later the supreme le

this is something that senator elizabeth warren and senator bernie sanders support. the postal service can get out of this ridiculous death that comes back every year, $5.7 billion loss last year. eliminating overlap duplication, access post offices, that that is the solution. spend more money, get them to do more things. it does not work. brian: robert gates was here a couple of weeks ago. here was a question we asked him. explain this. [video clip] brian: has the department of defense ever been audited? >> we get audited in different ways by different people but when it comes to a formal, accounting practices, the answer is no. the department has been working for years to get itself into a position of where it knows where all of the money has gone and it has that documented and it can present that in formal accounting practices. do we know where the money goes? yes. do huge amounts of money disappear into the ether? no. brian: what do you think? thomas: i think they need to have a clean audit and then we will see. i am not doubting him but we are not sure. it goes

states senators. the other part that is relevant here is we actually have a historicalrelevant analogy to draw. democrats in 1988 found themselves in the same position. they were in the majority in the senate and there was a republican in the white house. there was a vacancy on the supreme court, and there was a question they faced about if they were going to vote in a presidential election year to confirm the president's nominee to the supreme court. and even though

senate. this is two hours and begins with charles grassley. >> yesterday the minority leader came to the floor to disparage the work the senate judiciary committee and disparage the work of the senate as a whole. has he does from time to time he launched into a personal attack against me. that is okay. i don't intend to return the favor. i love senator reed. i don't want to talk about the nuclear option and the damage that did to the sen achlt over the years and years the democrat senators had had to endure his leadership without being able to offer an amendment we had the story about one democratic senator who was defeated in the last election. he never got a chance to make a vote during the entire time in the united states senate. we know that is how some people act when they don't get to wait. tantrums are in appropriate for the senate. i think if my friend senator biden had been in the chamber today he would have said, as you have heard him say so many times, that is a bunch of malarkey.

the senate has to approve. the senate is not going to approve. ironically it was schumer under george w. bush who said over a year out we should block anybody, except in the most extraordinary circumstances. it was obama who tried to filibuster alito. >> president reagan appointed bourque. he didn't pass muster. he didn't make it judge ginsburg was nominated. he didn't make it it then justice kennedy was nominated and he made unanimously with the democratic senate. >> i don't have to square it. it was a time and plakh where they had worked at it for well over two years. the seat was vacant. so this idea that we have -- the president has every right to nominate anybody he wants to. the senate has equal right to ignore. >> to reject it. >> just ignore it they don't have to reject it they can ignore it. >> what kind of candidate do you think could pass? we're in an awkward position we risk four-four decisions. >> for 10 months. given the supreme court record would be probably three to five decisions. now, the fact is the president will never do this

but you do have senators like senator grassley, who has backed away from that statement. there is a real question about public opinion. will they tolerate a very obvious example of the senate not functioning when there is already at perception of congress is not being the most functional body in the federal government? steve: all right, thank you very much. straight ahead, the politics of replacing the late antonin scalia. what do party leaders say should happen? welcome back t steve: welcome back to "close up." the nation is waiting to see who the president will nominate to fill the supreme court vacancy left following the death of antonin scalia. but even more important everyone is wondering what senate republicans will do when they get the president's pick. joining me to talk more about this, is tom henderson, chair of the polk county democrats, and matt strawn, former chair of the iowa republican party i'd like to thank you for being here. you guys show up quite a lot, i appreciate it. tom let's start with you. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell and other republic

senator joseph r. biden, chairman of the judiciary committee, has urged president bush not to fill any vacancy that might open up on the supreme court until after the november election warning that any election-year nominee would -- quote -- "become a victim of a -- quote -- "power struggle of control over the supreme court." biden said he would also urge the senate not to hold hearings on a nomination if bush decided to name swufnlt the article continued, quoting then-senator biden. "if someone steps down, i would highly recommend the president not name someone, not send a name up," biden said. "if he did send someone up, i would ask the senate to seriously consider not having a hearing on that nominee." and then this: "can you imagine dropping a nominee after the three or four or five decisions that are about to be made by the supreme court into that fight, into the caldron of the middle of a presidential year," biden went on. "i believe there would be no bounds of propriety that would being honored

