SHOTLIST:

AuBC FILE

Various Locations - During World War One ++Black and White++

1. ANZAC (Australia New Zealand Army Corps) soldiers on board ship AUDIO: Commentary

2. ANZAC soldiers in front of Egyptian pyramids AUDIO: Commentary

3. General William Birdwood on horseback AUDIO: Singing

AuBC FILE

Gallipoli, Turkey, 25 April, 1915

4. Various of ANZAC soldiers arriving on beach AUDIO: Singing

5. Close-up General Birdwood AUDIO: Singing

AuBC

Canberra, Australia - 14 May, 2009

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Peter Burness, Historian at Australian War Memorial:

"Birdwood has a very unique place in the history of the Australian Imperial Force in the First World War. He led the ANZACs. He commanded them on Gallipolli, and later he commanded the corps in France and Belgium. When they created the corps as the Australian Corps late in 1917 he was in command of that until it was handed over to General Monash, the Australian."

7. Pan across folders holding photographic collection

General Birdwood's Collection of WW1 Photographs - Courtesy of Peter Stiff/Sotherby's - Horizons Clients Only

Various Locations, World War One

8. Various still black and white photographs of scenes from World War One

AuBC

Canberra, Australia - 14 May, 2009

10. SOUNDBITE (English) Georgina Pemberton, Sotheby's:

"He was a great military buff, he has written many books on military campaigns but his children, he said, don't show any interest sadly, in this area, so he said it's about time he brings them back to Australia."

General Birdwood's Collection of WW1 Photographs - Courtesy of Peter Stiff/Sotherby's - Horizons Clients Only

Various Locations, World War One

11. Various still black and white photographs of scenes from World War One

LEAD-IN:

An extensive collection of battle-scene photographs from World War One has just come to light.

The collection belonged to British Commander General William Birdwood, and is up for sale.

Birdwood had a distinguished military career and led the Australian and New Zealand forces, known as the ANZACs, at the famous Battle of Gallipoli in Turkey in 1915.

STORYLINE:

The soldiers who served with the Australia New Zealand Army Corps were known as ANZACs and were famous throughout the world for their skill and fighting spirit, especially during the Battle of Gallipoli in 1915 where they an suffered enormous loss of life.

The troops were led by then Lieutenant General Sir William Birdwood also known as "Birdie", who was their commander at Gallipoli and later in France and Belgium.

Birdwood built up a collection of 600 war photographs from the various theatres of war.

Many of the photographs feature the ANZACs in action.

The images are a record of the World War One and of the horrors of battle. They include pictures of life in the trenches, burning bodies during a lull in fighting and troops fighting.

They also track the war's industrial revolution, with motorbikes, tanks and planes all featuring.

The twenty five albums of photographs were part of a colonial estate auctioned in what was then called Rhodesia, at the height of the war for a new Zimbabwe.

Peter Stiff, a military author, had no one bid against him during the auction for the albums and bought the photos for very little money.

Military expert Stiff said he had hoped his family would be interested in the albums.

But Georgina Pemberton of Sotheby's in Australia, who auctioned the collection, says the family are not interested and so they have been sold again.

The collection went up for auction in Melbourne, Australia on 27 May 2009.

English/Nat

Two one-hundred-year-old African American World War One veterans were honoured on Monday.

The two men became Knights of the National Order of the Legion of Honour, France's highest award.

The awards were presented as part of French President Jacques campaign to commemorate the end of the first World War by honoring surviving American military personnel who served in France.

SUGGESTED VOICE-OVER

Better late than never, thought the French, who just recently started a campaign to honour surviving American military personnel who served in France.

The occasion marks part of the 80th Anniversary of the Armistice that ended the war on November 11th 1918.

Having waited most of their lives, Herbert W. Young, who is 104, and Robert Thomas, who is 113, were awarded medals by the French Consul General, Richard Tuque, and made Knights of the French Legion of Honour.

[SOUNDBITE: (English)

"Robert Thomas, on behalf ot the President of the French Republic, and by virtue of the powers vested in me, I hereby make you a Knight of the Legion of Honour."

SUPER CAPTION: Richard Tuque, French Consul General]

Both men, who served in France during the war, received France's highest award.

SOUNDBITE: (English)

"...and by the virtue of the powers vested in me, I hereby make you a Knight of the Legion of Honour."

SUPER CAPTION: Richard Tuque, French Consul General]

There are an estimated three thousand American World War One veterans, half of whom are believed to have served in France during the war.

The Legion of Honour will not be given posthumously to American veterans.

To date more than 300 World War One veterans have filed applications for the award.

New York City, USA, 22 February 1999

1. Wide shot exterior French Consulate

2. Close shot consulate sign

3. Two French soldier with flags

4. Interior of consulate, playing

5. Close shot soldier saluting

6. Cutaway cameramen, pan to Herbert W. Young and Robert Thomas, being honoured

7. Family of veterans

8. Close shot medals

9. French Consul General taking medal from pillow

10. Cutaway media

11. SOUNDBITE: (English) Richard Tuque, French Consul General

12. Close shot Herbert Young

13. SOUNDBITE: (English) Richard Tuque, French Consul General

14. Cutaway media

15. Glass of champagne, pullout to side view of ceremony

HOUSE FLOOR DEBATE:

The House meets for legislative business.

Last votes expected: Unknown.

One Minutes (10 per side)

H.Res. 861 - Declaring that the United States will prevail in

the Global War on Terror, the struggle to protect freedom from

the terrorist adversary (Closed Rule, Ten Hours of Debate, Begin

Consideration) (Sponsored by Rep. Hyde / International Relations

Committee)

House Speaker Dennis Hastert gives the opening statement to begin

the debate on the Global War on Terror.

13:00:10.8 introduced a bill s. 1290 that would have reduced the intelligence budget by $300 million in each of the fiscal years, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000.

13:00:27.1 and then we have a gentlelady serving with distinction in this body from sunny california. in 1998 she stated, quote, it's time to totally eliminate the c.i.a., closed quote.

13:00:43.2 congressional record, march 18, 1997. on several occasions in the 1990's following the collapse of the soviet empire, a majority of democrats in the house voted to cut the u.s. intelligence budget.

13:01:00.5 following the horrific events of september 11, the voices that had previously advocated reducing our intelligence capabilities quickly reversed their theme.

13:01:13.8 even they must thank god that they have been unsuccessful in their efforts, but on this subject we hear nothing but deafening SILENCE. one ines capable lesson of history is is the invitation to

13:01:31.8 strike. the desire to run away only encourages pursuit. we're seeing that fatal approach gather strength elsewhere in the world, manifested in efforts to bind the hands of those who would attack terrorism at its source.

13:01:47.5 the hope is that as what the passing of a storm, the threat will move on and blue skies reappear, and that the nightmare will at last be over but the terrible reality is by succumbing to the fear of

13:02:04.6 terrorism by doing too little in the fear that we are doing too much we condemn ourselves to a future of unending assaults. other countries have learned that however meager their

13:02:20.7 contribution on their own in the world security, however ineffectual their actions, in the end, their united states will rescue them, we'll make the world right again, we'll defend against all threats.

13:02:33.4 we, however, no longer have that luxury. if we do not take action to defend ourselves, then we're lost because no one exist to

13:02:45.5 rescue us if we fail. so where -- aware of the responsibilities, aware of the horrific consequences that could occur on the reliance on trust and hope, president bush

13:02:58.7 acted to remove the threat posed by saddam. what he did is called leadership, and for doing his duty for all of us he's been denounced by many of the same people who would have denounced him had he not acted, denounced

13:03:16.7 by people who bear no responsibility, who take no responsibility, even for their own actions. saddam is no longer a threat to anyone. that's a lesson for those

13:03:29.5 around the world who watch and wait for opportunities for unopposed regression. they now know that they're invulnerability has vanished. even more important and almost entirely unnoticed amid the

13:03:46.2 criticism foe -- focused on president bush is that his actions have greatly enhanced the credibility of the united states. for the next time this or any president warns a foreign country to see actions, there

13:04:04.8 can be little doubt that we will take decisive and forceful action no matter how great the opposition in the world community. no one can creditably question that this greatly enhanced credibility paid off with

13:04:19.5 libya's decision to abandon its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. qaddafi understood what president bush's critics still refuse to acknowledge, that

13:04:34.1 this administration is determined to eliminate threats to our country, both actual and potential and if necessary, will use force to do so. that's in sharp contrast to the passivity to the prior

13:04:53.9 administration who refused to act on the prior attacks on the united states. what other conclusion could al qaeda and others have reached from our baffling inaction and response to their assaults on

13:05:08.6 our embassy, on our military, on us. they were taught the false lesson that they were free to slaughter us and we would do nothing. incredibly, senior officials from the administration now shamelessly criticize this

13:05:26.4 president for taking decisive measures to address the threat that they themselves could not be brought to contemplate. by acting first in afghanistan and then iraq to remove saddam, president bush has rendered the

13:05:42.1 need for future interventions, much less likely. it's unfortunate that the quest for political advantage and a high decibel partisanship have intruded into the national discussions of how best to

13:05:58.4 address the problems we face in iraq, but there could be no doubt that the more we appear disunited and the more valuable our dissent into weakness and inaction, the greater the aide and comfort we give to our

13:06:16.0 enemies. the world of predictibility and relative safety we once knew is gone. we are now engaged in a cruel, brutal struggle with those who would destroy us one unprecedented in our challenge

13:06:32.0 to perseverance and courage and one that will be fought, not just on foreign lands but on other own oil. to insist that decisions must await perfect intelligence, that the risk of action is to more feared and the risk of

13:06:48.0 inaction, that others will save us is to guarantee our defeat. but defeat in this new and more dangerous world means annihilation. the smoking gun that some critics insist on might well be

13:07:01.9 some of our cities. we in this chamber, our country, the entire world owe this president not condemnation but our thanks for acting in iraq, for refusing to wait for an enemy to strike, for not

13:07:19.3 temp rising and letting the forces of destruction wage unopposed their pettyless war to destroy everything we believe in. to those faint of heart from temporary setbacks in iraq or who seek to benefit politically

13:07:36.0 from our differences, permit me to quote from thomas payne.

13:07:43.0 thomas payne wrote, these are the times that try men souls. the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot, will in this crisis shrink from the service of their country. but he that stands by it now deserves the love and thanks of

13:07:58.7 man and woman. tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered, yet we have this consolation with us that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph. charles de gaulle once said,

13:08:15.8 france would not be true to herself if she weren't engaged in some great enterprise. our great enterprise is the defense of freedom, and may we be worthy of the challenge. mr. speaker, i reserve the

13:08:30.1 balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. murtha: i yield myself two means, mr. speaker.

