tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN July 27, 2009 5:00pm-8:00pm EDT
will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. clay: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. clay: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. clay: i'm pleased to present for consideration h.r. 3072, a bill to name the post office located at 9810 halls farery road, in st. louis, missouri rks after a true missouri legend, coach jodie bailey. h.r. 3072, which i introduced on june 26, 2009, was reported from the committee on oversight and government reform on july 10, 2009. the st. louis community lost one of its true giants with the passing of coach bailey at the age of 94.
he was an icon in the public high school league for five decades. during his career, he coached at o'fallon tech, and northwest high schools in st. louis. coach bailey accumulated an outstanding total of 828 victories and only 198 losses in a great career that spanned 42 years. he coached many great sports stars, including the late elston howard of the new york yankees, and the great boston celtic player angelina jolie white. his accomplishment -- the great boston celtic player jo jo white. he was inducted into the sports hall of fame in 1989. he put emphasis on putting --
on teaching the fundaments of the game. he was treasured for making personal investments in each of his stuents' live which is they remember until this day. mr. speaker, on a personal note, jodie bailey happened to be my ymca camp counselor and taught me how to swim. the camp was a -- it was called camp river cliff, located in bourbon, missouri. at a very young age, they required me to swim across the merry macriver and you can -- the merrimac river and you can bet i learned to swim at a young age in order to survive that river. i will always remember coach bailey for that and what he gave to the community. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to join me in
recognizing coach jodie bailey by agreeing to pass h.r. 3072 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from minnesota. mrs. bachmann: i yield myself such time as i may consume. hapely rise in support of h.r. 3072, to designate the facile i have to the united states postal service located at 9810 halls ferry road in st. louis, missouri, as the coach doe jodie bailey post office building. this honor is much deserved, mr. speaker, as jodie bailey was a coaching legend in st. louis. he began his career as a talented player and later found his true passion in coaching basketball. it was in the 1940's, when jodie bailey began coaching the vashon wolverines and helped
them win league titles in 1943, 1945, 1947, and 1948. he also guided them to the missouri negro interscholastic state championship not one, not two, not three, but four times. in this tenure, segregation still existed within the school system and many people were not aware of his greatness in the beginning of his career. that is true no longer. however, after school integration, the vashon wolverines participated in a regional championship and the state quarterfinals in 1963. coach bailey's success success with coaching didn't end with the wolverine he coached o'fallon tech, guiding the hornets to their first championship. soon thereafter, o'fallon dropped their sports program,
so coach bailey found a new job coaching northwest high school where he immediately helped them win a title in 1969. wherever coach bailey went, success followed he coached three different public high league basketball teams and led those teams to a total of 824 wins and 198 losses phenomenal record. coach bailey's formula for coaching success was simple he said this, to be a successful basketball coach, you need three mings -- things. you have to have a well-conditioned team, you have to be fundamentally sound in every phase of the game and you have to be team-oriented because there's no i in the word team thosme recognized for his exceptional coaching abilities, he was respected as a mentor on and off the field. he was a man of his open he urged his players to concentrate on the fundamentals of basketball, he emphasized
the need to use their natural abilities to become even better by employing this talent for support and inspiration he positive impacted the lives of so many young men he coached in his 42-season career. sadly, this st. louis basketball community lost jodie bailey in march when he died at the age of 88. for his dedication to the st. louis basketball community, i happily join with my fellow members and especially my colleague congressman clay to join us in supporting house resolution 3072 and i reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. clay: mr. speaker, i want to thank my colleague from minnesota for her support of this and wanted to also add that coach jodie bailey was a
true scholar, a graduate of cole college in iowa who studied at springfield college in massachusetts, which was also the school of dr. naismith who created basketball. there's one thing he always stressed to his players, that, you know, academics will take you much further than basketball, he always pushed them to excel in the classroom as well as on the basketball court. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from minnesota. mrs. bachmann: mr. speaker, i again join with my colleague mr. clay and urge all our colleagues to support the passage of house resolution 3072 and i yield back to you the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri.
mr. clay: again, i urge my colleagues to join me in celebrating the life and legacy of coach jodie bailey by supporting h.r. 3072 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3072? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- mrs. bachmann: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from minnesota. mrs. bachmann: i object to the ground on -- to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announce. , further proceedings on this will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. clay: i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to the bill h.res. 483. the speaker pro tempore: the
clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 483, supporting the goals and ideals of veterans of foreign wars day. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. clay, and the gentlelady from minnesota, mrs. bachmann, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. clay: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. clay: mr. speaker, it is an honor to rise today in support of house resolution 483, a bill supporting the goals and ideals of veterans of foreign wars day. every day, more and more brave americans join the ranks of the veterans of foreign wars and they deserve every ounce of praise we can possibly provide. i would like to thank my colleague, the honorable john kline from minnesota, for
introducing this important resolution. i would also like to thank chairman towns and my colleagues on the committee on oversight and government reform for bringing this bill to the floor. just before the turn of the 20th century, the united states was called upon to defend the hemisphere in the spanish-american war. american troops fought valiantly and emerged victorious in this, our first modern foreign conflict. on september 20, 1899, the american veterans of foreign service was established to guarantee that troops received the benefits to which they were intilettled. the following decades commanded billions of young americans, men and women, heed their nation's call for service, war against fascism and tyranny this europe. first in 1917 and again in 1941. prove that american soldiers
are the great proast tectors of freedom in the world. when they returned home, the troops were greeted by the veterans of foreign wars, the organization was and continues to be a vital advocate for veterans' well being. it helped establish, among other thing, the g.i. bill which provided college education for all veterans, and fueled the -- -- fueled the greatest economic boom our nation had ever seen. in 2008, the v.f.w. was instrumental in passing a 21st century g.i. bill to continue to provide educational assistance toer is viz men and women returning from iraq and afghanistan. today the veterans of foreign wares and its auxiliaries represent 2.2 million veterans with 8,100 locations worldwide. help is never far away from those who deserve it most. the veterans of foreign wars mission is to honor the dead by
helping the living. for 110 years they have done just that. for this, i send my personal gratitude. ski my colleagues to join me in recognizing the invaluable work of the v.f.w. and support house resolution 483. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota, mr. cline, who will control the time. without objection. mr. cline: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in strong support of h.res. 483 and i want to thank my friend, the gentleman from missouri, for his kind remarks. i'm a life member of the veterans of foreign wars, and a proud one at that. a member of post 210 in my hometown of lakeville. the v.f.w. is not just a gang of old guys sitting around, these are raul patriots, real americans who have sacrificed for our country.
the v.f.w. traces its roots back to 1899 when veterans of the spanish-american war and the philippine insurrection founded local organizations to secure rights and benefits for their service. before that time, as has been mentioned, many veterans returned home wounded or sick and there was no medical care or veterans pension for them. they were left to care for themselves. the founders of the v.f.w. sought to remedy that and provide support and encouragement to all veterans who served in foreign wars. their mission statement to honor the dead by helping the living. over time, their mission expanded to, quote, ensuring rights, remembering sacrifice, promoting patriotism, and javo catting for a strong national defense. mr. speaker, some of these veterans go down to the cemetery, the national cemetery, snelling, in
minnesota, every day. to perform services to honor those who have passed. to fire the salute to fold the flag. they do it sometimes when the temperature is way below zero. some of these veterans now are in their late 70's and 80's. but there's a dedication here i think we should all be aware of. the v.f.w. has a rich history of advocacy, playing a role in education tab lishing the veterans' administration, and fighting to ensure combat-wounded veterans from all wars receive proper compensation. in addition, the v.f.w. has been a powerful force behind the creation of the vietnam, world war ii, korean, and women iner is vess memorials. aren't they fantastic. there's nothing that lifts your spirits more than taking a group of veterans to the world war ii memorial and seeing the joy in their faces as they get
that fantastic experience. today, the v.f.w. has grown to more than 2.3 million members worldwide and continues to advocate for all of our veterans of foreign wars. i applaud the member of the v.f.w. for their continued commitment to one another and this great nation. i'm honored to speak on behalf of this resolution. i ask my colleagues to join me in supporting h.res. 483 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. clay: mr. speaker, i to not have any other speakers, and i'll -- i do not have any other speakers and i'll continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri reserves the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i urge all my colleagues to support this legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. clay: mr. speaker, in closing, i want to thank my friend from minnesota, mr. kline, for offering this resolution, for such a worthy organization. and, mr. speaker, again, i urge support for the house -- for house resolution 483, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 483. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- mr. kline: -- mr. kline: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of
cable companies treated c-span as a public service. no government money. >> now, former prison reformer president clinton talks about his foundation and the american heart association did -- dedicated to preventing childhood of the city. he spoke today at a conference hosted by the centers for disease control. this is about 40 minutes. others in the organization as they address the media. that's live just before 11:00 a.m. eastern on our companion network c-span. a look at the u.s. capital where the house -- >> thank you, thank you. thank you very much. dr. frieden, admiral garson, dr. marks, dr. collins, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here and inviting me.