king: senator? senator mccain: china is obviously a place where this -- one of the signal failures of this administration. although there are certainly many failures throughout the world. but i would also look very -- revise our policies concerning these rogue states, iraq, libya, north korea, those countries that continue to try to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. king: and you'd do what? mccain: i'd institute a policy that i call "rogue state rollback." i would arm, train, equip, both from without and from within, forces that would eventually overthrow the governments and install free and democratically elected governments. as long as saddam hussein is in power, i am convinced that he will pose a threat to our security. "the new york times" reported just a few days ago that administration officials worry that saddam hussein continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. congress passed a law a couple of years ago, called the iraqi liberation act, the administra

he squeaked through the senate. any one senator could have forced a cloture vote. any one democrat could have done it. we didn't do that. it was never done until the republicans showed up here in the last few years. now bork, a very controversial person, received a long, long hearing before the committee and a long debate here in the senate. and he was voted down. that's the way this place is supposed to work. other nominations have been voted down. but we didn't, with bork, we didn't say we're not going to hold a hearing on bork. we didn't say we're not going to take the committee's actions and leave it at that. listen to this, bork was turned down in the judiciary committee by an overwhelming margin, but in spite of that we brought it to the senate floor and there was a debate and he won by two votes. no filibuster. he was defeated in the committee. we didn't look for an excuse. that isn't the way it used to be done. this now -- the republican leadership now, they won't meeth the nominee, they won't hold a hearing and the chairman of the committee won't even go t

the president would need all 46 democratic senators plus 14 republican senators which is probably 14 more than he'll get. beyond that -- >> to break the fill ibuster? >> that's correct. knowing harry reid, reid would broken the rules by changing the rules in the middle of the ed busters and the president would have got away it with. >> david and, by the way, good to have you here. >> good to be here. >> the future of the supreme court is always a big issue in presidential elections. but now we're talking about the current state of the supreme court playing out in the midst of a presidential campaign. how much of an issue do you expect that to be? i agree with george's take on the politics of this in the senate. of course, if you're president of the united states, why wouldn't you do what is your responsibility is which is to appoint a successor to scalia? and by the way, this is now ideological warfare of the highest order. i don't mean that even pejoratively. this is what ideology and ideological warfare is really about, a contest of ideas in this country. and if scalia stood for a

senator russell was known as the senator's senator. he had respect for his colleagues regardless of their ideology. that building was named for richard russell, a democrat. for some balance, this building was named for senator everett dirksen, the republican leader 1969 and was quite a popular figure in the united states at the time. r in theic orato old-school style. record herammy for a did, just reading sheet music patriotic speeches with music in the background. quite a popular piece of the time. >> down through the years, there brave, gallant men who have died that others might be free. ♪ dirksen, just as a popular who also represented a great spirit of bipartisanship, because he was by my -- the minority leader in the senate. 35 senators on his side of the aisle, which is a small minority. his boats were critical in the days when it took 2/3 to avoid a filibuster. if they were going to stop a filibuster, they needed everett dirksen's support. act, the rights dirksen treaty, once agreed to whatever the compromise was, enough vot

senator merkley: thank you. >> senator casey, last but not least. senator casey: thank you. i appreciate you calling this hearing. this is a distant wished panel. -- distinguished panel. my question might elicit a response that is already in your testimony, so if you are responding by way of reiteration, i apologize for that. but around here, it does help to repeat ourselves, you can help us do that. i am particularly stunned by this position republican senators have taken. this is my 10th year in the senate. i thought i had seen it all, until this. it is a stunning dereliction of duty. i don't know how else to say it. if it is not, you know, to tear any of ideology, it is the tyranny of raw politics. depending on what day it is, i am not sure if they are doing it purely for ideological reasons or purely for political reasons, for both. but it is too radical, and it is -- tyrannical, it is misguided, and it is bad for the country. it seems like the same thinking that resulted in a government shutdown in 2013. when most people thought we had come to the precipice and would no