13:08:47.5 the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. murtha: let me comment on some of the things that the gentleman said. this war has gone on, mr. chairman. this war has gone on longer than the korean war, has gone on longer than world war i and

13:09:02.5 gone almost as long as the european war. if i believe where we're making progress, we can't win this militarily. what i'm saying to redeploy, to get our troops out of harm's way is the key.

13:09:16.6 i see no progress at all in this operation. i see the opposite that when i see that when you talk about al qaeda being encouraged by what we say, al qaeda has gone from 15,000 to 20,000. incidents have gone from 15 a

13:09:33.6 day to 90 a day. we're not making progress. we're losing progress. i recognize the gentleman from missouri for 10 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: with all respect the chair asks members to direct their

13:09:48.1 comments to the chair. the gentleman from missouri is recognized for 10 minutes. mr. skelton: mr. speaker, thank you and i appreciate the opportunity to speak on this issue today.

13:10:05.3 this important issue for so many americans across the country from my home state of missouri, so many families, such as mine, have young people in uniform.

13:10:25.2 but this resolution before us today is not what we requested, nor is it what we were told we would have before us to debate.

13:10:41.3 we expected a resolution confined to the country of iraq and the conflict there. that's not what the resolution is. this resolution covers the middle east waterfront, trying

13:11:01.0 to blend together the iraqi war and the war against terrorism, which has its genesis in afghanistan.

13:11:12.7 mr. speaker, these are two separate and distinct wars. we did the right thing by going into afghanistan, toppling the taliban, which supported and protected the al qaeda terrorists, and then came along

13:11:31.7 the discussion, the international discussion about iraq. and saddam hussein and the weapons of mass destruction. we made the decision as a country to go into iraq.

13:11:48.7 at that time, mr. speaker, knowing the history and the culture of the middle east, i sent two letters to the president of the united states, one on september 4, 2002, and one on march 18, 2003 before we

13:12:09.2 went into iraq. my letters warned against the aftermath. they sent an assistant

13:12:22.1 secretary of the state and an assistant secretary of defense over to see me and said, ike, it will be all right. we know what happened in the aftermath of the insurgency because we allowed the looting, we sent the iraqi army home

13:12:38.9 rather than give them a

13:12:41.1 paycheck and a shovel and didn't have enough troops to quell in the insurgency. and here we are some three years later.

13:12:57.4 despite the fact that this resolution is a broad one, let's talk about iraq, which should be the complete subject of the resolution before us. mr. speaker, this nation is at

13:13:11.5 a strategic crossroads. we're spending $8 billion a month, over $300 billion on this war, and more strikingly we're losing, mr. speaker, a

13:13:27.9 battalion's worth of casualty killed or injured between iraq and afghanistan, by far most of them are sadly in iraq. and they are increasing insurgent-inspired attacks.

13:13:42.9 now what makes this resolution so interesting is the fact that is flies in the face of the law that we passed here in the congress of the united states and the president signed. the bill, the defense bill of

13:14:04.8 2005 said this -- come the year 2006 should be a period of significant transition to full iraqi sovereignty with iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and

13:14:21.4 sovereigned iraq thereby creating conditions for the phased redeployment of the united states forces from iraq. that's the law of our land. that's what the defense bill

13:14:34.7 said last year. thereby creating conditions for the phase redeployment of the united states forces from iraq. well, what does this mean to us in the long run? well, farmers in missouri know

13:14:53.6 that the quality of the corn that they plant will bring about the quality in the corn that grows. and we find ourselves militarily eating our seed corn

13:15:11.3 in the country of iraq. sadly a few moments ago we had a MOMENT OF SILENCE for the 2,500 americans that sacrificed a life in that sad country.

13:15:31.7 but it means that by eating up the equipment, and we are using equipment left and right, and it will take three years to refurbish the united states

13:15:45.6 army, if the war were to stop today qup-wise. there's challenges in recruiting and retention, but i have to tell you how proud i am of the young people in uniform today.

13:16:01.0 but if we don't take serious thought about the fraise phraseology in the law creating the condition for the faced redeployment from the troops in

13:16:17.4 iraq, we may be eating our military seed corn, and what does this mean? it means that the united states of america will be less prepared to either deter or defend an attack that might come at some future date.

13:16:35.3 this is serious business. we need to remain strong militarily, that's the way you deter problems. should north korea, somewhere

13:16:53.6 in asia, somewhere in latin america, somewhere in africa cause us to be involved? the question is, mr. speaker, would we be prepared militarily to meet that challenge.

13:17:10.2 that's why it's very important that we do our very best to take seriously the law regarding transition this year. the significance transition.

13:17:26.4 and what will it take? it will take the iraqi government to stand up on its own and it's on its way there. to transfer the security problem and situation to their

13:17:41.9 police force and to their military, and we have some 250,000 iraqi military either fully trained or nearly fully trained. we have to hand the baton over to them.

13:17:57.1 we as a country, whether militarily or not, cannot determine the fate of iraq. the iraqis have to do it themselves.

13:18:10.8 their own government, their own military, and their own police force. we can be of help, we have been of help. we have been there some three years. i think it's time for us to seriously look at where we are,

13:18:32.0 where we're going, and do our very best to keep ourselves militarily strong so that those days that are bound to happen, and mr. speaker, let me remind, i've been in congress 29 plus

13:18:46.9 years, thanks to the wonderful folks in missouri. during that time we have had 10 military confrontations with other countries. history being what it is

13:19:03.8 reflects that and the future may hold something similar. we hope not. but the question is, will we be militarily prepared when the time comes?

13:19:18.8 the iraq adventure needs to be looked at in light of the law that we passed last year. the calendar year 2006 should be a period of significant transition to full iraqi sovereignty with the iraqi

13:19:35.2 security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of the united states forces from iraq. that's the law. so the congress passed it, and that's what the president

13:19:52.7 signed, and that's where we are. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that my letter to the president of september 4, 2002, and then a letter of march 18, 2003, be entered in full in the record at this point, and i

13:20:09.5 yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the letter will be inserted into the record. the chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 4939, an act making emergency supplemental

13:20:26.6 appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2006, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman california.>mr. speaker, i claim such time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

13:20:43.3>thank you, mr. speaker, and i want to thank the chairman of the intelligence committee for allowing me to take a little time early in this debate, although i know that the armed services committee is going to come up a little later, and i want to talk about, about this

13:21:00.0 war and about -- and touch on some of the subjects that my good friend mr. murtha has brought up over the last 15 or 20 minutes. you know, i was a new member of congress in 1983 when i went over to beirut with a lot of

13:21:15.1 those great members of the armed services committee, and we got over there a couple of weeks before the marines were blown up in the terrorist act that all americans now have heard about and understand. and the reaction of the united

13:21:31.0 states to that was basically to move out. and i know that we all remember the kobar towers going up and a similar non-reaction from the united states. and we remember the embassies going up in north africa, and

13:21:48.4 the national derision that followed the sending back of a couple of cruise missiles, one of which was alleged to have hit a drugstore which was in the least, or at the most, a symbolic response to the

13:22:02.6 blowing up of those embassies in africa. and i remember the cole and the destruction of that ship and the ensuing american casualties and the non-action by the united states, and then we were struck in 9/11 and we realized

13:22:19.7 that it was wrong for us to treat these terrorist acts as isolated compartmentalized acts that were unrelated. and at that point we struck back. and we undertook a mission, first to afghanistan, secondly,

13:22:35.6 a mission to iraq. and i don't think that we have

13:22:40.1 to plow old ground about iraq. i think everyone understands saddam hussein and gulf one, but i think it's important, and it's good -- it's good that my friend, mr. murtha, has point out that in fact even as we drove that armored spearhead

13:22:56.9 north in this war against iraq, taking baghdad, tommy franks was intercepting communications even then from iraqi officers to the effect that they were on the verge of using the special weapon which we interpreted to

13:23:11.2 be poisonous gas. a weapons of mass destruction. and we -- and he gave out orders that were to break down the platoon and squad level and get ready for those weapons of mass destruction. i can also remember giving a briefing, offering -- giving an invitation to every member of

13:23:27.0 this house, democrat and republican, before we voted on taking military action in iraq to come over and listen to intelligence experts in a closed briefing, with no hammers, no white house personnel, and ask any question they wanted to ask about weapons of mass destruction.

13:23:44.7 and they did that, lots of them. we had over 100 members at several of the briefings, and we had members of the intelligence committee laying out -- or the intelligence apparatus of this country laying out differences. they talked about the aluminum tubes, how some thought those

13:24:00.8 were to be used in centrifuges for the enrichment of uranium, and others thought they were used for rocket bodies, but we allowed all the members before they made that vote to give the president license to go into iraq.

13:24:15.1 they did that vote from an educated standpoint, they had an opportunity to pull all the information that they wanted. now, you know, it's been stated that we didn't have enough troops going into iraq, and i remember as we were driving that armored spearhead north, and the marines taking a piece

13:24:32.8 of it, and the army taking a big piece of it, we had a number of experts appearing on national forums on a daily basis saying, there's not enough troops. they used the term, we're going to get bogged down. and what was interesting is

13:24:47.8 that even as they were on talk shows saying that there weren't enough troops, the talk show would be interrupted with the news flash to the effect that tommy frank his taken yet another stronghold. and it was stated at the end of that drive toward baghdad with

13:25:05.3 what was described by some of the observers, some of the so-called experts, with too few troops that that lightning attack taking baghdad would go down in history as an example of a low casualty level, and we did have an extraordinarily low

13:25:21.6 casualty level, and a lightning advance in which the enemy in many cases was destroyed long before the american columns got to their land forces. now let's talk about troops in the occupation, and the level

13:25:35.4 of troops in the occupation, because that's been brought up a number of times and the general's statement about needing more than the number of troops that we had there has been used many times. you know, there's been two arguments.

13:25:51.5 one, that we needed to have more troops to make sure that we could suppress the insurgents. and the other statement that was made, sometimes in the same speech, would be that we needed to put an iraqi face on the security apparatus.

13:26:07.5 well, you can't have it both ways. you can't have an american on every street corner and have an iraqi face on the security apparatus. and let me just say one last thing which is a hard, tough truth for this house, but when the gentleman from pennsylvania

13:26:25.0 and i, as we watched the last of the 1990's unfold and the clinton administration left the white house we noticed in our defense committees that we went into that administration in the early 1990's with 15 american

13:26:41.7 army divisions. we came out of that administration with 10, count them, 10. roughly 33 combat brigades. that's a fact of life. that's what we had to go into this operation with.