i want to thank -- i was reminded when dr. frieden said i now had a foundation in new york, his former hometown, that i was kidding him backstage that hillary and i, as i'm sure you all know, have a daughter we're very proud of and she left the private sector and went back to graduate school in public health. and she -- she -- one of the things she hoped to do was spend this summer working in new york city for dr. frieden and another person that he ripped out of his department there to make new york the most successful city in the country in the transition to electronic medical records. i want you to know, doc, she was still there on the job. but i say that because this
whole issue of public health, we're here to talk about childhood obesity and it has become an obsession of mine, but i want to say that in general, it is a public health issue that cannot be dealt with entirely within the confines of a medical office, and you don't want it to be -- get to the point where it all cases are dealt with within the confines of a hospital or a pharmaceutical response. and it seems to me that in that way the childhood obesity problem is a microcosm of the whole thing we need to be thinking about here with health care reform. and i didn't come here to give a talk about it and it's beyond my pay grade now. i don't have to think about it, except that -- except that all
these debates about what change will save what money have an eerily familiar ring. and actually always give a and comfort to the forces of the status quo who are spending more money doing this than any system in history or nonsystem. so the truth is we have to change the delivery system of a lot of things in america from energy to education to health care. this is a delivery system issue. and cultural issues require us to go back and have a broader definition of delivery. so that's why you're all here, really. you're part of -- with this childhood obesity initiative, america's attempt to reimagine how we take on our challenges in
an interdependent world where we are all crashing up against one another, divorce is not an option, we can't get away from one another. there are lots of wonderful things about it, but it is entirely too unstable, too unequal, and because of climate change, completely unsustainable. and in a world like that, you have to build new and interesting partnerships to build up the positive forces and reduce the negative forces of interdependence. that is the context in which we confront this childhood obesity issue. and we were talking on the way out, you know, before i came out here, ireland has a national campaign against it. the uk has a national campaign against it. india has a national campaign against it. how could they possibly need it? they have i think the world's most interesting diet, because they're chunking it rapidly in favor of western fast foods, particularly in urban areas
where people are too busy to prepare all that lovely food at home and they have limited annual fund-raiser of the new they are terrific. and they were honoring my friend jon bon voefjovi, a very good there. them because food bank has lost might imagine, because of the collapse of so many wall street efforts. and they feed a huge number of people, our food bank does, people in new york city this because of this economic
collapse. more people who are at risk of childhood obesity in new york how can that be? modern society. the children most at risk of being hungry are just on the other side of a knife edge of those most at risk of obesity. the people most at risk of obesity are those who are the nonrich in a rich society. who have enough opportunity and a turning rapidly changing society to get from rural areas to cities or to get from one neighborhood to another, but can just barely pay their ibms and they have k and they're busy and they think they don't have time to spend food and they spend food on high bulk, low nutrition foods. there are other reasons for it, but the big numbers are coming out of these huge social
changes. i say that because i am very grateful that you have recognized the alliance for healthier generation today. i'm grateful to the heart association for giving me the chance to start it with them. i'm profoundly grateful to the people who are running the program, including jenny ehrlich, our executive director, you'll hear from her later in this -- in your meeting here, and jessica duncele black and i'm grateful to the johnson foundation because they fund the healthy school food program without which we wouldn't be here. it is very important to see the social and economic context of th this. because if we want to change this, we have to change what goes on at home, and in the community, and in the
neighborhood, and in the schools. if we want to change it, we have to give people rational information and understand that both the economic and the psychological pressures that have made this perhaps the number one public health problem in the country, certainly put the younger generation at risk at being the first in the history of our country to have a shorter life span than their parents. i used to regularly say that we had a young 9-year-old diagnosed with type 2 diabetes a couple of years ago in harlem. and yesterday i ran into a young woman who had worked in hillary's campaign who is at georgetown medical school who told me she had just seen a 9-year-old girl in washington, d.c. with type 2 diabetes. and we have now been told that we can no longer refer to it as
adult onset diabetes. so that's the setting for all this. high stakes, deep causes, but i think a lot of reason to hope. next week we are going to have our annual program recognizing the schools and our alliance that we believe we're doing the best. jessica will talk about that and i'm sure jenny will. but we're now working in more than 5,000 schools. we support them in various ways. and they're reaching more than 2.7 million children. and every year we have a meeting and recognize the ones we believe have done particularly outstanding work. we'll have 114 from around the country. but we actually try to keep score on all of them to see if we can both measure the results they're achieving and tie them as specifically as possible to
the things they're doing. and the three years we have been working with schools, more than three-quarters of the schools that have participated in our healthy school program seem to be making quite good progress. and they seem to be successful, interestingly enough, in involving large numbers of parents. some of you may have seen we did a little program with rachael ray, i'll say more about that in a minute, but we had recognized two mothers, one from north carolina, and one from indiana, who had basically gone out and literally and one and two and $5 contributions raised enough money to provide exercise opportunities and recreational facilities at their schools. so we got -- we're beginning to try to change the culture here and i think the healthy schools program has made a big difference. but we don't want to be naive about this. california was one of our best
opportunities because arnold schwarzenegger thought thises with a good idea and agreed to work with me on it in a bipartisan fashion. and back whenhey had money they started actually hiring physical education teachers again. and actually paying for equipment to be put in the schools. and i went to california and i saw things in ordinary public schools and lower income areas that i have not seen in decades. so i don't think we can, you know, we have to acknowledge there have been some consequences because of the economic downturn. but i do believe it is important to say that for me, at least, the healthy schools program has been a great success because you get both the particular benefits of whatever the particular things they're doing, and change in the cultural attitude. students going home and getting their parents involved, parents getting interesting saying
they're trying to do something to help me raise my children better. intergenerational efforts to eat better and exercise more. the school program has made a big difference and i want to say none of it would be possible without the robert wood johnson foundation and some other help we get around the country in local settings, that we hope to expand rather dramatically. i want to talk, if i might, a little bit more about the >> most of my analysis when i was president dedicated that the medicaid program alone had over
20% of its costs generated by diabetes. now, that included type roman 1 and type from an two -- type i and type ii. i think this money is a terrific number. they are having a serious debate is a terrific number. they're having this huge debate in congress, right, and with people that don't really understand that we spend over 16% of our income on health care and none of our competitors spend more that be 11%. switzerland spends 12% base they have a very old population, very dispersed in a lot of rural highly mountainous communities, canada at 11. france and germany at about 10%. both their systems are regularly rated better than ours in terms
of health outcomes and the only one under 10% is the uk because most of -- because of the employees all work for the government in the uk, so those of you getting government salaries understand that, they hold the costs down. but even there, even there in the last few years because of an effort to genuinely modernize the uk system, they're up to over 9% of gdp now. so we know that it takes 10% of your gross domestic product to run a first class health system in a rich country, and in good times. with the kind of challenges that we all face. and we know all of our competitors have been able to do it for between 10% and 11% and we have to spend 16.5% to leave over 50 million people uninsured, lots of other people underinsured and get health outcomes that are worse. and every time somebody comes along like the president's trying to do now and fix it, all
of the naysayers say, this is only going to make it worse and more expensive. as if they are totally blameless for this wonderful, beautiful mona lisa system we have now. but to b fair to them, in the world of washington, d.c., we, you know, strain at a lot of nates while we're swallowing camels. i mean, that's what happens here. because people don't understand the impact of certain assumptions and one of them is this, i say that because the difference in what we spend in canada does is about $800 billion a year in today's dollars. well over four times what it would cost to provide health
insurance to every man, woman and child in america without insurance. and mckenzie and company if you're interested, did two studies on this one in detail and one updated, i think last year, which actually break down where the cost differentials are. and what the likely consequences on quality. but it really doesn't go to the heart of cultural behavioral systems that produce problems like the childhood obesity problem. so you just -- if you look at this, $147 billion is rough ly 20% of the differential. and if we could get rid of it, it is more than we would need to cover everybody. this is something you should all
think about. the most important thing is to save these kids lives and give them a future. it is important to see it in the context of this debate that is unfolding in washington. now, then there is a new debate here, trying to bat away every change. for a long time i thought we were making progress in this health care year, because the administration was making a really strong case that we had to fund more primary and preventive care. and we had to set up basic care networks and try to stop bad things from happening in the first place. so the people, they start producing articles and say, this might not really save us very much money because we're going to be spending primary and preventive care on people who wouldn't have gotten sick anyway. and then people who are at real risk, their primary prevention, that will cost a lot of money and you're going to spend
primary and preventive care on 100% of the people to keep only 10% of them from getting really, really sick. this mayot be -- it may be a nice thing to do, but we may not make money on it. give me a break. i say that -- you know, it is kind of fun when you're not in anymore, you sit up in the peanut gallery, and i can see who to -- the baseball manager is sending up to bat and what they're trying to do to get them to strike out. i don't like it. because it really matters what happens here. it matters whether we save this generation of kids. matters whether we save our country's health system. and because i believe we can't make an affordable universal health plan, without a thicker
more effective public health program that includes more and more people who have some means and in effect pay membership fees the way you join certain health plans today, i want this to work. but let's go back to the primary prevention thing because that's where a lot of you come in. last year the trust for america's health said if we invested $10 a person a year, a whopping sum, on community-based programs with proven results, to increase physical activity and improve nutrition, and prevent smoking, we could save the country more than $16 billion per year. that is a return of $5.60 on every dollar spent, avoiding future heart attacks, strokes,
diabetes, and some kinds of cancers. and just general debility. so sounds like a pretty good deal to me. when all these people get sick, we're going to pay for it, aren't we? so it is not true that all prevention winds up costing you more money. this prevention will save more than five times what it costs. i think it is important that all of you know this, we're all going to talk later about what you should do, but you need to go back to the field armed with this. i am, you know, we have all these assumptions, but the biggest one you've got to fight among the citizenry at large is, okay, we spend more than anybody else does on health care. we're a rich country and we must have the belt health care system in the world. some people don't have health care, that's too bad.