the presidential appoint, with consent of the senate. but in this case, the advice he's getting is, don't bother. in this case, the law, the constitution and the delineated politics, in this congress, blocking a democrat from replacing a conservative jurist will work. rolling the diagnosis, let's begin with washington's seniorer washington correspondent, mike viqueira. >> i don't believe that the president should appoint someone. >> almost from the moment of his passing, the fight has been a political stroke that could leave the supreme court with 8 justices for at least a year. republicans want to turn the november election into a referendum for who should sit on the court. and any nominee put forward by president obama should be blocked in the senate. ted cruz has blocked a filibuster. >> we're one away from a majority that would effectively write the second amendment out of the constitution. >> reporter: mr. obama has ignored that call and said that he will do his constitutional duty to fill the vacancy. who will he nominate? speculat

senator shelby: senator crapo. senator crapo: i appreciate your comments where we discussed the $50 billion trigger to determine when a bank is important and increasing the threshold and focusing on the flexibility that we need there. while congress continues to make progress on this effort and hopefully we will make some progress soon, you have previously noted that the federal reserve has the authority and discretion on its own to taylor these. those covered by section 165 of dodd-frank. can you give us some specific examples of the kind that might be in the works as the federal reserve works on this? and will there be relief on stress testing and resolution planning? chair yellen: so we are actively engaged in reviewing our stress testing and capital framework for the bank holding companies ove $50 billion we are considering that risk burdensome that are close to the $50 billion asset line. along with that we might make it somewhat stricter for some of the gsibs. we are considering that as well .nd that would be

and so the senators from michigan, senator peters, senator stabenow, have come to the floor of the senate and said to america will you help flint, michigan? and it's right that they do so. i have been fortunate to serve in the house and the senate for many years, and i can't tell you how many times senators from states all across the nation have asked that same question -- will you help us in louisiana? will you help us in alabama? will you help us in texas? there's hardly a state that hasn't come to the floor of the senate asking for help. and yet for reasons i can't explain, the republican majority in the united states senate is resisting this idea. almost 100,000 people were forced to live without access to clean water in their homes. they couldn't turn on their faucets in the morning, make breakfast or take a shower like all of us do. they started their day by waiting in long lines for bottled water to feed and bathe their kids, to take showers and to stay healthy. they started rationing the water. the elderly and disabled that couldn't make it to a pickup location for bottled water a

senators? two other colleagues, senator rand paul and senator ted cruz and senator ted cruz, of course, just won iowa. >> solid guys. we have been blessed with really strong conservatives. the 2010 marco rubio, ted cruz, rand paul, tremendous class. we are so thankful that we are serving with good people. the reality of it is though we are looking for one person who is going to lead this party and unite the party, beat hillary clinton and not compromise our conservative values. that person, without question is, marco rubio. >> all right. the other uy senator from south carolina, senator lindseyodsae graham. he was in the race but no longer in the race. evidence has endorsed governor jeb bush. he likes a governor. he likes a governor's experience because senators have a different job and very different experience than a governor. do you have any sort of hesitation about -- i know you are new on the senate any hesitation about the fact that marco rubio has never been a governor? >> i have had the