13:26:55.4 and now we're moving and we're building toward 43 combat brigades right now, but we cut the military, we cut the u.s. army by almost 40%, and that's what we had to go into this war with. now, with respect to the gentleman's statements that in

13:27:11.3 the first war we got lots of folks to chip in and pay for this thing, that's right, on the other hand, you had lots of self-interest. you had saddam hussein's tasks and third gear before we threw the 82nd airbornee in between him and his objectives and you

13:27:28.6 had everyone that had an oil well in that region scared to death and willing to pour money into this operation. so it's no surprise that

13:27:39.4 countries out of self-interest will pile on and help out. and it's also no surprise that we had lots of times in our national history when it's been tough to bring allies onboard. when we had to go big pieces of this operation by ourselves and go it alone, and yet, we were

13:27:53.3 able to bring at least 20,000 coalition members into this operation. and it's true that we didn't have the french and the germans, but the french and germans were looking forward to major oil contracts with saddam hussein and they didn't want to go this time against their pocketbooks, and that's a fact

13:28:10.6 of life. mr. lewis: will the gentleman yield?>i would yield. mr. lewis: you chaired our subcommittee on appropriations and brought in clear form to me the contribution you've made to

13:28:26.2 the strength of america and our role in the world. let me say to the gentleman, i may not be able to speak later, but let me say to the gentleman that early on in the process that one of the great trips that i had taken with the cross section of this house, people who had voted against the war,

13:28:41.6 people in the center somewhere, and people when supported the president from the beginning, all of them over a long weekend. together we saw saddam hussein about, what he was, visiting killing fields with 500,000 people that this guy murdered of his own people, and while he

13:28:57.4 was building golden palaces. as we left we came together to see what we could do about the big supplemental on the war. to a person, democrat and republican, one of our members summarized it by saying this, all of you know where i've been coming from, i voted against

13:29:11.9 the war. it's going to be very unpopular when i go home, but after seeing what saddam hussein is really about, how could we do anything else? and all 13 of those members came in that great debate and supported the president's fight against saddam hussein because

13:29:28.1 it was a fight against the war on terror. i appreciate the gentleman yielding.>i thank the gentleman and that takes me to another point, which is the iraqi army. it's been said many times and probably said again in this debate that we should have kept

13:29:44.0 the iraqi averpley intact. now the road that's not taken is always the smoothest. but looking at the iraqi army, at saddam hussein's army, he had 15,000 sunni generals. how are you going to maintain an efficient iraqi army that is

13:30:00.7 responsive to a new fledgling civilian government with 15,000 sunni generals running this thing? we've had to build this army from the ground up. i think that history will show that that was the right thing to do. to have an efficient army you

13:30:17.6 have to have a couple of things. you have to have an army that has a chain of command that's responsive. that means that the private does what the sergeant says. and the sergeant says what his platoon leader says and right up the chain of command. and you also got to have an army that's responsive to the

13:30:35.2 civilian government, to that new defense minister that was put in place. i don't think you are going to do that with 15,000 sunni generals. and i've seen that statement tossed around so much that i hope to be able to talk to some of the folks a couple years down the line when it -- it's

13:30:54.2 reflected. and people like barry mccaffrey who have not been great friends of the administration's operation who said that looking at the iraqi army now, they see a core of strength, they see leadership emerging and they

13:31:06.3 see an iraqi army that's becoming effective. so what are we doing? we have a mission, and the mission right now for the military is to provide a shield for this fledgling government as it goes into place, this new government.

13:31:22.1 we are nation builders, we are building a nation. it's also to train up the iraqi military, and we are going to hand off this defense burden. that means our people come home after we train up and mature the iraqi military. if the question for us is, who is best equipped to decide when

13:31:40.9 we take the training wheels off, when we let the iraqi military go forward, i think we should leave that judgment up to the people who track down and brought to justice mr. zarqawi, the gentleman who said

13:31:55.4 that he was going to take this war to washington, d.c. and london. he's going to be a little late for that one because we have an extremely competent american military on the ground in iraq right now. and i think the gentleman from pennsylvania would agree with that.

13:32:10.6 so let's use that same judgment of those combat commanders who are training those iraqi units in their areas of operation who say, ok, this battalion is just about matured. this one isn't. this one needs more equipment. this one needs some more training. let's rely on their judgment as

13:32:28.2 to when we can hand that load off to them and let them bear the security burden.

13:32:37.3 why should a congressman from california try to impose an arbitrary date on when that maturity takes place? you can't do it. so i would just ask my friends to give to these great americans who are over there working this mission right now.

13:32:55.2 let's send a united statement to them that there's value in this mission, there's value in their operation. we're going to complete this mission. and you know, they don't -- they're lacking something that

13:33:09.5 the greatest generation had. the greatest generation in world war ii had a united american public. when the 101st went into northern europe, they had a united american public. let's give the 101st airborne, now in most you will and in

13:33:26.6 that tough sunni -- now in mosul and in that tough sunni triangle a united american public and a united american congress. let's give the first marine division that's in that tough province in that al anbar province out in fallujah the

13:33:45.0 same support we gave them in another mission. they deserve a united american public and united american congress. let's send them a message, a message that's manifested in this resolution is that we

13:33:59.6 shouldn't have an arbitrary cutoff point, an arbitrary deadline and second, let's complete this mission. let's send this message to every soldier, every marine who is watching this in every mess hall in tikrit a message that

13:34:17.2 the united states house of representatives stands with them. thank you. and i would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. murtha: i yield myself two

13:34:29.9 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. murtha: i believe we sent them a message when we vote on the armed services bill. very few people voted against it. only 15 or 16 people voted against it. but theodore roosevelt said, if you disagree with the policy

13:34:46.3 and you don't say anything, you're actually treasonnist. i disagree with the policy. there's no one that supports the troops better than people in this congress. one other thing, i think the

13:35:03.9 gentleman made a mistake when he said, we're fighting against -- we're moving against -- for the war on terror -- against the war on terror. we're fighting for the war on terror is what we're doing, but i appreciate what the gentleman

13:35:17.9 is saying and i appreciate the fact that he and i both asked for more troops at one point. he was the lead sponsor at that particular time. and i recognize the gentleman from california for 12 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 12

13:35:32.7 minutes.>mr. speaker, before we went to war, president bush and other administration officials made three promises to the american people. one, we would find weapons of mass destruction. two, we would be welcomed as liberators and, three, the

13:35:51.7 reconstruction of iraq would pay for itself. well, all three promises proof to be false. today, i will focus on the reconstruction effort in iraq and the massive waste, fraud and abuse that have undermined

13:36:08.3 our efforts. stuart bowan is the special inspector general for iraq reconstruction. he often talks about the reconstruction gap which is the president's promises and

13:36:24.3 reality. he's absolutely right. the gap is enormous, but it is dwarfed by the competency and corruption gaps in iraq. the consequences of mismanagement and corruption

13:36:41.5 are serious. waste, fraud and abuse have flourished. the taxpayer has within repeatedly gouged. iraq is not being rebuilt. we have lost credibility and are now viewed in iraq as occupiers, and our troops did

13:37:00.8 not get essential equipment when they needed it. we have now spent $50 billion on iraq reconstruction, including $30 billion from u.s. taxpayers.

13:37:15.5 let's look at what we got for the money. despite spending $2 billion, iraq's oil production is stilwell below prewar levels, running about a half million barrels below 2003 levels. we've invested $4 billion into

13:37:37.0 improving electricity generation. not only is the administration 2,000 megawatts short of reaching its goal for peak output, but generation is actually below prewar levels.

13:37:51.9 and we spent $6 billion on oil production and electricity generation, and we've actually lost ground. the situation is the same for drinking water.

13:38:03.6 in essence, we've squandered $50 billion. profiteering has been rampant, but the taxpayer has been gouged and the work hasn't gotten done. and what's especially shameful

13:38:19.9 about the wasteful spending is that we needed this money for our troops. when we first went into iraq, our troops didn't have enough body armor. families had to purchase armor off the internet and ship it to iraq in a desperate attempt to protect their loved ones.

13:38:36.2 on congressional delegations, individual service members have taken our staffs aside and begged for more night vision goggles. patriotic americans even had to donate their frequent flier

13:38:52.5 miles when they were dumped at the baltimore airport could make it home for the holidays. this shouldn't have happened. this is inexcusable that our troops are lacking essential gear while billions of dollars

13:39:09.1 were wasted away. to understand the magnitude of this, there's no better place to start than halliburton. halliburton is the largest private contractor operating in iraq. the company has three contracts that total more than $20

13:39:25.1 billion. we now know that the political appointees, not career civil servants, decided to give halliburton a secret no-bid contract worth $7 billion to operate iraq's oil fields.

13:39:41.1 as gao has reported, the key decision led to the award of the secret contract violated federal procurement law. when a career attorney properly objected, he was simply

13:39:54.5 overruled. and despite statements from the vice president, we now know that his chief of staff, scooter libby, was personally briefed on this entire plan months before the war. the decision to give these

13:40:10.7 lucrative contracts to halliburton has been expensive. according to pentagon audits, halliburton's total, unreasonable and unsupported charges exceed $1.4 billion. well, the examples of waste,

13:40:27.5 fraud and abuse are numerous, halliburton charged $45 for a case of soda, $00 for a 15-pound bag of laundry. and when they had brand new $85,000 halliburton trucks,

13:40:45.6 they abandoned them or torched them if they had a flat tire or experienced minor mechanical troubles. halliburton is reimbursed for all of its costs and then receives an extra percentage as

13:41:02.7 additional profit. in practical terms, this means that the more halliburton spends the richer it gets. now we talked to former halliburton employees who worked in iraq. they told us the informal company motto was, don't worry

13:41:18.8 about price. it's cost plus. halliburton was supposed to be in iraq to provide support for the troops, but the company used one standard for the troops and a different standard

13:41:33.7 for its executives. they stated the five star -- they stayed at the five star hotel in kuwait where it cost taxpayers $10,000 per day. this gorgeous hotel had maid

13:41:50.7 service, complimentary fruit baskets to halliburton employees. our troops stayed intense in the desert. -- stayed in tents in the desert. one asked halliburton to move its employees into air-conditioned tents but they

13:42:07.3 refused. to their credit, career government auditors identified these overcharges when they examined halliburton's second

13:42:22.4 contract, they harshly criticized their performance finding exhosh tent indirect

13:42:32.6 costs but their recommendations were rejected. after reviewing halliburton's first oil contract in iraq, auditors recommended that the army not pay $263 million in unreasonable unsupported

13:42:50.7 charges. but they ignored these charges and paid them $254 million. and despite the auditor's findings, halliburton was made

13:43:02.8 nearly $100 million in profits and bonuses for overbilling taxpayers. well, halliburton is not the only contractor abusing the system. parsons received a contract to rebuild health clinics

13:43:19.1 throughout iraq, but despite spending $186 million, parsons completed just 20 of 142 health clinics they promised to build. another firm, custard battles, received two security

13:43:34.8 contracts. a federal jury recently found that the company committed 37 separate acts of fraud. these aren't isolated instances. there are over 70 corruption investigations currently under way in iraq.