that must be because nobody has to wait for all the wonderful things they get under our system which is better than anybody else's in the world. it is almost impossible to break these things down. it is really important you have simple things like this, you can say to explain to people why you got do this stuff in the schools, why you got to do the stuff in the community, why you got to do all these things. and why your government should give us health care reform. i think it is really, really important. let me just say, just a couple more words about what we do, most of the time i was in politics, i was in the kind of debates i see going on in washington today where the cbo says, well, this is, you know, way more expensive than you thought and a lot of these things aren't going to produce the savings you think and all that. and where government, with the people pushing for reform could fall into the trap of saying, well, since the things we really
need to do are to change the delivery system, but we can't get any credit for that, let's just say we're going to cut medicare and medicaid, which will drive more good health care providers up the wall, make fewer people want to be in primary and preventive care and get us right back in the soup again. and this is something we all need to be thinking about. so, but let me say most of the debates in washington, you see it now in the health care debate, we saw it in the stimulus debate earlier, they debate two questions, don't they? people in politics. what are you going to do, and how much money are you going to spend on it. there is relatively little time spent on the third question which i take it as why dr. frieden was asked to assume his current position, and why the rest of us who know about his work in new york were
thrilled when he agreed to do it. because he answered the third question. however much money you got to spend, on whatever it is you're going to do, how do you propose to turn your good intentions into positive changes? the how question in the end matters more than the how much question. not because money doesn't matter, but because if you answer the how question, you can get more money for what you're trying to do. if you answer the how question, in demonstrable ways, you're more likely at least to get adequate levels of investment. and yet when most of the word wars that go back and forth in washington are about how and how much, or what and how much, but how do you propose to turn your good intentions into positive changes matter? that's what our healthy schools program does. and we have done some other things i would really like to
talk about because, again, i will say i do not believe there is a chance that we can solve this problem unless we do it in the homes, the schools, the restaurants, the doctors offices, the communities, this is a social issue. we're trying to turn the "titanic" around before it hits the iceberg. and it is very much worth the effort. so let me just say a few words about the other things that we have tried to do. first, we do try to go into all these places. the thing that is sometimes most fun for me is we have an advisory board of 25 absolutely terrific young people who tell us whether these programs are going to have any impact at all on their generation. and it is true that sometimes we find that we are absolutely sure they'll respond to, they don't.
and sometimes they respond to things we don't think they will because all people, when they get older, are guilty of underestimating both the intelligence of the young and whether they're paying attention or not to things that affect their own lives. so these young people have really done a great job for us. and we now have a by kids, for kids movement, it started with our partnership with nickelodeon. we now have 1.3 million of them that are personally enrolled with our effort to say they'll eat better, exercise more and attempt to persuade they're peers to do the same thing. i mentioned rachael ray earlier, she has been one of our partners and her -- the way she fits into this is so important. she tries to show very busy parents with limited amounts of money and time how they can use whatever money and time they do
have to actually prepare more nutritious foods. and we worked this with her and i don't have any data to know, but i know the show is highly rated and a lot of people watch the show, in particular where we recognize what the mothers and the schools were doing in carolina and indiana as i mentioned earlier and other things. we made agreements with the beverage industry and the snack food industry to reduce the caloric content of the products they sell in school vending machines. you know, i really learned a lot about this when i got into this. i went to a really big high school at least by arkansas standards. i had about 325 people in my senior class. and we had one vending machine in the whole school that sold a few soft drinks.
and i had to learn all about the rise of the vending machines and the economics of the school and how it funded what and all that. but i can only tell you that the agreements we reached have been pretty impressive. we have got about three-quarters of our schools now have observed the one with beverages. and it led to 58% reduction in the caloric content in total of the beverages that go into schools, into the schools. that's a pretty good reduction. >> we just made an agreement with a school prue -- school food provider that serves 6000 schools with meals to join us in the beverage and snack-food agreements.
we also have finally made a real important breakthrough that deals directly with this reform issue. i what you think about this as i describe it. ask yourself whether it would be a good or bad thing if this were a part of health-care reform. but it save money or not? rm. would it save money or not? these are the vexing questions that the congressional budget office has to come to terms with in the face of all the people who like it the way it is, who say if you do that, it really won't save you money. you tell me what you think. this past february the alliance for a healthier generation announced our alliance health care initiative. a collaborative effort with national medical associations, leading insurers and employers, to offer comprehensive health benefits to children and families for prevention assessment and treatment of childhood obesity. the first time these crews have
joined together. to have preventive care available on a broad scale. and committee to actual benchmarks on utilization, that's a fancy way of saying they promised to enroll more people every year until we get a bunch of people. and to systematically, while we're doing this, add to the science base on the impact and return on investment that is i don't mean anything that i have said so far to be at all frivolous about the challenge the congressional budget office faces in coming to grips with health care and trying to cost it out. but just to say that the defenders of the existing system almost always have the short end of the stick. it would be hard to spend less money and do more with it. but if you're sitting in that budget office, you got to project the future. we're trying to really add to
the science here on this little piece of prevention. now, all the insurer and the employer signers of this agreement, which are pretty impressive, they include insurers like aetna, well point, blue cross/blue shield of north carolina and blue cross/blue shield of massachusetts, and companies like our first big company was pepsico. we have owens corning, look heed martin, paychecks, the houston independent school district, nationwide children's hospital, and here's what they have all agreed to do. they have agreed to offer four visits with a primary care practitioner a year, with four visits to a dietitian a year for children of covered parents ages 3 to 18. this is just part of the normal
benefit portfolio for children and youth. they have committed to a set of goals around the number of beneficiaries they hoped would use the benefits. we now have just almost a million kids being covered by this already. just in the last five months. and within the next couple of years we're trying to get up to 6.2 million which is what we think is the number necessary to cover 25% of all the overweight kids in the country, in the age group. so i'm not sure we can get there. but we're working at it. and it is really impressive. so first thing i want to do is to thank the insurers and the employers who are part of this. as well as the american academy of pediatrics and the american dietetic association who have signed on to support this. this is really, really important.
the final thing that i would like to say is that all of you can do something about this. that's why we're here, right? and do i want you to lobby for health care reform? of course i do. do i want you to say in the end primary and preventive actions will make us a healthier country and lower the cost of health care whether by the mathematical rules now operative you can't prove it or not? and don't strain a gnat and don't swallow a camel? of course i do. but keep in mind most of us don't have a vote in congress or even in our local legislature. all we can do is lobby. but we should spend most of our time actually answering the how question as we can. i got a big climate change
project. and i went all the way to sweden the other day to give a speech, this big european group, and all these -- tony blair was there, and the great kenyan nobel winner was there. and they were giving these passionate speeches about what should be in the new climate change agreement. that will be considered in copenhagen. and unfortunately it is a total anticlimax they asked me to close the meeting because i said, look, i love what they said. i love them, i love what they said, i agree with everything they said, i have nothing to add to it, i came all the way over here to tell you that unless you are going to copenhagen and you have a role there, or you have a vote in your local legislative body, you should stop coming to these meetings and go home and do something. do something.