>> senator marco rubio? >> i would say, you're a nice guy, and you're a good speaker, but show me exactly what things that you have accomplished that make you an outstanding individual. >> senator ted cruz. >> same question. >> carly fiorina? >> you know, i've known carly for 20 years. and i would say to her, do you think that being a woman who can tackle hillary clinton is the most important benefit that you bring? >> governor chris christie? >> i would say why did you not recognize that validating barack obama just before the elections in 2012 was not a bad move? >> governor kasich? >> i would say thanks for all your service. you've been the consummate politician. and you've done a very good job as a politician. thank you. >> governor bush. >> same. >> the same? and senator rand paul? >> appreciate your willingness to jump into the arena. and i have often asked people of science and medicine to get involved because they've learned to make decisions based on evidence and not on ideology. >> okay. now, what

the senate, when the senators took - sorry, when the republicans took charge of the senate, they said they will get things done. this is going to be a cry tore the president if they sit on this nomination and doesn't act. these republicans said they were going to get things done. they're not moving forward on the nomination as they should. this is their responsibility. you can see the political points that he could be making down the road once he nominates someone and the senate does not move forward with that nomination >>> michael, is this something that's going to impact the voters? are the voters people who listen to what's going on in the supreme court? are they going to be impacted by this when they go to the polls? >> this is new territory. the last time a supreme court justice was actually approved during an presidential year was 1988. that was anthony kennedy. that was earlier in the year. it wasn't the same thing. they're going to be hearing each candidate constantly talking about filling that last seat. they are certainly going to have to answer these questions. it becomes

he was talked into running or the senate. i' m sure he was talked into being the bank commissioner but >> there is another ointment, that of drugs are -- of drugs are -- of drug czar. you think the governor should be looking to someone who is an outsider? someone who can rattle some bureaucratic cages? or an insider who can restore some confidence and competence to the position? >> no matter who gets appointed it is a daunting task. we have to do a better job of all three phases of recovery and treatment. and prevention to. even though we passed a number of pieces of legislation related to drug and substance abuse that, in particular because of the impact of fentanyl. one person isn' t going to solve a problem overnight. >> i think senator bradley is spot on. we are going to solve this with a plan. we need to support the person who is in that position, not let partisanship get in the way. and really get to work on this issue. we have made good progress thanks to senator bradley. more needs to be done. clearly we are not doing

senator hatch: thank you, senator. senator stabenow. senator stabenow: thank you, mr. chairman, ranking members. welcome, secretary. always wonderful to have you before the committee. let me start by thanking you for working with me and leaders in my state to help us on a number of different areas. we very much appreciate it. and as i start, when you were talking about the unemployment rate, when president obama took office in michigan it was 15.7% and we were at the very erge of losing the major -- verge of losing the major foundation of manufacturing in the country. and with the administration's help, the president's help, we've turned that around. unemployment is now 5.1%. o from 15.7% to 5.1% is a huge change. the challenge, as you know all too well, is not everyone is feeling the recovery and so when people lost the equity of their home, the primary way that middle-class families save, or lost their job or even in the auto industry took major cuts to save the industry and those who have been threatened on all sides, it's very, very difficult even though the broad

not because of any senate rule. no senate rule prevents it. not because of historical precedent. historical precedent does not lean against this. the only thing preventing the united states senate from taking quick action on the president's next supreme court nomination is america's toxic mix of politics and television. joining us now, david frum, senior editor for "the atlantic" "the atlantic." jonathan allen, head of community and content for sidewire, and a columnist for roll call. and tom goldstein, publisher of scotus blog and a supreme court expert. david frum, the senate majority leader in an unprecedented move announced shortly after justice scalia was pronounced dead that he absolutely will not bring any nominee by the president to a vote in the senate. we have turned a corner in the modern contentious history of supreme court nominations. >> well, lawrence, i'm going to speak to your sense of political realism. it's no surprise that leader mcconnell would do that. of course he would do that. of course he would run out a clock on a nominee by the opposing party. what is