13:43:49.8 these cases involve allegations of fraud, false claims, theft, bribery and kickbacks. some of the worst problems in iraq are almost beyond comprehension. the u.s. management of the developed fund for iraq, which

13:44:06.5 was the fund that held the proceeds of iraqi oil sales is a classic example of what not to do. the coalition provisional authority handed out over $8.8 billion in cash, in cash, to iraqi ministries, and they had

13:44:25.7 no idea what happened to the money. $8 billion in cash simply vanished. one former u.s. official who was in iraq at the time, frank willis, described conditions as the wild west.

13:44:41.1 he said the lack of controls effectively created a free fraud zone. iraq was awash in brand-new $100 bills with no accountability to prevent corruption.

13:44:56.2 and all the while, the white house looked the other way, and congress put its head in the sand. under the constitution we are supposed to be a check and balance, but we've advocated

13:45:13.5 this responsibility. they are terrific at applauding the president and they're proving it again today with this dishonest resolution. congress isn't doing the serious and important work it must do to protect our troops, rebuild iraq, look out for

13:45:29.3 american taxpayers, congress must be more than a cheerleading section for the white house. the fiasco in iraq was a windfall for some. halliburton made more than $2 billion in profits last year.

13:45:46.3 its entire revenue was increased 66% since 2002. and another beneficiary was david brooks, he's the ceo of a company that makes bullet proof vests. in 2001 mr. brooks reportedly earned $525,000.

13:46:01.5 in 2004, he earned $70 million. last year the u.s. marines recalled more than 5,000 of the company's armored vests, but by that time mr. brook his pocketed $186 million.

13:46:19.3 well, the american people might think that congress would rise up in the face of such unconscienciable profit tears when our troops are willing to sacrifice so much and they do sacrifice so much.

13:46:31.9 how can we let others create cynical fortunes off their blood? as we debate this resolution, 2,500 of our bravest men and women have been killed in iraq. over 18,000 have been wounded.

13:46:50.0 and the total cost of the iraq war is over $300 billion. those of us privileged to serve here have been spared any of the personal consequences of being on the frontline.

13:47:04.7 but we should not be spared the responsibility of doing our job. we owe more to our troops than slapping, i support troops bump are stickers on our car and exel toing their courage.

13:47:20.1 instead of wasting time on partis an charades, we should acknowledge and fix the mistakes so that iraqis can take over and our troops can

13:47:31.2 come home. and we owe more than empty promises to american families who are paying for this costly war in iraq. they -- an additional one minute. they count on us to make sure that their money is spent well

13:47:46.7 and we haven't done that. and an honest unsparing look at the record of these past three years tells us a stark truth, the white house and congress have failed our troops, the taxpayers and the iraqi people.

13:48:01.6 they deserve better than a partis an resolution that pats ourselves and the white house on the back. it's shameful that we're squandering money on hall you burton at the very same time that we don't have money to protect our troops, and it's shameful that congress has

13:48:20.1 advocated its responsibilities to rein in the incompetence and efforts that have undermined our efforts in iraq.>i yield myself as much time

13:48:35.8 as i will consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.>mr. speaker, this resolution in front of us today is about an urgent proposition. we are a nation at war, a

13:48:53.4 nation at war with radical islammists, the war was not of our choosing, but it is the central struggle of our time. the first major conflict of the information age.

13:49:06.8 this debate is a defining one for the house and for our nation. it's important to begin by explaining that the threats that we face are real. they are serious and they are ongoing. we must address these threats by continuing to confront them aggressively rather than shying

13:49:26.4 away from them because they are difficult. we begin the debate framing four fundamental issues that define the war with radical islam. first, our nation is engaged in

13:49:42.1 a long-term war, that war didn't begin on 9/11. we should maybe look back to 2-26. february 26, 1993, perhaps is when had war really did begin

13:49:57.9 to come into focus. what happened on february 26, 1993? that was when the world trade center was attacked for the first time. second, al qaeda views iraq as

13:50:12.7 a central front in its war against western democracies. bin laden's stated goal is to establish a global muslim center that includes iraq and zarqawi was operating in iraq

13:50:29.0 long before american troops entered that country. third, al qaeda is a sophisticated enemy in the first war of the information age. and a war against terrorism, a critical battle, is over intelligence.

13:50:43.1 we must use every means that are at our disposal to attain information about our enemies and encounter their sophisticated nothing war. and, fourth, our nation must recognize how this battle is evolving. we need to recognize the threat

13:50:59.8 of homegrown terrorism. homegrown terrorism that's already been experienced in spain, the united kingdom, australia, the netherlands, and most recently canada. we're a nation at war. america has been in an armed

13:51:16.6 struggle with radical islam for 15 years. the first clear declaration was the attack on the first -- on the world trade center. six dead, 1,000 wounded. the kobar towers were attacked

13:51:33.8 in june of 1996, our embassies were attacked in kenya and tanzania in august of 1998, and the u.s.s. cole was attacked in october of 2000. in 1996, bin laden declared war

13:51:51.1 against the united states. throughout the 1990's there were multiple attacks, almost 300 people were killed, and there was a minimal u.s. response.

13:52:04.3 no one in the 1990's connected the but this war is not limited to the united states. it's a global war against western democracies. our enemies are active across the globe and they must be

13:52:22.4 countered, not just by the united states, but by our allies. i would like to-year-old yield to the chairwoman of our

13:52:31.1 tactical subcommittee for further explanation about the long-term focus of this war. i will yield.>i think it's important for americans to understand that the war on terror did not begin on a cool september morning.

13:52:44.2 that this was something that had been building over a decade or longer. in february of 1993, radical islammist operatives drove a truck into the basement of the world trade center and blew it

13:52:58.6 up. 1,000 people were injured, and six people died. and we treated it as a crime, not an act of international terror. on june 25, 1996, american airmen who were conducting operations in the southern no-fly zone in iraq, were

13:53:16.2 settling in for the night in their quarters in saudi arabia in a building known as the khobar towers when a sewage truck drove into the compound, and backed up to the wall of that building and the people who drove it fled in a white

13:53:29.7 car. they were seen from the roof of the building by the security forces and they started evacuating the building. they were about three floors down when the truck exploded and 19 airmen were killed. in august of 1998, we were here

13:53:47.8 in this house when we got word that our two embassies, one in kenya and one in tanzania had been attacked by bombs. the u.s. attorney in the district of new york got 17 indictments, one of them for a

13:54:02.3 man whose name wasn't really well known at the time, his name is osama bin laden. in october of 2000, the u.s.s. cole was in yemen when a small boat came up next to it and exploded, tearing a gash 40

13:54:21.6 feet-by-60 feet, and 17 sailors died. and all of these acts we treated as isolated nances. we played defense ineffectively against a transnational,

13:54:38.3 loosely connected regimists who use terrorism to bring about their dark vision of the future. the adherence to this movement, the par sights who thrive in weak states and in failed

13:54:51.7 regimes, and that is why the terrorists made iraq a central front in their war. if they could keep self-government in iraq from being born, they could thrive in the chaos and continue their

13:55:07.8 attacks on us. that is why it is important to see it through in iraq. we made a decision after 9/11 that we would play offense and not defense.

13:55:23.6 as americans know, the enterprise that we're engaged in is difficult and requires persistence and resolve that is very hard on some days, it's very hard for us to understand why it's important to stay the course. but we know this, our enemies

13:55:41.2 are persistent and will stay the course. they won't stop if we ignore them. so that is the choice we face as a nation and why this debate today is so important. it's a choice between resolve

13:55:56.0 and retreat. and for me and my family, i choose resolve.>reclaiming my time, i thank the gentlelady for her comments.

13:56:09.7 a quote from swraswraw harry to zarqawi in july 2005. it's been my belief that the victory of islam will never take place until a muslim state is established in the manner of the prophet in the heart of the islamic world, end of quote.

13:56:28.0 al qaeda views iraq as a central part of this global war on terror. i'd like to yield to my colleague from michigan, mr. rogers. mr. rogers: thank you. mr. chairman and mr. speaker, iraq is the central front on the war on terror, despite what

13:56:41.8 you hear, despite the pointing out of problems in a very difficult task. we ought not be asking politicians here in washington, we ought to listen to our enemy. osama bin laden, quote, this third world war is raging in iraq.

13:56:57.6 the whole world is watching this war. it will end in victory or glory, or it will end in misery and humiliation. and to point along with what you talked about earlier, mr. chairman, from that letter to zawahiri to zarqawi, he went on to say that the prophet in the heart of the islam world,

13:57:16.7 specifically egypt, neighboring states of the peninsula and iraq. they have declared war against the united states, and all those who seek to find

13:57:28.3 democracy and peaceful solutions. a terrorist that dal was killed in baghdad in 2002. zarqawi and his network were operating in iraq and the kurdish region of iraq a year

13:57:41.7 before the start of the war. as a matter of fact, from that base of operations they executed the assassination of an american diplomat in jordan in 2002. our troops found suicide vest factories that had 800 suicide

13:58:00.5 vests equipped and ready to go in south baghdad in april of 2003. iraq was on the state department's sponsor of terrorism list. saddam hussein paid $25,000 cash to the family of suicide bombers in izzrame. -- israel.

13:58:15.2 you know with every sacrifice made by our great american soldiers, for every girl that now walks in iraq and baghdad and goes to school, for every young mother that goes to a medical clinic to get treatment where there was none before, for every dead terrorist in

13:58:31.5 iraq, we make progress every day. one platoon sergeant in iraq, and i quote, i have yet to speak to an american here who thinks we're losing. trust me, no soldier wants to be here. no one wants to cut and run either.