we're going to be tested by whether we do things that change people's lives. n now, i don't feel that way about you, because we haven't been doing this like we have in climate change for over a decade now where we got a -- a broadly shared information base and the person running the local building retro fit program in a town of 50,000 is liable to know as much as the chairman of a congressional committee about this now because we have been working on this a long time. we're just getting into this. i want you to keep sending foam meetings until we get more of a knowledge base, a shared knowledge base. but let's just think about the kind of things that still need to be done. we could better integrate obesity prevention with health and wellness and primary care by adding body mass index measurement to existing
performance standards for well care visits by children. a couple of states have done that already. why shouldn't we just do that? as a matter of course? why wouldn't we benefit from having more data on it. why shouldn't obesity be recognized as a stand alone condition to qualify for effective treatments for reimbursement, more broadly, not just in the insurance plan that i mentioned. but generally. why shouldn't we take this obesity problem as a warning that we need to do a better job in america of considering health in all facets of our life, this is not just about going to the doctor's office, it is about whether you have sidewalks when there are new real estate developments, we need to -- we
need to examine -- this really is the number one public health problem, than bra befoefore we will begin building houses again one day in america, i wish we had a national building code on clean energy, i would like to think that we need to consider the impact of new developments on the public health. we need to consider the impact of new school buildings on the public health. so we need to work this in to every aspect so that it is not just educators and it is community leaders, food and beverage people, i'll give you another example, why shouldn't some of the stimulus money be given out to communities that have particular problems here? why shouldn't some of the money for education be set aside for this? and the cities that have big issues? why shouldn't some of the
stimulus money for capital projects like roads be spent on the development of city parks and tourism divisions that will directly empower poor neighborhoods and poor groups to access exercise facilities to help to combat this? why shouldn't this be part of the calculus as we go forward with capital investments and every state in the country. i know you -- it may be hard to believe now because we only get bad news about state budgets, but the truth is that the federal stimulus gave money that cut off -- that at least cut the crisis that states like my state, new york, face by about 50%. and made it go away in some states that weren't in such bad shape. so if you got this money and it helped you, why shouldn't some of that money have to be
invested in creating recreational opportunities for low income people and urban areas who otherwise would not have it? why what about rural areas? when there is poor rural wearar with a lot of obesity, do we know whether it is able to organize some kind of affirmative health opportunitys? do they have access to the same level of health information? dr. frieden was providing in new york. dhoef access to the same kind of exercise opportunities? there is a big rural obesity problem in america that cuts across racial lines. there have been a lot of genetic research that shows vulnerability to diabetes in particular has enormous racial disparities. with pacific islanders and
native americans being the most vulnerable, african-americans next, hispanic americans the next, european americans the next, that has given a constant diet and constant level of activity, but the vulnerability to obesity and its other consequences are quite broadly shared and in rural areas, encompass people of all racial and ethnic backgrounds who live there. do we really understand how much harder it is for them to do some of this stuff than people in more densely populated areas and is there something we should do that specifically responds to that? i think that these things are really important. i think that some of you can answer these how questions better than i can right now. but i spend my life trying to answer these questions around the world and in dealing with the problems of aids and malaria, we provide the lowest
cost, high quality medicine in the world. all we did was change the business model. the generic aids business was a low volume, high profit margin, uncertain payment business. it is now a high volume, low margin, absolutely certain payment business, and about 2 million people are staying alive now getting medicine off these contracts. it was an answer to the how question. i think this is harder because to goes right to the core of everything from the way we organize society to the way people who are just over the knife edge of need have to manage their own budgets, to the incredible psychological pressures that are going on in people's lives to how our bodies react to the stuff that we can afford to take off the shelves.
so we were all raised to believe in some way or another that an unexamined life is not worth living. this is time we have to examine all of our lives now. and we have to examine the lives of our friends and neighbors who are so busy trying to keep body and soul together, pay their bills and take care of their kids that they do not have time to examine their lives and how they eat and purchase food and do things without some help. this is a deeply challenging and difficult thing. but it is, i believe our number one public health problem, and a test of whether we are really committed to go forward together and not allow america to continue to be divided by accident of birth, and the economic polarization which has gripped our country for more than 30 years now. you can do this. but nobody can do it alone. therefore we all have to go home
here thinking about all the how questions and how we can answer them. thank you very much. >> congratulations. i was supposed to give you this. lifting it will give you plenty of exercise. >> i'm vy grateful. >> thank you. your words are well appreciated by the group here. [ applause ] [ applause ] )8ñ>ñ
>> you have time for a bright. i believe that current sessions begin in about 10 minutes. that is so much for your participation this morning. >> the house returns at 6:30 p.m. eastern to debate bills voted on this afternoon. they plan to work on corporate compensation and $636 billion for defense spending and a new budget years. live coverage when the house returns hear on c-span. on "the communicators," no -- more from a new media leaders including bill bradford. tonight on c-span2. >> join the conversation on race relations with joined williams.
that is live next sunday on booktv on c-span2. >> a look at the new u.s. policy in afghanistan from today's "washington journal." it is 30 minutes. of fox digital media. >> host: lawrence korb served in the reagan administration as assistant defense secretary and here to talk about u.s. policy in afghanistan. so many stores have come out and the last few days about issues in afghanistan policy, including this morning where "the guardian" reports a provincial cease-fire with the taliban this morning. how is that government approaching the cease-fires? what i've been trying to do? guest: what they are trying to do is separate those who joined the taliban because they don't have enough money, because they have no other way of making a
living, from those who are committed to their philosophy of very strict interpretation of islam. if you can break those apart, obviously you will have less people trying to destabilize the government. host: somebody recently actually describe what you just described as, if there is a version of the taliban, a taliban lite, for lack of a better term, not engaged with u.s. forces, separated from the militant taliban we are seeing. guest: that's right. i think that is very, very important. people have no other way to make a living and the taliban offer a way to make ends meet, particularly of the government is not in the area. whereas those committed to restoring afghanistan to what it was back before the united states invaded in 2001. host: larry korb is with us until 10:00 a.m. eastern.
the numbers -- we will continue to take your twitter comments and also via e- mail as well, so we will get to your calls momentarily. late last week, an article from "the new york times" won a shift in policy regarding our products. they write the strategy will shift from wiping out opium poppy crops, which senior officials acknowledged that served only to turn poor farmers into enemies, new operations are already being mounted to a trip -- attack, not the crops, but the drug runners and the drug lords. that is a fine tune it can't come is in it, for policy? guest: i think it is a smart policy. the previous ambassador and afghanistan has come from colombia -- and this was opposed by the military and the nato partners. what you need to do is go after
the criminals, those profiting. i would go one step further. talking about, just buy the stuff from these people until you can develop the big develop an alternative way -- from these people until you can develop an alternative way. host: the administration is putting new troops. the marines made an enormous initiative into the helmand province. guest: i think it is about time. basically after 2007, the chairman of the joint chiefs sighing -- we only had some 30,000 troops. with the increase that president obama has put in, we could be close to 70,000. that, i think, would enable us to secure areas and hold them until we can do the reconstruction. host: calls for lawrence korb, philadelphia on the democrat line. caller: i would like to thank you guys for c-span.
and i appreciate lawrence korb' s work at the center for american progress, my favorite website. guest: thank you. caller: do you think eventually we will be able to leave afghanistan anytime soon? guest: i think we have a year or year and a half to turn around the security situation. and while we're doing that, we need to train more of the afghan security forces -- the army and police. if you do that, then i think you can begin to cut down the number of troops there. but it is not going to happen overnight because we neglected for far too long. host: the british is under increasing pressure from their citizens about their presence in afghanistan. what do you hear about how committed in terms of years? guest: of the british government is committed -- the british people are beginning to wonder because last month we had the highest numbers of casualties -- action to come in july. we have 30 americans died and 26
coalition forces died. and i think the real problem, challenge for the obama administration, is going to be the dutch and canadians who actually had set deadlines. the british have not. there is pressure. host: one of the deadlines? -- what are the deadline? guest: out by 2011. host: afghan forces -- dearth of capable afghan forces complicate mission and south. they say some quit because they are reluctant to work in the violence out and others are expelled to do drug use. the afghan troops here are heavily defendant -- dependent on western forces, are hesitating to take on greater responsibilities. guest: that is the challenge. we ignored that. the total afghan security forces, an army of 160,000 -- in a country larger than iraq.
we have neglected it so long. host: this report in "the post" on saturday talks about some of the issues they had with literacy among afghan troops and police. guest: no doubt about it. it is very hard to train people when they obviously can't understand the manuals. the real challenge, i think, is we waited so long we may have missed the golden moment. that is really the tragedy because we had it actually where we needed to be in late 2001. we diverted our attention to iraq and resources and this thing is allowed to go downhill. host: how is the situation with the pakistan, the taliban complicating efforts? guest: what has happened is if we drive the taliban out of afghanistan, they go into pakistan and regroup and then they can come back again. and the pakistani government finally begun to move against them after the taliban came very
close to the capital of islamabad. but that is a challenge. you will never get pakistan right unless you get afghanistan under control. but even if he did afghanistan under control, you will have a big problem with pakistan. host: minnesota, your comment or question? caller: it sounds like to have the problems with the drugs and poppe is being raised. the way i understand it, russia used to buy most of the commodities raised, the food commodities from afghanistan. and i am sure they would be glad to do it again, you know? if all of these countries in the world are worried about drugs -- and training people and so forth. it would definitely help the citizens and they afghanistan people. the vacant row other stuff other than half days. if you are just going to pay for
one crop, go do it and burn it. host: efforts have been made to get them to grow other crops. guest: violence and this -- security situation deteriorated so they could not get it to market and the taliban and other criminals are willing to buy opium. the caller makes a good point. the ossian's are helpful in afghanistan. in fact, when president obama went over to russia they agreed to allow us to fly supplies over because they are concerned about the opium -- they have a big drug problem in russia. paul host: he writes britain is enveloped in scandals concerning lack of helicopters for the troops. does america have enough equipment for the job? guest: we do now, but we did not up until very recently we gave it sentences. the british do have a challenge to get enough helicopters because it is a place -- it is very hard to drive around given not in this terrain.