the president chooses a no many knee and after consulting with senate party leaders and senators from that nominee's home state. then that nominee faces a series of contentious hearing with the senate judiciary committee. the committee then makes a recommendation backing or not backing that nominee. senate then votes and the nominee is appointed. if they receive a simple majority, they just need 51 votes. whole process can take up to three months under normal circumstances. this is not a normal circumstance. a majority republican senate, very, very unlikely to confirm a liberal nominee any time soon from a lake dumb president during such a contentious presidential election. >> judge scalia was unanimously appointed by the senate. but these days, that's unlikely to happen. >>> stick with us for the loss of a legal giant. next we'll talk with a former law clerk for justice scalia for an up-close look at his legacy. yeah. yeah. then how'd i get this... [ voice of dennis ] ...allstate safe driving bonus check? what is that? [ normal voice ] so weird, right? my agent, tom, said... [ voice

senate republicans should meet their responsibility. senate republicans should do their job. give the nominee a fair hearing and a vote. membersy, republican sent a letter to the majority leader. willsaid, "this committee not hold hearings of any supreme court nominee until after our next president is sworn in on january 20, 2017." unusualthey take this position in defiance of the constitution? >> the presidential election is well underway. americans have begun casting votes. they can decide and concrete way court should go. ,hey voted to elect a president barack obama, and 100 senators in this body. a four-yeared to term and 11 months remain. the american people voted for each of us to do our jobs for his long as we serve in office. the american people have chosen a president. not for three years, for three years and two months. they elected a president for four years and this president's term continues until january 20, 2017. the republicans conveniently ignore the obvious. the well of -- the will of the american people was expressed in empowerstion and it him, under the co

he has held fundraisers for senator harry reid, and senator charles schumer. he has met with nancy pelosi in the house in he has something of a reporter with the former house speaker, john boehner. he had gone golfing in the past with him. an interest in politics and he does know some of the folks on the hill but that is different than having to past spending bills to sign them into law or working at some of these big trade agreements and getting them passed. there is a layer of complexity i don't think he has dealt with. >> lawmakers contemplating the possibility of a president trump. thank you for your time. kristina peterson: thanks so much. former president bill clinton campaigned for his wife, hillary clinton ahead of this weekend's south carolina democratic primary. president clinton spoke to voters at fairfield middle school in winnsboro, south carolina. this is one hour. outresident clinton will be here in just a few minutes. he has been traveling this date all week and he is no stranger to little towns across the south. he is from one. he knows where

democratic ohio state senator and surrogate for senator introduced aign him. >> please welcome senator sanders! if people ning, ohio want to be president, they need to come through b.w. i got to give a shutout. you are going to need coffee after you listen to humble g. this morning, sisters and brothers, it is my honor to introduce the next president of the united states of america! [cheers and applause] nd i want you to know that the cause is right and the time is now. senator bernie sanders has been a consistent champion for civil rights and social justice. [cheers and applause] >> he's not new to this. and for the students in this room when he was around your age, he stood up at the university of chicago as a member of core fighting against segregation in public housing. as the mayor of burlington, vermont, he used his leadership to transform that city. he is not new to this. he's running for president of these united states of america to make sure in the words of my grandmother that everybody has opportunities in these united states of america. [cheers and applause] he's running ag

of the senate, though many would argue that violates the senate rules. notwithstanding that personal personalaspect of this, i want to address this issue before us. why does the senior senator from arizona continue to single me out personally? well, i.t. combo it's because io agree with the secretary of defense and the secretary of the air force about a vital are national security issue. the senior senator from arizona disagrees with them. the issue is deadly serious, despite the name-calling by my colleague. it is about competition for launching defense satellites into space. here are the facts: one company, united launch alliance, or u.l.a., held a monopoly for nearly ten years. the costs of launches was out of control. today there is finally an opportunity for competition. a new company i mentioned earlier, spacex, has entered. they are challenging u.l.a. as i said earlier, in january 2014 i recognized this option, this possibility, this opportunity, and held a hearing with the c.e.o.'s of both companies, testifying under oath. the result of this comp