13:58:45.8 leaving would send the wrong signal to our enemies. there's only two groups of people who want america to leave and withdraw in humiliation from iraq. president bush met with the shiia and the sunni and the kurds just recently, just this last week, and none of them,

13:59:02.6 even the sunnis, wanted the united states to leave. as a matter of fact, they asked for reassurance that we would stay with them in this difficult and tough struggle for freedom. and that would leave only the terrorists who want an early american withdraw, and some

13:59:19.5 politicians in this town. i would listen to what our enemies said. and zarqawi declared, we have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who seek to enact it they will kill american

13:59:35.6 families at any given opportunity. i would say, mr. speaker, that we should stand with our soldiers, we should stand with our families here who help to take the fight to the terrorists overseas, we should stand for victory, and we should stand with the united states of america, and mr.

13:59:50.7 chairman, i would yield back the remainder of my time. mr. hoekstra: i thank my colleague from michigan for those comments. the other thing that we have learned is that this is the first war of the information age. the information age provides some unique opportunities to our enemy.

[DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SENATOR JOHN KERRY (D-MASS) REMARKS ON ADAPTING MILTIARY TO DEAL WITH TERRORISM THREATS / RS 119]

[INDEPENDENCE, MO USA]

DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SENATOR JOHN KERRY (D-MASS) REMARKS ON ADAPTING MILITARY TO DEAL WITH TERRORISM THREATS / RS 119

[KERRY - Speech on "adapting our military to deal with new threats of terrorism," Harry S Truman Library, 500 West Hwy 24, Independence, MO]

12:35:49 Thank you General Wilson for that kind introduction, and thank you all for coming today. General Wilson is the quintessential example of what we mean by the opportunity Army. He rose from private to Commander of the Army Materiel Command, supplying the Army with everything from beans, to bullets, to boots. And I'm delighted that he's with us today.

12:40:15 I can't tell you what a treat it is for me to stand here this afternoon in this remarkable library celebrating a remarkable man. In word and deed, Harry Truman embodied the highest ideals of the Greatest Generation. He desegregated our armed forces. He created the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe from the ground up, and gave life to the United Nations and NATO. And he set this nation and the world on a wise and patient path to win the Cold War without a third World War.

12:41:11 President Truman understood that our military is only as good as the men and women in its ranks. And I know that he would be as proud of the soldiers who serve this country today as he was of those who sacrificed for our country sixty years ago.

12:41:32 In the spirit of all the men and women in uniform we honor at this time every year, let me offer this pledge: As President, I will always remember that America's security begins and ends with the soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine - with every man and every woman in our armed services standing a post somewhere in the world. Today, we salute each and every one of them for their commitment, strength, and extraordinary courage - especially those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. They, like all veterans of wars past, deserve our prayers and then, when they come home, they deserve the respect and support of a grateful nation. After all, the first definition of patriotism is to keep faith with those who have worn the uniform of the United States.

12:43:04 And the first duty of a commander in chief is To make America strong and keep Americans safe. A week ago in Seattle, I outlined a new strategy of national security based on four imperatives. First, we must lead strong alliances for the post 9-11 world. Second, to secure our full independence and freedom, we must free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil. Third, in addition to our military might, we must deploy all that is in America's arsenal - our diplomacy, our intelligence, our economic power, and the power of our values and ideas.

12:44:08 And fourth is the imperative I will discuss today: We must modernize the world's most powerful military to meet new and different threats. The Bush Administration was right to call for the "transformation" of the military. But their version of transformation was directed at fighting classic conventional wars, rather than the dangers we now face in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in the war against al Qaeda. To rise to the challenges we face, we must strengthen our military, including our Special Forces; improve our technology; and task our National Guard with Homeland Security.

And there's a reason I decided to come here, to the birthplace of President Truman, to deliver this speech. In 1945, Franklin Roosevelt died unexpectedly, leaving his vice president of only eighty-three days, Harry S Truman, to finish a war that had claimed the lives of 400,000 Americans. Beyond the war, the new President inherited a shattered Europe and a divided world, with the warmth of democracy on one side and the chill of communism on the other.

In describing what he saw before him that day, Harry Truman said: "I feel as though the moon and all the stars and all the planets have fallen upon me." In many ways, they had. But that plain spoken son of Missouri rose to a responsibility as grave as any given to any President. In a world divided between freedom and tyranny, his decisions set a course that saved the future of humanity.

To contain communism, and build a mighty alliance, Truman had to rebuild our military both to deter conventional aggression and the threat of nuclear weapons, because, as he put it, "The will for peace without the strength for peace is of no avail." He modernized our armed forces by creating the Department of Defense and the Air Force - the greatest change in our nation's military structure since the beginning of the Republic.

Today, in the post 9-11 world, we stand at another historic crossroad, at another moment when the old enemy is gone but we face a new threat. We must change if we are to meet and defeat the danger. We must reshape our military and prepare it for the risks and tasks of a new era.

Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and its copycat killers are claiming the right to execute the innocent. They confuse murder with martyrdom and fanaticism with faith. They use terror as a sword and religion as a shield.

They present the central national security challenge of our generation. But they are unlike any other adversary our nation has ever confronted. They have no president, capital city, territory, army, or national identity. We are not absolutely certain how they are organized or how many operatives they have. But we know the destruction they can inflict. We saw it here in America on September 11th. We saw it in Bali and in Madrid, and across the Middle East. And now we see it day after day in Iraq.

To defeat these threats, we must draw on the four imperatives I described earlier - especially the need to modernize America's military.

Despite all its talk of transforming that military, the Bush Administration has done far too little to adapt our forces to the new missions they must undertake.

We went into Iraq with too few troops to prevent looting and crime, and we failed to secure nearly a million tons of conventional weapons now being used against our troops. We failed to build alliances and squandered the opportunity to generate wider support inside Iraq, in the Arab world, and among the major powers. These mistakes have complicated our mission: a stable Iraq with a representative government secure in its borders.

But as hard as it is to believe, there is little evidence that this Administration has learned from its mistakes. The rhetoric of toughness is not enough to make us safe. We need tough decisions to strengthen the American military, so we can find and get the terrorists before they get us. As President, I will build a highly-trained military, with more ground troops and Special Forces not just to win war, but to win the peace.

Instead of over-relying on weapons and tactics to fight the battles of the past, against enemies out in the desert or on open seas, we must build mobile and modern forces to prevail against terrorists hiding in caves or in the heart of a city. We must broaden our capabilities to create a military ready for any mission, from armored battle to urban warfare to homeland security. Yes, we must invest in missile defense. But not at the cost of other pressing priorities. We cannot afford to spend billions to deploy an unproven missile defense system. Not only is it not ready, but it's the wrong priority for a war on terror where the enemy strikes with a bomb in the back of a truck, or a vial of anthrax in a briefcase.

This is part of a larger problem. From day one, this Administration has been obsessed with threats from other states -- instead of opening their eyes to the perils of the new century: terrorist organizations with or without ties to rogue nations and failed states that can become their sanctuaries. These are the enemies our military is facing. And this is where we must train, arm, and equip our military to win.

In addition, we must secure our own democracy and our own borders. Homeland security must be a top priority of the president. Today, it's too often something this Administration just pays lip service to when the cameras are rolling.

We can't meet the new threats of this new century with a military from the last one. We must always be ready for strategic and conventional missions. But we must also be committed to build the strongest possible military to meet the new and greatest threats. I'm running for president to build a new military for a new time.

My first order of business as commander in chief will be to expand America's active duty forces. Not to increase the number of soldiers in Iraq, but to add 40,000 new soldiers to prevent and prepare for other possible conflicts. The fact is, the war in Iraq has taken a real toll on our armed services. Nine out of ten active duty Army divisions - eighty percent of the Army's active duty combat divisions - are committed to Iraq, either currently there, preparing to go, or recently returned. That is a dangerous and potentially disastrous course that limits our capacity to respond to other crises.

The war has been especially tough on the Army's critical post-war specialists. Civil affairs. Military police. Combat support units. Psychological operations units. All are in short supply. All are nearly exhausted.

To pick up the slack, since 9-11, we've called up our Guard and Reserves at historic levels. Currently there are more than 165,000 Guardsman and Reservists on active duty. In fact, 40 percent of our forces in Iraq are from the Reserve and the Guard. They are America's workers, doctors, mechanics, and first-responders. Some have been on the ground in Iraq for as many as 15 months - much longer than was expected or promised. And many of these units are being pushed the limit.

The people of Missouri understand this situation well. More than 800 of your sons and daughters have had their deployments extended and their homecomings delayed. The Administration is even planning to send troops from the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment to Iraq -- a unit whose primary mission has been to prepare other units for future deployments.

The effect is clear: our soldiers are stretched too thin. The Administration's answer has been to put band-aids on the problem. They have effectively used a stop-loss policy as a back door draft. They have extended tours of duty, delayed retirements, and prevented enlisted personnel from leaving the service. Just yesterday, the Army announced this would affect even more soldiers whose units are headed to Iraq and Afghanistan. By employing these expedients, they've increased the forces by 30,000 troops.

But this has happened on the backs of the men and women who've already fulfilled their obligation to the armed forces and to our country - and it runs counter to the traditions of an all-volunteer military. Because they're serving one tour after another, our soldiers are not getting the training they need or the rest they deserve. Military families are under incredible strain as it becomes harder and harder to balance the demands of family life and military duty. This is especially true at a time when more than half of our military is married - a dramatic increase since Vietnam. When you add it up, we are in danger of creating another hollow Army - a grave concern that I've heard time and again over the last few months from active duty personnel. I heard it in Pittsburgh from an Army Reserve Captain who had just returned from Iraq. Like me, he fears that our military will not be ready for the next mission. That's not the way to make America safer.

The 40,000 new troops I am adding will not be soldiers who've already been on the front lines, but new volunteers trained and ready to defend their country. And this will help relieve the strain on our troops; it will bring more of our soldiers, guardsmen and reservists back home to their families and get them time for the new training they need.

But numbers alone won't win the war in Iraq or the war on terror. We need to create a "New Total Force." Our military must be prepared to defeat any enemy, anytime, any place. And our soldiers must be capable of success in any conflict.

As president, I will double our Special Forces capability to fight the war on terror. That's the second part of my plan to modernize the military. Our Special Forces are the troops who land behind enemy lines, conduct counter-terrorism operations, perform reconnaissance missions, and gather intelligence. In Afghanistan, after September 11th, they took the fight to the Taliban with remarkable creativity. They also train local forces to take on the responsibilities themselves and they build the relationships that are vital for our victory in the war on terror. We saw what they could do during the Iraq war, when two teams of American Green Berets totaling 31 men worked with Kurdish troops to defeat an Iraqi force numbering in the hundreds. The victory at the battle of Debecka Pass is a tribute to the flexibility, training, and courage of American Special Forces - all essential to winning the war on terror.