guest: have we secured a supply line? there was concern, i think year's exxon. do we have a secure supply line in afghanistan? guest: we do now after president obama went over to russia. host: dave on our democrats line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i was wondering if you believe the war in afghanistan is a war we can end war is the objective to capture osama bin laden and the al qaeda leadership still? do you think that they are in pakistan? are they still in afghanistan? and what kind of commitment from the defense department and the obama administration over the next 10 years? guest: our goal in afghanistan is to ensure that it does not become a haven for groups like
al qaeda, terrorist groups with global reach, and to ensure that afghanistan does not become a threat to the other countries in the region. those are your short-term goals that you really need to accomplish we would -- need to accomplish. we would like to get a society in a place where the citizens would have a different -- decent life. i think given the troops we put in now, we are close to 70,000, 68,000 by the time all of gotten in there. we will see if that begins to turn the situation around. we have afghan election coming up in august. we will see how that goes. it looks like it will be a vibrant election. at one time we thought hamid karzai would whisked through but now it looks like it will be contested and may have a run off. host: what can you tell us about this picture in "the new york times" about dr. of della --
abdullah. it guest: he is concerned about the corruption of the hermit karzai government. the fact he is willing to challenge his former boss, that he is willing to take this on -- and i offered to debate and hamid karzai did not show up. i think this is a hopeful sign for afghanistan. host: north carolina. go ahead. caller: i am not republican or democrat -- i think the republicans have no need for minoritiesnd democrats pretty much ignore. that being said, i think going after the dealers themselves instead of the crops is a bad mistake. as you see in the inner-city is, we go after dealers all the time and that does not stop anything. it pacifies the general public for a while. i think we have to take a firm stance and destroyed the crops.
they are not really affecting the rich. that is just how i feel about it. i am not a politician from you guys award in may but that is how i feel. guest: i think one of the reasons you have to get the people who are profiting from the drug trade, basically they are using those profits to fund the insurgency. that is what i think we want to stop. and if we can buy them from the farmers, they themselves would have time until they can develop alternative sources of living. so i think we have to be careful about where the drug money goes in afghanistan as compared to where it goes in the united states. states. caller: i wanted asked about afghanistan and iraq -- is not that we just took our eye off afghanistan. secondly, i think afghanistan is
a nato operation. if we put the entire force in there, the allies did nothing the whole time. guest: let me make a couple of comments. neda has as many troops as we had in there. we abruptly had 33,000 roughly. central command -- admiral palin who was the head of central command -- fallon there was head of central command wanted to put more troops. he actually resign. james on the democrats' line. caller: concerning multiple deployments of troops between iraq and afghanistan and those being pulled out of iraq and served three or four tours and they are going to afghanistan, has there been serious discussion about some kind of
draft being reinstituted? guest: there should be. i think as a country we let the military down. the volunteer military was never designed to fight the long wars. what we have done to the men and women particularly in ground forces is a disgrace. i would have gone back to a draft right after 2001 when the country was willing to sacrifice and we knew we were going to have these conflicts, particularly when the bush administration decided they were going to go into iraq as well afghanistan. but your point is well taken. what we have done -- we as a country, our politicians and military leaders, as a country really should feel very bad about it. host: all wheat -- "new york times" report, iraq veterans find after an enemy is even bolder. in iraq they hit you and ron, reported by a sergeant, is what leader for company c, fifth
marines, but these guys stick around and maneuver. a different tactics. guest: no doubt about it. i think you have to be careful saying, this work in iraq so we will see if it works and afghanistan. the one good thing about the last call is because so many of these troops served so many tours, they have tremendous amount of experience dealing with an insurgency in and i think that will help in afghanistan because they are not just new to this whole counter insurgency million. -- milieu. host: we have a captive in afghanistan. a picture. what is the latest? guest: the latest as we know he is alive, at least was when he made the videotape. secretary gates and admiral mullen have complained about using prisoners for propaganda purposes. but i think what this should tell us, when americans get
captured we expect them to be treated humanely, unfortunately some of the ways we have treated prisoners since 2001 has not, and that is why our military objected when the bush administration and the justice department wanted to use all of these harsh interrogation techniques because they were concerned about americans being captured. host: frederick, md., on the republican line. caller: during the bush administration we spent about $10 billion to $12 billion on pakistan and all went to military and they put it into the eastern border in reference to india instead of spending some of that money on domestic situations to make the people be more inclined to like the united states and make the country more civil. secondly, what hamid karzai, there is some much corruption, i don't know what we are going to do with that. guest: you make sonntag good points. one is about the $11 billion we
gave to pakistan after september 11. we did not monitor where it went and unfortunately it went to buying weapons that were more suited dealing with what the pakistanis sees as they're major threat, from india. now what the kerr-lugar bill, it will go toward economic development. the military aid has to go through counter insurgency. hamid karzai startup well, he has become corrupt and that is why i think a good sign with this election, that are viable candidates. so hopefully if the afghan people feel as you do, they will put someone else and there. host: orlando, florida. glen on the democrats' line. caller: thank you for having the show. lawrence, i wanted to just touch on one of your points where you were talking about how we could actually buy a lot of the opium
from the afghan people and help them in the meantime while we figure out how to control that market. it is actually one of the best things we could do. opium -- i don't think people realize it -- but it is one of the most prescribed medications in the country. one of the most prescribed in the world. all of your pain killers, codeine -- and out of all the drugs taken in the world, only 8% for people who are actually using heroin, which is the synthetics from opium, and it has its change the and the last 40 or 50 years, relatively the same. so the issue in buying them back, i think we have the issue of action getting the pharmaceutical companies to agree with us. guest: i think in a good point, and at the center for american
progress, my colleagues have been arguing that for quite awhile because you find, for example, some countries like turkey do that and you are right, a lot of it can go to medicinal purposes. host: does your organization considered russian covert military intervention in afghanistan when forming consultation in the u.s.? guest: the russians have been very helpful overall in afghanistan, basically because they do not want to see that instability come into their country, they do want -- do not want to see the open. are they involved? every country looks after its own interest. but a lot of people think the russians are trying to say, we will show you how you will lose like we did. i think that eric is behind us. host: you bring a great perspective from your period of time in the right demonstration and early 1980's, not long after which the russians were ousted from afghanistan with a great
deal of u.s. support. guest: no doubt about it. when people use the analogy, we had something about 250,000 people in afghanistan on our side. we were providing very sadistic it weapons, stinger missiles that shot helicopters down. the russians were horrible. they killed 1 million people. 5 million left -- when they were there they mined the whole country, so they were supportive. when we went into afghanistan, 84% supported as, now down to roughly 50% because the way we handle but since then. but it is completely different. host: why did turn around? why were we not able to maintain the support of the afghan people at the time the russians were expelled to the point it became safe-haven for taliban and possibly osama bin laden? guest: the first president bush said, we want to let us focus our attention elsewhere. and i was just over an pakistan
-- one of the things people are concerned about. are we a disposable ally? you come when you need as and when you achieve your objectives -- the molly line host: government officials? guest: and people. we did, the same way pakistan help us against the russians in afghanistan and after it was over we washed our hands of it. and i think we've got to be in the area for a long haul. host: good morning to leave on our independent line. caller: hi. i just want to say that they are misleading the people because the conflict with iraq and iran, a lot of the middle east has been going on since the 1950's. you have the i ran-contra affair, all directly related with iraq. you had the hostages that were taken in iran, with people that i worked with a and i knew were
involved -- were part of the hostages that were taken in iran at the time. then you have the illegal war in pakistan during the reagan administration. all of these work illegal assaults on these countries and then you wonder why people are coming after us here in the u.s. and non of this stuff is being talked about to the public. also, who gave george bush judicial authority to overrule constitutional law? host: several items to respond to. guest: i think if you start with the last one, congress did authorize the president to go into afghanistan and iraq and the majority of the american people supported him. but the caller makes a good point. we have a long history. iran had a democratic government and we would that of the british over through its in 1953 and put the shah and power, was
no democrat, and authoritarian. between the war between iran and iraq we were helping iraq and the iranians remembered that. interestingly enough, iran- contra when we send the missiles to israel and israel sent it to iran so the iranians could use against the iraqis. host: he used the term illegal war in the reagan administration, talking about afghanistan, but the bottom line is eventually afghanistan was flipped and the russians were out and the afghanis reason why, but with our armed supported that was never cleared through congress. guest: it definitely was. if he saw the movie "charlie wulsin swarmer," it was congress who was pushing to send the equipment -- "charlie wilson's wore the tiered iran contra, that is why it was a scandal, because they did not get
permission to send missiles to israel and sent to iran because they were using the profits to fund operations in central america which the congress had prohibited. host: texas, thomas on the republican line. caller: good morning. i used to work for unilever for 21 years -- it is pronounced unileever. afghanistan, a certain path with the british road, the 600 through the valley of death. guest: tiber pass. caller: that's it. if al qaeda and bonds could be held up in that past because everybody knows it would only take a handful of troops to hold off a whole army in there. and if you want to look for them, that is probably where
they will be in that area, you will be able -- he will be able to move from where he is at to that area quickly. guest: i think thomas makes a good point. that. is -- the british joe airline between afghanistan and pakistan. the people there do not recognize it. they are mainly pashtun, they live there. they give support to groups like al qaeda and the television. i don't think we will go in there, that is why we are using the drone's right now to go after the leadership and we are hoping the pakistani military will go from swat valley after they get that under control and hopefully into south waziristan, part of this area. host: in a recent "part affairs the tiered their recent article. -- recent article in "foreign affairs. com
host: are they any farther along now? guest: i don't think so. president obama is right, you need a comprehensive strategy. you need to have economics and reconstruction. and this has to be part of that. i don't think they are there yet. i think general mcchrystal, now we have a new strategy, that this will be part of what he does. he is doing a 60-day review and i think once that is done they will be able to move in that direction. host: a famous " see about afghanistan -- where some buyers go to die. guest: the graveyard of empires. host: how does the u.s. overcome? guest: again, we are not there.