who were some of the other senators on this committee? donald: this was the senate foreign relations committee. you had senator john sparkman of alabama, previously a vice presidential candidate, george mcgovern, an up-and-coming senator from south dakota. , one of wayne morris the two votes against the gulf of tonkin resolution. -- aave people like republican from iowa, who was a supporter of the war. or you have george aiken, who is a skeptic about the war, but not a hard-line skeptic. so you really have a whole range of people who support the administration, people who oppose the administration, people who are willing to trust the president, give the president a bipartisan foreign-policy, people who feel the president has led the country off the side of a cliff, that this is a disaster and he should never have done this, congress should never have given up their right to declare war, and so you have those senators asking questions of all the witnesses, the witnesses in favor of the war, the witnesses who are opponents of the war, being

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. a senator: mr. president, first i want to thank my colleague and chairman of the judiciary committee, chuck grassley. many years ago i went to iowa with senator grassley to set up an antidrug coalition. we had done one in ohio and i was the chair of that and chuck grassley asked if i would come. this is probably 20 years ago, senator grassley and i was in the house. we had a great visit. we had a couple of town hall meetings. mr. portman: this is a guy, chuck grassley who understands the issue, cares about it, has devoted a lot of time and resources to it in iowa. people of iowa know he's sincere about it because he's been on the ground setting up these coalitions dealing with this issue. and frankly it's a little disappointing probably to him and to me to see twerch years later we're -- 20 years later we're facing this issue now and a different issue. he mentioned the methamphetamines, and opioid addiction problems. 20 years ago it was more marriage, cocaine -- marijuana, cocaine. i think the lesso

the senator who was chairman or ranking member of the appropriations committee, senator stevens in alaska. they split a huge pot of money, per capita, alaska and hawaii and west virginia were the top three. they write the bills, they have the last chance to put in their particular projects and that is how it gets in. it is not an open process. it is behind the scenes. the east-west center is still there because the new senator keeps putting it in there. brian: you have done this for almost 30 years, why did you start with this center? thomas: we started out following the report of the grace commission, i joined the organization after working for six years for congressman hamilton fish of new york. we started looking at how we could best get people to pay attention to wasteful spending. we tend to find things that are interesting, different or easy to understand because the government is so large an organization like citizens against government waste has to cut through the noise, members of congress talking about the wonderful things they are doing and try to get people to be more involved

senators. they have no plans to let it move forward when asked if he would filibuster ted cruz who sits on the judiciary committee. you know he clerked at the supreme court. he said absolutely that is is the plan to filibuster obviously you have to hold the other 60 to do that. we will see. >> there is something -- i know that a lot of people think that should be done that way. the fact is that we have a process. constitution is a process. it says he shall nominate and the senate has a right to just sort of sift on it it you know what? the shoe is going to be on the foot another time it. it would be nice to set a precedent where they at least hold a hearing so the person gets a fair shot at it if the person doesn't getqt confirmed doesn't get confirmed. when will rereverse this search acting according to the constitutional process? >> i would not say this year. i don't think this will be the year. >> i shouldn't bet on it then. >> no. don't bet on it. president obama did try to appeal on his re

so i am proud of senator

>> we will hear from the senator and i appreciate senator franken and senator blumenthal and we will get to the witnesses and questions. >> thank you for sitting on the republican side. i'm hoping it will wear off. [laughter] you mean on them. >> but there shouldn't be a republican and democratic side on this. i want to thank you for pulling this together. as senator cardin said, it is unusual for us to do something like this, but it's important and we will be in and out because we have other hearings this afternoon that were scheduled, but it's important to be here. senator mcconnell was right when he said of the american people should have a voice in the selection of the next supreme court justice. and in fact, they did when president obama won the election in 2005 by 5 million votes. article two section two of the constitution says the president the president of the united states nominates justices to the screen court with the advice and consent of the senate. i cannot find the clause that says it is the turn of the democratic president. make no mistake the republican senate appro