We must also recognize that the battle itself is only half the mission. In any conflict, we need an expanded, well-trained force, with soldiers prepared for both war and its aftermath.

As President, I will also increase our civil affairs personnel - those who arrive on the scene after the conflict is over and help win the peace. They work with local leaders and officials to get the schools back in shape, the hospitals reopened, and banks up and running.

We also need - and a Kerry Administration will provide - more military police, because public order is a critical step to winning the peace. At the same time, we should move greater responsibility for non-military missions to civilian agencies to ease the burden on our troops.

As President, I will build a modern military, with the best trained troops and the most modern equipment and technology. That's the third part of my plan. The war in Iraq has left us with a hefty bill to pay. Our equipment is worn from the daily assault of battle and the harsh effects of an unforgiving desert. We must repair, replace, and upgrade it to maintain the highest level of readiness.

We can't have a 21st century military unless we're using 21st century technology and preparing our forces for 21st century threats. We need a military that is equipped for the next fight, not the last one. That means educating, training, and arming every soldier with state-of-the-art equipment, whether it's body armor or weapons. And it means employing the most sophisticated communications to help our troops prevail and protect themselves in battle. Right now, the technology exists to let a soldier see what's over the next hill or around the next bend in the road. Every soldier in every unit should have access to that modern breakthrough, which can be the difference between life and death. As president, I will see to it that they do.

I will also accelerate the development of non-lethal technologies, like directed energy weapons, that can incapacitate the enemy, without risking the lives of innocent bystanders. The need for this technology is driven by pure military strategy. With more of the world's populations living in cities, it's more critical than ever that our military be able to carry out their missions with the least harm to civilians. As we saw in Fallujah and Najaf, our forces may advance on the ground, but innocent casualties can cost us victory in the minds of the people. This is especially true in the war on terror, where our forces must track down leaders and their cells no matter where they're hiding, even if it's in the center of a densely populated city.

Technology also plays a critical role in keeping the worst weapons out of the hands of rogue states and terrorists. On Tuesday, I proposed a broad agenda to limit the spread of nuclear weapons and material. But we must recognize if the worst does happen, and dangerous weapons technology falls into the wrong hands, the President must have at his disposal every instrument of force necessary to destroy those weapons before they are used against the United States, its citizens, or its allies. Before the war in Afghanistan, there were troubling reports that our military lacked forces specifically trained and targeted to seizing and dismantling nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. We simply can't win the war on terror if we can't control the world's most lethal weapons. As president, I will build new forces that specialize in finding, securing, and destroying weapons of mass destruction and the facilities that build them.

However, technology alone isn't the answer. We must educate and train our forces differently. This commitment to innovation must be wedded to a continuing investment in the men and women of the American military. Their training, education, and professional development will transform this new technology into real military power.

But one thing we've all learned in the war on terror is that America can't lead abroad unless we're secure at home. While this Administration has taken steps to protect our borders, they've left out a key asset in the fight on terror - our National Guard. The Guard has kept our nation safe since the militias gathered at Lexington and Concord. They've served in every war, and they're serving now. In fact, after September 11th, they were the first ones called on to line city streets, guard bridges, and patrol our airports.

But today, too many of them are far away from home and the Guard as a whole is not integrated into an effective strategy for homeland security. The National Guard was intended to complement, not be a substitute for, active duty forces. Sending thousands of National Guard members to Iraq has actually weakened our ability to defend our own country. Members of the Guard are first responders across the country - fire fighters, police officers, and emergency medical technicians. To take them out of their communities is to take down a critical first line of defense. That's no way to protect America.

As president, I will make homeland security one of the primary missions of the National Guard. While the military can't solve the entire homeland security challenge, the National Guard can make an important contribution to the mission. That's the fourth part of my plan - modernizing our National Guard. I will assign Guard units to a standing joint task force, commanded by a General from the Guard. This task force will prepare and, if necessary, execute a coordinated strategy for homeland safety, working with the states and the federal government to react in times of crisis.

Just as it was in the time of Harry Truman, and in all the years of the Cold War, the job of commander in chief is now central to the presidency. As President, I will use military force to protect our interests anywhere in the world, whenever necessary. But strong leadership demands more than the willingness to use force. It means directing the use of the right tools at the right time for the right purpose and the right cause. Only then will we be strong and respected around the world.

Strong leadership means striking a balance between the Department of Defense and the other agencies focused on America's national security. It means coordinating our national power rather than competing for bureaucratic power. It means building a first-rate intelligence community, because no president can act wisely without it.

Strong leadership means listening to and respecting the advice, wisdom, and experience of our professional military - and never letting ideology trump the truth. It means working with Congress in a bipartisan fashion to make our military stronger.

Strong leadership means setting goals for a new military, insisting on progress, and seeing the mission through to success.

Strong leadership means building alliances to help win the war on terror and stem the spread of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

If Harry Truman were standing here today, I know that he would believe, as I do, that America's strength demands a new military for a new time - what he once called "the strongest, toughest and most enduring forces in the world."

Above all, as President, I will never forget the pledge with which I began today: I will always remember that our security and our strength begins with a single soldier, standing a single post somewhere in the world. And we should be grateful to men and women willing to do it, with such grace and such courage. Thank you and God bless America.

CHERTOFF

Secretary of Department of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff

makes remarks on the future direction of the Department of

Homeland Security

March 16, 2005

SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY MICHAEL CHERTOFF REMARKS ON

FUTURE DIRECTION OF HOMELAND SECURITY DEPARTMENT

RS23/ X86/ Slugged: 0930 CHERTOFF X86

09:41:18 Chertoff to podium

09:41:37 ws, push to Chertoff at podium

09:41:43 how much of a fraction will I still have to testify at. call you skip. And frank, secretary ridge has advised me to call you often, and I will

09:42:07 our nations security. The homeland security policy institute here at.at such a distinguished forum. when the president offered me the position

09:42:30 for my father, world war II was the calling of his generation and now winning this war against terror is the calling of our generation

09:42:56 defense of the values to which this nation has long

09:43:06 as a nation we have every reason to be resolute about our fight against terror.and every reason to act urgently

09:43:23 of course as with the cold war we know this struggle will not be won for years to come. This is a marathon not a sprint.vision that balances

09:43:42 with the American way of life and the values that we cherish, now what does that involve.incorporates.into our lives as to respect

09:44:03 one large element of this will be giving people options.at our borders they can achieve it by agreeing to provide

09:44:23 that tradeoff will be their choice. Another element is trust. We will earn public trust...a time when security measure

09:44:50 mindful or risks but not encumbered by fear.so how do we get there. First we must realize that homeland security is one piece.first involves bringing the battle to the enemy

09:45:18 terrorist threats abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. defend themselves against

09:45:33 to plot how to get by our own defenses.diminishing the threat. First the intelligence we gave

09:45:47 by taking the fight to our enemies we keep them on the run

09:45:55 but while one key to defense is offense. that means even as we pursue terrorists oversees we work here.to protect our people and our places if infiltration occurs

09:46:23 this is embodied in our strategy.what defense action does not and cannot mean.because what we are trying to protect

09:46:43 America is a dynamic country.sum of every generation that has ever been born in or immigrated to

09:46:58 and innovation of our own people and we prosper through the.global economic community. A nation as vital and thriving as ours

09:47:18 by the existence of threats. That is why we need to adopt a risk based approach.fundamentally managing the threat

09:47:37 our decision as we examine how we can best organize.dept of homeland security is working with state local and.that targets resources where the risk is the greatest.something bad can happen and we adjust our lives

09:48:08 let me give you a simple example.pursue this kind of perfect security because we understand

09:49:11 note of caution because the media and the public often focus on the threat.terrorist attack on the two lane bridge

09:49:32 other end of the spectrum we know even that a remote threat. because of the catastrophic effect.that are attached to it. As consequence increases, we have to respond

09:50:00 so our strategy.manage risk in terms of these three variables. to fashion a serious

09:50:16 and when I say. these of course

09:51:52 every single person. this system we can pull. so US-VISIT adds one powerful

09:52:07 other layers of defense against terrorists.federal standards for notification.this layered approach is designed

09:52:26 at the same time each of these players. innocent citizens.airline security is one obvious place

09:52:50 prepare for future dangers, how do we avoid.fighting the last war and distracting from those

09:53:04 examine the mission and work of all the elements.consequence, vulnerability and threat

09:53:17 and what more needs to be done.other questions, I have initiated a comprehensive review.over the course of the next

09:54:09 through that prison.adjusting the structure operations and policies to execute.

09:54:46 we all have a roll to play. two years now it has been the dept of homeland securities announcement.and preparedness measures

09:55:03 to intelligence, powerful investigative tools.on its own. To complete our mission we must and do count on our.true partnership that protecting.share information but we also share responsibility

09:55:38 bare a part of the security.federal govt dispatches.high risk cargo, at the same time we look to the companies to ship this high risk cargo. in other words their own layered system of security

09:56:09 we can provide our own level of security protection.but our partners who own.we have to guide

09:56:26 pathogen detectors.and again multi-layered security systems. bar against evil human interest

09:56:47 we want to look more closely about how we can.to strengthen relationships with other countries.security intelligence sharing

09:57:09 look forward to meeting with deputy foreign minister in Canada.all of these exchanges.from day one this department has looked...for international travel and trade. Like you we believe we cannot live in

09:57:47 pursuing these shared goals. Finally and in some respects most importantly, the individual

09:58:07 that means we have to engage the public into a.cannot pretend that nothing bad can happen.the American people understand this and we have to respect

09:58:32 we cannot look in every container and every box.advance technology.to manage that risk and again we along with people all over the world.that we must now translate developing our strategy to manage risk in the war against terror

09:59:09 contemplating at least at one point.unfortunate outcome of the derailment.might have, that psychological difference

10:00:39 Churchill spoke to

10:00:51 quote. they know that they have behind. protect

10:01:01 but that we shall rather grow up in the heart. not only for ourselves, but for all

10:01:13 but for the long and better days to come, much can be said today

10:01:27 weigh the risks. for our own time

10:01:34 thank you very much.

FOR CLEAN VERSION SEE STORY NUMBER: 2051670

A remembrance ceremony was held on the Japanese island of Iwo Jima on Saturday to mark the 70th anniversary of one of the Second World War's bloodiest battles.

Dozens of US veterans, now in their 80s and 90s as well as US and Japanese officials flew to the island, where the US invasion began on 19 February 1945, and lasted 36 days.