i think our leaving iraq is very important. what president bush agreed to before he left office. shows we are not there as occupiers. yes, the british were run out and then it came back three decades later and took control. i think you overstate it and people have compared it to vietnam. all of these historical analogies, i think, are not quite appropriate given the way the situation there is now. host: missouri, democratic collar. -- caller. guest: with the taliban making money from opium, we use a pair phrase jeb stuart -- the mostest money and take the opium and process it as pharmaceuticals and distributed to hospitals. that stuff is valuable. that is my only comment. guest: i agree with you. certain countries do do it.
certainly it is a short-term gap to keep the taliban getting the profits to fund the insurgency, i think it will help us get the situation under control. host: joe from athens, ga., on the independent mind. caller: good morning. host: make sure you turn down your television or radio so they don't feed back. go ahead. caller: i was very disappointed with president bush, shifted his focus from afghanistan to iraq, going after the oil instead of taking care of national security. but i was wondering, do you think we have the infrastructure in place -- the people to retrain already and are we training people to get them in their so that we can
provide a livelihood? guest: i think given enough time, we do do that. but the real question is, have we missed the golden moment? we went income 84% of the afghans welcome us. we had all kinda cornered and we let them get away. let them get away. we promised -- we leave this as the houses backed of vote on bills debated this afternoon. this afternoon.
that's money that should be going to treat the sick and disabled. now taxo contracts want to hand all of our health care money over to the bureaucrats. law enforcement needs to go after medicare and medicaid cheats before we consider nationalized health care. we can save billions of dollars on health care by simply sending the crooks to jail. fix the obvious stealing and waste before we encourage more fraud and abuse under a universal government-run health care system. that's just the way it is.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota rise? mrs. bachmann: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mrs. bachmann: mr. speaker, this last saturday was a very sad day in minnesota. we laid to rest a fallen hero named daniel paul. his parents who were in attendance, his family, our community and we came together in sorrow and tears, our governor, our two senators and we wept as a community for this fallen hero. he was really remarkable, daniel paul. he was so rohrabacher mabble, 22 years old. he didn't fear anything. -- he was so remarkable, 22 years old. he didn't fear anything. he laid his life on the altar of freedom for all of us. it was one more reminder, mr. speaker, of how heavy the cost of our freedom is yet how remarkable these young men and women are who voluntarily with
full assurance in their heart lay their life down with us. and so, mr. speaker, i just wanted to come today and make reference and thanks to this young man who gave his life for us, to his parents, to his siblings, to his extended family who have all sacrificed so much with the loss of this young life. so, mr. speaker, i want to honor his memory of daniel paul and thank him for his service to our country and also for those in our community who doff their hats, the patriot guards, the motorcyclists who lined the streets with their flags. i was never more proud to be an american than this last saturday when i saw our community recognize this cost and pause and honor his memory. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are there any further one-minute requests?
for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. gohmert: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm looking at the list of things to be covered this week. it has friday, health care legislation, question, question, question. i hope that the american people will let their voices be heard. this is not good for america. it is going to cost tremendous amounts of money. and then you -- our seniors, especially, get particularly vulnerable. they go on lists and they are not prioritized and then they die waiting in line just as the man i met here recently from canada, just as his father did after being on the list for two years to get a bypass surgery. we don't need to go here. people don't need to be dying in line. we can have a better plan.
we have a better plan. but it's been shut out with leg counsel, i can't get it out in the form of a bill. that's what we need to do. the plan's there. just let us get it to the floor. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise? mr. burton: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. burton: about 85% of the people in this country do have health care coverage, mr. speaker. and we really need to do something about the indigent, people that are poor, the 15% that don't have coverage. but creating a socialized medical system simply won't work, as my colleague that just preceded me said. socialism cause as rationing of health care and in addition to that, it causes a tremendous amount of additional expense on people that they don't really think they are going to have to bear. we are going to see a tax increase for everybody in this country if we pass the program
that's been put forth by the democrats and the president of the united states. and the rationing of health care for seniors, i can't believe the aarp has come out in favor of this bill. because the seniors who have more health problems as they progressively get older are going to be hit the worst. as my colleague just said, there will be rationing of health care. many people won't be able to get a hip replacement or hurt sargery that's needed to keep them -- heart surgery that's needed to keep them going. and i hope the people of this country, mr. speaker, really pay attention. i hope we don't get this bill passed until we get back in august because once the american people find out what's in it, they aren't going to want it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: are there any further one-minute requests? the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. crenshaw of florida for today. mr. cuellar of texas for today.
mr. davis of illinois for today. mr. lynch of massachusetts for today. mr. ortiz of texas for today. and mr. rodriguez of texas for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into the following members may be permitted to address the house revise and extend their remarks, and include therein extraneous material. mr. mccotter for today. mr. mack from florida for july 28. ms. ros-lehtinen for july 29 and 30. mr. moran for july 28, 29, 30, and 31. mr. boozman for today. mrs. bachmann for today, july 28, 29, 30, 31. and mr. paul broun for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, i ask
unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into the following members may be permitted to address the house revise and extend their remarks, and include therein extraneous material. ms. lee, california. ms. woolsey, california. ms. kaptur, ohio. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, and under previous order of the house, the following members are recognized for five minutes each. mr. poe of texas. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. poe: thank you, mr. speaker. the women of iran are inspiring people around the world. leading in the cause and fight for freedom. they have taken to the streets by the thousands because of the fraudulent government elections and repressive government
subjugation. they are giving even men courage to protest. "the new york times" ran an eyewitness report recently saying, quote, for days now i have seen women urging less courageous men on. i have seen them getting beaten and even returned to the fray. women shout at the men to get up, get up. speak out against government oppression. untold members of iranian women have been arrested. a journalist, lawyer, and human rights activist was last seen friday, july 17 on her way to prayer. she was seen struggling with government henmen as they beat her and dragged her into car. she managed to breakway for a few moments but she was chased down, beaten with batons, and taken to prison in tehran to keep her voice silent. she is jailed this very night as we assemble here in this cradle of liberty. what's the charge? what's her crime? seeking freedom and respect seem to be her crimes.
and by any means necessary the black booted government thugs want to silence those who exercise the first human right of freedom, that being the freedom to speak out against oppression. as a lawyer she represents iranian ack have i tisses and -- activists and journalists. she's won cases for several women sentenced to be executed for violation of religious laws that have been overturned. she also involved in women's field a. group defending women's rights in iran, including the stop stoning forever campaign. mr. speaker, women are tragically stoned to death for religious violations in iran. for acts that aren't even crimes in civilized countries. they are buried up to their waist with their hands tied behind their backs. then a mob throws stones on them until they are dead. and sometimes it takes more than an hour to die. these violent barbaric acts are to be condemned by those who value life and liberty.
for the first time in a president pension campaign in iran, women made oppression an issue in the election. women courageously confronted their oppressors demanding freedom. one iranian woman said, quote, when the elections were stolen, women felt betrayed. they took to the streets. images of security forces beating up unarmed, innocent women were shocking and fueled their anger. at times the number of women exceeded the number of men in protest. one protester told reporters, we don't sit in the corner and wait for the men to make change, we do it. we are the mothers of iran. you see, mr. speaker, women in iran have been fighting for dignity and respect for over 30 years. mr. speaker, these mothers of iran have true courage. the kind of courage that comes from standing for truth over government lies. the kind of courage that comes from fighting for freedom against tyranny. it's been said, tyranny is when the people fear the government.