The battle claimed 6,821 American and 21,570 Japanese lives.

Speaking at the ceremony, Ray Mabus, United States Secretary of the Navy said the "inferno of Iwo Jima" brought the two nations together.

"Our partnership developed in a wake of war and has grown ever stronger in the years since. Today the Unites States and Japan are inter dependent - they have cooperation from everything from international security to free trade. We depend on one another so that each nation may live in peace and prosperity," said Mabus.

Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani pledged to work hard to strengthen the US-Japan alliance which is "based on the sacrifice of those who perished" on Iwo Jima.

++QUALITY AS INCOMING++

DVIDS

Iwo Jima, Japan - 21 March 2015

1. US war veterans and Navy Secretary Ray Mabus laying wreath

2. Close of flowers

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Ray Mabus, United States Secretary of the Navy:

"Rising from the inferno of Iwo Jima our partnership developed in a wake of war and has grown ever stronger in the years since. Today the Unites States and Japan are interdependent. They have cooperation from everything from international security to free trade. We depend on one another so that each nation may live in peace and prosperity. America and Japan stand together today as sailors, marines, soldiers airmen, as nations and as friends."

4. Various of veterans, military and officials listening

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Ray Mabus, United States Secretary of the Navy:

"As partners we will face together whatever challenges the future brings, but we will never forget the lessons of our past. To overcome trying times we will invoke the character traits demonstrated by the battle for Iwo Jima - honor, courage, sacrifice."

6. Wide of military holding Japanese and US flags

7. Ceremonial gun salute

President George W. Bush delivers remarks at the 25th Anniversary

of ROTC Award Seminar at VMI

Virginia Military Institute

Lexington, VA

April 17, 2002

RS20 STIX&CUTS

10:15:37 Bush walks out..

10:15:52 Bush on stage

10:17:11 one of America's great institutions.I have brought a graduation present.. I am sure you will like it some of you will need it.. as commander in chief I hereby grant amnesty. general bunning I can tell who need it it. I think you will be generous.. I congratulate the winners..

10:18:40 the more than the 2169 members who represent it. officers who will serve the military in future and will one day lead it.

10:19:20 for nearly ninety this program has developed leaders.. thos looking for ideology o college campuses in America will find it on rotc. evey college and every university. powell was in the rotc.. in city college.. in the city college of new york.. inn his words the order and self discipline the pride .. that has been instilled in me by rotc prepared me well for my army career. service in vietnam top rank in military now on a peace mission in the middle east.. I am proud of an rotc graduate serving our country.. only one other armY general has gone on to serve .. that waw marshal. amry chief of staf.. he became architect of america's vitory in ww2

10:21:48 Truman consider him the greatest man he knew.. Churchill marshal always fought vitorirusly over defeatism.

10:22:16 marhals.. steadfast on courage and hope.. and today we are called to defend freedom against ruthless enemies.. and once again we need steadfastness courage and hope..it will not be enough to make the world safer must also work to make the world better I told the American people that this would be a different war fought on many fronts.. some cased we use military force.. inother wea re fighting thorugh diplomacy financial pressure on in special operation.. in acny case we will defeat the threats of our country in a civilized world.. our progress is measured day by day, terrorist by terrorists. we recently apprehended one of al-qaedas; top terrorist. he was spending time plotting and planning murderer he is not plotting an he is not planning any more.

10:25:01 he is under lock an key.. and we a re going to give him some company.we are hunting down the killers one by one we are learning a lot of al-qada and their plans.. they left some things behind.. lab top computers drawings and maps.. and their methods..

10:26:33 this war will not be quick and this war will not be easy.. our armed forces continue to perform with bravery and skill.. as we route out the taliban they were not sent out to conquer they were sent to liberate.. our military makes us proud..battles in afghanistan are not over. hunting down the al-qaeda and taliban force.. and keeping them on the run. intercepting ships terrorists and their supplies,,..

10:28:40 we are not going to repeat that mistake.in the us of america .. terrorist have faced a foe they never have before.. we are tough and we are relentless. We will stay until the mission is done. we know true peace.. will only e achieve.. peace will be achieved by helping afghainstan wih stable government. peace will be achieved through an education system for biys and girls that works.

10:30:15 we are working had in Afghanistan building roads. develop an economy that can feed its peoples without world demand for drugs.. we ill help them recover from taliban rule.we find evidence of horro in the region. red cross have found site of massacres.. this is the legacy of first regime to fall.. these mass graves.. They are the kind of evil we continue to fight. best traditions of marhsal.. he knew that our military victories had to be followed by another victory..

10:32:33 help rebuild a Japan that had been decimated by world war two. Europe and japan our are partners in rebuilding afgabistan. this show success of marshall. in our second pahae are helping countries around the world .. global terrorism will be defeated.. stop al-qaeda form moving to other countries. we are working with Yemen's government.. we send troops for local . in Georgia temporary help for Russian cell.

10:34:18 we and our friend will response and we will respond decisively.around the world the naitons must choose.

10:35:07 in the middle east where acts of terror have triggered mounting violence all parties have choice to make.. every leader every state must choose between 2 separate paths paths of peace or paths of terror. the entire world is witnessing the agonizing cost of this conflict every nation .. must workd to end terror.

10:36:11 all parties have responsibilities..these responsibilities are not easy but they are clear powell is helping make them clear..i want to thank powell for his hard work for a difficult . path he reurens home making progress for peace.. confronting decade old.. I will continue to lead for vision of peace.

10:37:17 we ill continue to remind folks they have responsibilities.. they must act.. in words of condemnation against terror.. israel must continue its withdrawals.. The Egyptians Jordanians and Saudis have helped and they must confront terrorism in the middle east.. al parties have a responsibility to stop inciting terrorr. all parties must say clearly that a murderer is not a martyr he or she is just a murderer.***

10:39:01 only vision for a long term solutions is two states Israel and Palestine living side to side in peace.. it will require hard choices.. time now for all to make the choice for peace,.***

10:39:54 a small number of outlaw regimes today possess and are developing nuclear weapons.. cultivating ties to terrorist groups. and their mad ambitions. thee regimes constitute and axis of eveill and a world must confront them..****

10:41:07 we will proceed with missile defenses.. america will take necessary action to oppose emerging critics.,.. we will work with our friends and allies. hold our day to defend freedom.

10:41:48 we will fight against terrorist organization with different tactics..with different ways and for different tactics.. our objections are always the same.. we will not allow the worlds most dangerous regimes to threaten us.

10:42:44 we believe tin the dignity and value of every individual.. America seeks hope and opportunity for all people.that is why we work for free trade.. children are sent to kill other children.

10:43:46 hatred and fanaticism are not the way of the future because the hopes of humanity are always stronger than it s haters. and these hopes are universal in every country and every culture men and women want to win with dignity.. to raise their children in peace and security. dignity requires the world of law..respect for women and children..

10:45:46 they are destined to change lives and nation on every continent.. george marhsla is admired for the war he fought. Marshall plan and rebuilding europe.. showed that America is not content with victory a lone.. America see a just and hopeful world beyond the war on terror.

10:46:50 may of you will help achieve this greater world you will serve our country and our values.. by your efforts and example you will advance and congratulate yo on the high honor you have received...

10:47:54 end of speech

10:52:09 bush waves to crowd.

11:00:50 CUTS CUTS CUTS CUTS

11:03:18 nice crowd shots of VMI in uniform. ts on young people in uniforms.

11:04:45 ts on uniforms and medals.

11:05:00 medium wide of bush at podium..

11:05:36 VMI student in uniform.

11:05:52 ws of event.

VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS - WOLFOWITZ&RIDGE

End of Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz address

Secretary of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge address to the Veterans

of Foreign Wars

VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS/ TOM RIDGE

RS24

March 11, 2003

Tape Two 1100 - 1200

10:57:29 for years nothing was done despite the .

10:57:48 eager for peace, opposed taking a firm stand

10:58:00 we should ask, how long should we wait and what are we waiting for

10:58:16 should we wait until the people inside Iraq that are prepared to help us give up.?

10:58:41 if the US wanted Iraqi oil, the US could have dropped its sanctions and let Saddam Hussein .

10:59:15 the world's most brutal tyranny

10:59:22 in Dearborn, Michigan. and how much they and their relatives back in Iraq want to be free of Saddam Hussein

10:59:46 over and over we hear reports of Iraqis here in the US

10:59:56 what they are hearing is amazing.

11:00:03 they want to know what is taking the Americans so long?

11:00:14 another leader at that same meeting said "please stop the war that is going on in Iraq, a war that Saddam Hussein is waging"

11:00:38 the mere absence of war is not peace

11:00:54 a plan that president Bush has said.

11:01:04 the Iraqis also recognize the economic.

11:01:19 in conclusion, I'd like to ask for your support

11:01:28 the war on terrorism is a tough and dangerous business

11:01:36 I would ask you to keep the men and women of the armed forces in your prayers

11:01:51 courage is a virtue that enables some people to go above and beyond.

11:02:03 general Omar Bradley described it as the.

11:02:12 in truth as you know much better than most, courage is .

11:02:25 young people in the US armed forces today are as courageous, well trained and dedicated as i

11:02:41 they showed the world what they are made of in Afghanistan..

11:02:54 I would ask you and all Americans to give them your full support

11:03:04 as you know from your own days in Uniform, they need to know that the country is behind them

11:03:19 God Bless you.

11:03:42 walk off and shaking hands

11:05:37 introduction to Tom Ridge

11:06:51 Tom Ridge at the podium

11:07:04 thank you commander for that wonderful introduction

11:07:20 I miss you. you know I love being our Government.

11:09:04 and so in times like this have the tendency to acknowledge.

11:09:26 its really great to be with you

11:09:29 this is a critical time for our Nation

11:09:36 some of our troops are over seas fighting.

11:09:43 bringing our enemies or bringing justice to our enemies one at a time

11:09:56 protect America and our way of lives. in the new department of Homeland security

11:10:08 they do a difficult job everyday and I believe they do it very very well

11:10:24 in this first difficult war of the 21st century

11:10:37 there are many ways to. homeland security

11:10:44 we realized we had to take immediate actions

11:10:52 we had to unify our homeland security efforts.

11:11:02 we have to deploy these men and women whenever and where ever they needed

11:11:21 and take on the responsibility .

11:11:28 one team, one enemy, one fight to protect our homeland and our way of life..

11:11:44 all the way to the day we opened our days. we thank you for that

11:11:55 so we've got the right structure in place now

11:12:03 the president and congress

11:12:57 to build a partnership with the states and local communities

11:13:12 prevent terrorist attacks, reduce our vulnerability .