freedom is when the government fears the people. and now the government of iran has begun to fear these ladies of liberty. the women of iran have shown their courage to the world. they speak with one bold voice saying, no more. they will not be silenced because truthful righteous words cannot long be silenced by the stones of oppression and the rocks of brutality. the ladies of liberty are writing their own glorious pages in history. they have unjustly trampled, dragged, beaten, shot, and killed by a government that has declared war on its own people. they have earned their honored place among those who have shed blood for freedom. for their fight is not for their native iran alone. it is a fight for all freedom-seeking women and men worldwide that are being persecute by their own governments. -- persecute bide their own governments. the wonder women have earned the respect of a free world. mr. speaker, it is only a matter of time for the women of iran
win their freedom. they are throwing off the yolk of tyranny. with every step they take, they move closer to the day that liberty will be theirs. when they are successful in liberating their country from their any -- from tyranny, iran and the world will be safer. their cause is righteous and their actions are just. that's just the way it is. . i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: ms. lee of california. ms. lee: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is represented for five minutes. mr. lee: lie thank you. i rise to speak on the urgent issue of -- ms. lee: thank you. i rise to speak on the urgent issue of health care reform. the congressional black caucus and congresswoman marcia fudge from ohio, will be holding another special order on health reform. although i won't be able to join my colleagues tonight, i did want to come to the floor and add my voice to the chorus of
members from the congressional black caucus who are calling for real health care reform now. i want to begin by commending my colleagues in the c.b.c., especially congresswoman and dr. donna christensen, who is also the vice chair of the congressional black caucus and she has been leading the charge to address health and racial and ethnic disparities in health care. together with representative danny davis who co-chairs the c.b.c.'s health and wellness task force, the two of them have developed a very important set of requirements to ensure that real health care reform becomes the order of the day. so i just want to thank them for their leadership and just know that the congressional black caucus supports what they have put together with all of the input of the c.b.c. let me just begin by saying that we have is said over and over again that we want to ensure
that there is a strong public health option linked to medicare providers -- option. linked to medicare providers, this requirement must remain in tact in the final bill. we believe we must continue to work to get this done as quickly as possible. that meents hopefully we can do this before we recess this week. the $47 -- 47 million uninsured deserve this. this means again we must pass a bill this week before we adjourn for the august recess. the congressional black caucus believes that a bill that was -- that is less than $1 trillion that's completely paid for, that's budget-neutral, would likely compromise many of the provisions that are important to the millions of americans that are uninsured. this is unacceptable. we believe the bill must have a cost of $1 trillion. there's no reason to consider a bill less costly. the c.b.c. stands firmly behind an original request that we made
a long -- along with the congressional hispanic caucus and the congressional asian pacific american caucus to include specific health disparity provisions from the tricaucus bill which i believe is h.r. 3090, the health equity and accountability act. we want these provisions in the final health reform bill. the tricaucus has worked on a comprehensive bill to eliminate health disparities for the last eight years. we believe that we have a very good bill and we're pleased that many of the provisions in our health care reform bill are included now as it relates to health and ethnic and racial disparities. the c.b.c. considers the provisions on children's health prevention services and mental health and substance abuse critical to this bill and they should not be compromised in the final product. we must ensure that we guarantee true parity for mental health and comprehensive coverage
including dental and vision for kids. also the congressional black caucus believes that the disproportion share hospital payments should not be cut in an unnecessary attempt to reduce the costs of the overall health bill. many hospitals who care for a large number of low income patients or which serve as teaching hospitals depend on these dish payments to help cover their operating costs. we shouldn't be penalizing these hospitals because ultimately they will affect their ability to provide access and care to low income populations. and finally the congressional black caucus strongly believes that we can realize a host of savings from a variety of provisions in this bill. whether or not the congressional budget office agrees to evaluate and score these savings. as a caucus we strongly recommend including a trigger in the final health care reform bill that would allow those
savings to be used to replace current pay-fors and to add important services that were left out of the initial bill because of the failure to fully access and score the final cost. the bottom line is that expanding access to care and expanding the availability of preventive health services will cut costs, cut costs, mind you, and save lives and will be the benefit to the -- be to the benefit of everyone. we shupet try and recapture those savings and use them to strengthen -- excuse me, we should try to recapture those savings and use them to strengthen thesome. last week president obama reminded us all of the important work that we must do. and we must do it now. we must reject claims that the cost of reforming health care in america is something our nation can't afford. to the contrary, if we fail to act and if we fail to act now we do so at the peril of the
american people, particularly the 47 million who will continue to suffer. thank you. thank you, congresswoman fudge, for your leadership. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. mr. jones of north carolina. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. broun: ask unanimous consent to claim the gentleman's time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you, mr. speaker. when it comes to passing a health care bill that the democratic leadership insists that this will happen, they claim to currently have the votes to get it passed on this floor. if that's true, mr. speaker, then show us the bill. if the rhetoric coming from the other side of the aisle is true and you're planning to steam roll a $1 trillion health care experiment through this body before august, then let's see it. let's debate it.
let the american people see it. the american people deserve to see the bill with plenty of time for an open and honest debate about what is exactly in store for them if this partisan experiment passes. the american people have seen enough smoking mirrors about the washington bureaucrat that will be inserted between them as a patient and their physician. they've seen enough smoking mirrors about how many people will be forced off of their current health care plans. they've seen enough smoke in mirrors about the real cost of this plan. if you have the votes then let's clear out the smoke. show us the bill. and finay give hardworking americans answers to their questions. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. ms. woolsey of california. ms. woolsey: thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, one of president obama's greatest
challenges has been to restore america's moral leadership and reputation in the world, because it sunk to new lows under the previous administration. to achieve this goal, the president has taken several important steps. he has renounced the use of torture. he has called for a nuclear free world. he has reached out to the muslim world and he has promised to emphasize diplomacy and international cooperation. we're now seeing the results of these changes. last week the global attitudes project reported the results of its latest survey of opinions the -- about the united states. it found that the image of the united states has improved significantly under president obama. people in western europe, africa, latin america and asia now have a much more positive opinion of the united states. america's reputation is even improved, mr. speaker, in some
countries which are predominantly muslim. the survey also compared attitudes about president obama and osama bin laden in the muslim world. for the first time in the survey's history, people in turkey, egypt, jordan and nigeria and indonesia have a better opinion of the american president than bin laden. mr. speaker, i'm encouraged that the people of the world have more trust and respect for america these days. it means our moral authority is being restored. and moral authority matters. when america is trusted we have a much greater capacity for global leadership. but even though our country's good name is being restored throughout the world, there is much more to be done. most importantly we need a foreign policy based on the principles of smart power. smart power emphasizes
preventing war instead of preeveryonetive war. it relies on diplomacy and international cooperation instead of military occupation. and it gives the people of the world the hope and the opportunity they need to reject a life of violence and hatred. the principles of smart power are included in my smart security platform for the 21st century which i proposed in house resolution 363. the smart platform calls for america to work with multilateral organizizations to cut off funding and -- organizations to cut off funding and support for extremist networks. it strengthens international intelligence and law enforcement operations to strack down extremists while protecting civil liberties. it helps eliminate the root causes of instability by promoting economic development, third world debt relief,
conflict resolution, global health programs and universal education. it increases support for civil society which plays a key role in stopping violence. it reduces our dependence on foreign oil by investing in renewable alternatives. smart calls for diplomatic efforts enhanced by inspection regimes and regional security arrangements to reduce the spread of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials. it calls for the ratification of the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty by the senate and it provides adequate funding for the cooperative threat reduction program to secure nuclear materials in russia and other countries. mr. speaker, it's time for america to start relying on smart power to protect our country. because the smarter we are, the safer we're going to be. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. mr. moran of kansas.
for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota rise? without objection, so ordered. the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. mrs. bachmann: thank you, mr. speaker. we need to know what the people who advise the president of the united states think and believe about health care reform, mr. speaker. listening to the president's advisors' actual words is very enlightening. this morning i read a column written by betsy mci could and i'd like to quote from it extensively now. this is from a column dated july 24, 2009. mrs. mccoy wrote the following, she said the health bills that are coming out of congress would put the decisions about our care in the hands of presidential appointees. government will decide, not the people, not their doctors, what our plan will cover, how much leeway our doctor will have and what senior citizen will finally get under medicare. but what's even more important,
mr. speaker, are the actual words of the president's advisors on health care. here's the words from one of the president's first advisors, the brother of the white house chief of staff, he's already been appointed to two key positions. one is health policy advisor at the office of management and budget, the other is as a member of the federal council on comparative effectiveness research. this is what mr. manual has written, vague promises of savings from cutting waste and instilling electronic medical records and improving quality are merely lipstick cost control. more for show in public relations than for true change. isn't this what the democrats have claimed we're going to find $500 billion in savings for? the president's own advisor says this is just lipstick. this is just a paper covering, this isn't where the real saves are. savings, the president's advisor
writes, will require changing how doctors sympathy about their patients. doctors take the hip contractic oath too seriously -- hypocritic oath too seriously, he wrotes. this is the president's advisor writing this. doctors take the oath too seriously. as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others bufment that's what the people want their doctor to do. but emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patient and consider social justice such as whether the money would be better spent on someone else. this is a horrific notion to our nation's doctors, but it's a horrific notion to each american because doctors believe as americans believe that social justice is given out one patient at a time. but the president's advisor, dr. emanuel, believes communetarianism should guide
decision on who gets care. he says medical care should be reserved for the nondisabled, so watch out if you're disabled. care should be reserved for the nondisabled. not given to those who are, quote, irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens. an obviously example, he said, is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dimensiona. we just lost my father-in-law in dementia two months ago. i thank god that the doctors were able to alleviate more poor father-in-law's symptoms at the end of his life, at age 85. apparently under the democrats' health care plan, my father-in-law would not have received the high quality of care that he received in his last two months of life. . if you're a grandmother with parkinson's or child with cerebral palsy, it is written, unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not
invidious discrimination. every person lives through different stages of life rather than being a single age. even if a 25--year-old receives priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 now was previously 25. these bills that are being rushed through congress right now, maybe even this week, are going to cut over $500 billion out of medicare in the next 10 years. putting it on the backs of our state legislature to fill the gaps. knowing how unpopular these cuts are, the president's budget director has urged congress to delete their own authority over medicare to a new presidentially appointed bureaucracy that will not be accountable to the public. here's the president's next advisor, dr. david blue men tall. he recommends that we slow medical innovation in order to control health spending. you heard me right. he said, let's slow medical
innovation to control health spending. he's long advocated health spending controls. although he concedes they are associated with longer waits and reduced availability of new and expensive treatment and devices, he calls it debatable whether the timely care americans get is worth the cost. mr. speaker, americans need to wake up and read what the president and his advisors are saying. it may scare them to go to the phones and call their members. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. kaptur of ohio. for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. lujan: mr. speaker, at a time when families throughout my district and throughout our nation are struggling with the rising cost of health care, a robust public option will expand choice and increase competition,
driving down costs and making affordable health care a reality. we need a strong public option for the single mother in my district who changed jobs and lost her insurance. who deserves the chance to get the coverage she needs for herself and for her kids. we need a health care reform for the self-employed businessperson who will finally have a chance to get affordable, comprehensive health care without worrying about constraints on his business. there should knob question our current health care system is broken. to truly look after the american people and make a difference in their lives. we need a strong public option because our constituents, our constituents deserve affordable, accessible health care. mr. speaker, we have come to work. we have come to look after the general welfare of the american people. year after year we have had an opportunity and we have squandered it. to be able to address the problems that are afflicting the american people. people are struggling today. and we have an opportunity to either work to come up with
solutions or not present any ideas. mr. speaker, we have some great ideas here and it's about time that we take some action. mr. speaker, with that i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. burton of indiana. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. boozman: thank you, mr. speaker. i join those members of congress who are concerned about the rapid growth of deficit spending by the federal government. lots of spending with little job growth. for that reason i rise today to express my concern that the administration budget attempts to cancel a project that will literally cost the taxpayers more to cancel than it will to complete. on july 7, "the new york times" reported on the ozark powerhouse
rehabilitation project. according to the times, quote, shutting down the ozark jetta project won't save taxpayers a dime. since the government would pay a $12 million cancellation fee and reimburse utility tax ratepayers for their $20 million share. bottom line, federal taxpayers would spend $32 million to kill the project, $4 million more than it would cost to complete it. i end quote. i think it's important for the record to contain some background information on the ozark powerhouse rehabilitation project. let's take a moment to do that. the corps of engineers is in the middle of a major rehabilitation of the ozark jetta at thiser lore powerhouse on the arkansas river. construction is underway. this project involves turbine redesign and replacement that will improve and allow the continued operation of this 100
megawatt hydropower facility. the electricity produced at the ozark powerhouse is sold to customers in arkansas, kansas, louisiana, missouri, oklahoma, and texas. as the "times" article noted electricity customers have already invested $20 million through their utilities in this project. neither the president's fiscal year 2010 budget request nor the initial announcements of stimulus funding for the corps contain any funding for this project. my hope is that the administration will now work with the congress to do the right thing and ensure that funding is provided to complete this project. if the project is not funded in 2010, work would be closed out on the project as fiscal year 2009 funds are exhausted. if that happens, what will we have? we will have one turbine unit disassembled and inoperative. we'll have another inoperative unit due to a cracked shaft. we'll have three units that are
available only on a day-to-day basis due to frequent outages caused by problems with old turbine runners. we'll have five new units that have already been purchased. and maybe left sitting uninstalled and on site with no place to store them. most regrettably the taxpayers will have an additional $32 million bill on top of the money they have already spent on an incomplete project. if this project is cut, how can we say we want to reduce our dependence on foreign fuels, or fossil fuels, and cut emissions? if this project is cut, how can we say we want to encourage renewable energy? if this project is cut, how can we say we will avoid wasting the taxpayers' money? in fact, because the electricity produced by this federal project will be sold, once the rehabilitation is complete, every taxpayer's invested dollar will be returned to the treasury plus interest. at this point how could we even consider not completing the
work? i encourage the president to make an honest effort to reduce federal spending and we can start by completing this project rather than canceling. during the presidential campaign, then senator obama talked about the importance of using a scalp -- -- scalpel not a hatchet. this project was thoughtlessly cut, the kind made with a patchet. we have all seen crazy decisions made by both republicans and democrats in the white house. i'm not trying to be partisan expressing my concern about the way this project has been handled. instead i believe this cut illustrates that the government too often makes poor decisions and mishandles taxpayers' dollars. it just doesn't make any sense to cancel a project in the middle of construction when it will cost more to cancel the project than it would to finish it. again, my hope is that the administration now will work with congress to do the right
thing and ensure that funding is provided to complete this project. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. mccotter of minnesota. -- michigan. the speaker stands corrected. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. mccotter: to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. mccotter: i thank the gentleman. mr. speaker, tonight i have introduced h.res. 680, calling upon president obama to reject and apologize for his remarks regarding the conduct of cambridge massachusetts police sergeant james m. crowley jr. mr. president, i view this as a presidential issue. after admitting his bias and inadequate grasp of the facts, he never the less stated that sergeant crowley acted "stupidly" when carrying out his duties as a law enforcement officer. subsequently in a public remark, the president said that sergeant crowley had "overreacted." on his part sergeant crowley has
steadfastly denied any inappropriate conduct on his part. mr. speaker, this is the crux of the problem. it is a situation patently unfair to sergeant crowley and his standing regarding potential and legal consequences. therefore i ask the president to retract his premature judgment, apologize for it, and allow the appropriate authorities to resolve this issue through due process. with my view the ledge director of the police officers association of michigan agrees. i quote him, after admitting a bias against the police officer and ignorance of the facts, the president used his bully pulpit to help a well connected friend by unfairly accusing an officer of misconduct in the performance of his duties. it must not stand. if it does, what officer will be next? i end the quote, and i would add, what citizen will be next? mr. speaker, tonight i have also introduced h.r. 3347, the freedom trade act which applies human rights as a criteria of trade with the united states.
mr. speaker, i believe h.r. 3347 is most timely. for today in the ronald reagan building president obama stated how, quote, the relationship between the united states and china will shape the 21st century. which makes it as important as any bilateral relationship in the world, end quote. on my part i believe it is therefore imperative this relationpship be built upon a common and unbrickable commitment to every human beings' god given rights to liberty. including the rights to free exercise of religion and speech and the ability to form free and independent labor unions. that is why this bill is necessary. it will show all our potential partners throughout the world that the united states remains a beacon of freedom that will never forget the warning, that how a government treats its own people cannot be separated from how that government could be expected to treat other countries. end quote. mr. speaker, with this i
wholeheartedly concur. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. gohmert of texas. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. the gentleman is recognized for 60 minutes. mr. carter: just a moment, mr. speaker. i yield to the lady. she has a question. >> i thought we had first hour. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 60 minutes.
mr. carter: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise tonight to sort of doing a continuing of the theme that i have been discussing, but this one has gotten to the point of where i'm very concerned about the seriousness of the offense. we talked about failure of certain members of congress to pay their taxes. failure of members of congress to not disclose the influence peddling going on. we talked about a lot of things that at last week we talked about the rule of law and how many are trying to circumvent the rule of contract. in fact i read today in the
"wall street journal" that compensation czar is going to renegotiate the contracts, i assume that means strong arm the parties, to renegotiate the contracts on certain compensation packages. however offended we may be by compensation packages, there are certain rules of contract that should be honored. that's one of the back bones of our nation's freedom is that we have the right to make a deal and then be bound by it. but that's a different subject. tonight i want to talk about a subject i think if this doesn't concern people back home, if this doesn't concern the members of this body, then i don't really know what will. because the issue we are talking about here is something that is the beginning of tyranny and it's something we should all be very concerned