11:13:25 at the very heart of our .

11:13:31 it will also integrate security conventions .

11:13:50 what an incredible country.

11:13:59 millions and millions come by plane and sea every single year

11:14:12 we'll begin part of that defensive layer at the boarders

11:14:46 and depending on what could happen there you can have a third person commanding ..

11:15:00 what we are going to do is re-organize.

11:15:10 the bureau of customs and boarder .

11:15:18 and the bureau of immigration and customs for people who are already here

11:15:32 but on sound and well enforced immigration laws

11:15:45 we are a nation of immigrants

11:15:54 they've got an extraordinary display of suitcases that have piled up since the statue of liberty beckoned

11:16:20 we are an incredible place because we are a nation of immigrants

11:16:41 make sure that . give them a visa, we want them to seek medical care.

11:16:55 plenty of reasons to come into our boarders. but when their time has expired we want to make sure that they have a good reason to stay..

11:17:29 we also know that its not just looking for terrorist that is part of the

11:17:45 we must distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate.

11:18:03 use people and technology and tie up in a much more

11:19:06 if you agree to secure this merchandise along this supply chain..

11:19:17 then we'll facilitate that passage of those goods.

11:19:40 we are going to spend nearly 50 million dollars this year on non-intrusive.

11:19:52 we also have non-intrusive technology .

11:20:02 because we can target shipments, we can do a better job of targeting our human resources to inspecting them

11:20:18 they are only inspecting two or three of the ships.

11:20:29 they board those ships for very specific reasons, they are not randomly selected

11:20:42 before they make the decision to board them

11:20:50 they also are beginning to deploy customs agents

11:21:03 we get almost two thirds of our cargo from. in the world

11:21:17 you want to push that perimeter out as far as you can

11:21:29 again significant process in the past 18 months, still a way to go

11:21:47 now I am privileged as the secretary of homeland security.

11:22:04 and they have been doing homeland security for two centuries plus and they've been doing a darn good job

11:22:27 since the attacks of September 11th.

11:22:34 in the past couple of years they have had 35 thousand port securities alone

11:22:46 since world war II, enough to place an additional 200 men and women.

11:22:59 and equip these extraordinary men and women with the equipment they need

11:23:14 a new department will be passed with a mission of analyzing threats

11:23:27 and then making sure that the.

11:23:40 the president has authorized for the first time ever the .

11:23:50 that gather intelligence, various means from around the world, but we've never had one single place.

11:24:05 so we will have some of our analysts. that will make our ability to harden America

11:24:27 and then finally our third objective, preparedness, and response and recovery

11:24:37 nearly a billion dollars for anti terrorism equipment training and exercises

11:24:53 our efforts will be aided. to spur research and developments

11:25:06 and get them working on high stakes.

11:25:15 we build an arsenal of democracy .

11:25:31 just as in WWII this homeland security army will be supported by the home front

11:25:42 terrorism gives Americans a choice. We can be afraid or we can be ready and we're not afraid of anything because we will be ready

11:26:03 the key person. duct tape.

11:26:15 my name was mentioned a couple of times in one or two night shows

11:26:28 if you see any good political cartoons out there, send them on in

11:26:48 I want to keep alive till thanksgiving or Christmas

11:26:59 this is the message . we've got professionals fighting terrorism around the world

11:27:16 they are in the CIA, in the FBI, they work on the boarders

11:27:29 what we want you to do is have a communication plan.

11:27:42 have this emergency supply kit

11:27:53 take the kids to school, enjoy being American

11:28:01 we will not surrender our way of life

11:28:06 armed with information and empowered to act we will take and make preparations .

11:28:17 not unlike those in other parts of the country who prepare for natural

11:28:41 we used to hide under the desk or leave the school, we found out later that neither one would have done much good

11:28:56 let's do this to be prepared and that's what the. campaign is about.

11:29:14 four of us, we have three dogs.

11:29:28 Michelle, always points out that these steps aren't that different than what her family did in the fifties

11:29:55 common sense, its community service.

11:30:03 VFW has always been about service in one way or the other

11:30:13 so I believe when the terrorist see the doors closing at our boarders..

11:30:30 and they see the strength of our military.

11:30:44 it can't help but discourage them.

11:31:09 well it's the terrorist's turn to be concerned about us. terrorist and tyrants do not scare Americans

11:31:30 they never have and they never will

11:31:38 they maybe a threat from time to time to our personal safety but they will never ever take away our freedoms.

11:31:56 deserve all the credit and the gratitude of this country

11:32:07 you are the ones who have already paid the price

11:32:17 we will never forget that and we vow never to let terrorists with their cowardliness what you have built with your courage

11:32:36 hand shake and thank you..

11:32:50 walk off

[2004 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE - BUSH/KERRY BUSH ISO 2100 - 2231]

THIRD PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE IN 2004 BETWEEN PRESIDENT GEORGE W. / GW BUSH AND DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE SENATOR JOHN KERRY IN TEMPE, ARIZONA / MODERATED BY BOB SCHIEFFER / ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY

GEORGE W BUSH ISO

21:01:41 SCHIEFFER: Good evening from Arizona State University in Tempe,

Arizona. I'm Bob Schieffer of CBS News. I want to welcome you to the

third and last of the 2004 debates between President George Bush and

Senator John Kerry.

As Jim Lehrer told you before the first one, these debates are

sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Tonight the topic will be domestic affairs, but the format will

be the same as that first debate. I'll moderate our discussion under

detailed rules agreed to by the candidates, but the questions and the

areas to be covered were chosen by me. I have not told the candidates

or anyone else what they are.

To refresh your memory on the rules, I will ask a question. The

candidate is allowed two minutes to answer. His opponent then has a

minute and a half to offer a rebuttal.

At my discretion, I can extend the discussion by offering each

candidate an additional 30 seconds.

A green light will come on to signal the candidate has 30 seconds

left. A yellow light signals 15 seconds left. A red light means five

seconds left.

SCHIEFFER: There is also a buzzer, if it is needed.

The candidates may not question each other directly. There are

no opening statements, but there will be two-minute closing

statements.

There is an audience here tonight, but they have agreed to remain

silent, except for right now, when they join me in welcoming President

George Bush and Senator John Kerry.

(APPLAUSE)

SCHIEFFER: Gentleman, welcome to you both.

By coin toss, the first question goes to Senator Kerry.

Senator, I want to set the stage for this discussion by asking

the question that I think hangs over all of our politics today and is

probably on the minds of many people watching this debate tonight.

And that is, will our children and grandchildren ever live in a

world as safe and secure as the world in which we grew up?

21:04:20 KERRY: Well, first of all, Bob, thank you for moderating

tonight.

Thank you, Arizona State, for welcoming us.

And thank you to the Presidential Commission for undertaking this

enormous task. We're proud to be here.

Mr. President, I'm glad to be here with you again to share

similarities and differences with the American people.

Will we ever be safe and secure again? Yes. We absolutely must

be. That's the goal.

Now, how do we achieve it is the most critical component of it.

I believe that this president, regrettably, rushed us into a war,

made decisions about foreign policy, pushed alliances away. And, as a

result, America is now bearing this extraordinary burden where we are

not as safe as we ought to be.

KERRY: The measurement is not: Are we safer? The measurement

is: Are we as safe as we ought to be? And there are a host of

options that this president had available to him, like making sure

21:05:08 that at all our ports in America containers are inspected. Only 95

percent of them -- 95 percent come in today uninspected. That's not

good enough.

People who fly on airplanes today, the cargo hold is not X-rayed,

but the baggage is. That's not good enough. Firehouses don't have

enough firefighters in them. Police officers are being cut from the

streets of America because the president decided to cut the COPS

program.

So we can do a better job of homeland security. I can do a

better job of waging a smarter, more effective war on terror and

guarantee that we will go after the terrorists.

KERRY: I will hunt them down, and we'll kill them, we'll capture

them. We'll do whatever is necessary to be safe.

But I pledge this to you, America: I will do it in the way that

21:05:48 Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan and John Kennedy and others did,

where we build the strongest alliances, where the world joins

together, where we have the best intelligence and where we are able,

ultimately, to be more safe and secure.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, you have 90 seconds.

BUSH: Thank you very much.

I want to thank Arizona State as well.

21:06:07 Yes, we can be safe and secure, if we stay on the offense against

the terrorists and if we spread freedom and liberty around the world.

I have got a comprehensive strategy to not only chase down the Al

Qaida, wherever it exists -- and we're making progress; three-quarters

of Al Qaida leaders have been brought to justice -- but to make sure

that countries that harbor terrorists are held to account.

21:06:33 As a result of securing ourselves and ridding the Taliban out of

Afghanistan, the Afghan people had elections this weekend. And the

first voter was a 19-year-old woman. Think about that. Freedom is on

the march.

We held to account a terrorist regime in Saddam Hussein.

BUSH: In other words, in order to make sure we're secure, there

must be a comprehensive plan.

My opponent just this weekend talked about how terrorism could be

reduced to a nuisance,

21:07:04 comparing it to prostitution, illegal gambling.

I think that attitude and that point of view is dangerous. I don't

think you can secure America for the long run if you don't have a

comprehensive view as to how to defeat these people.

At home, we'll do everything we can to protect the homeland. I

signed the homeland security bill to better align our assets and

resources. My opponent voted against it.

We're doing everything we can to protect our borders and ports.

21:07:30 But absolutely we can be secure in the long run. It just takes

good, strong leadership.

SCHIEFFER: Anything to add, Senator Kerry?

KERRY: Yes. When the president had an opportunity to capture or

kill Osama bin Laden, he took his focus off of them, outsourced the

21:07:43 job to Afghan warlords, and Osama bin Laden escaped.

KERRY: Six months after he said Osama bin Laden must be caught

dead or alive,

21:07:50 this president was asked, "Where is Osama bin Laden?"

He said, "I don't know. I don't really think about him very much.

I'm not that concerned."

We need a president who stays deadly focused on the real war on

terror.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:08:03 BUSH: Gosh, I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about

Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those exaggerations.

Of course we're worried about Osama bin Laden. We're on the hunt

after Osama bin Laden. We're using every asset at our disposal to get

Osama bin Laden.

My opponent said this war is a matter of intelligence and law

enforcement.

21:08:20 No, this war is a matter of using every asset at our

disposal to keep the American people protected.

SCHIEFFER: New question, Mr. President, to you.

21:08:35 We are talking about protecting ourselves from the unexpected,

but the flu season is suddenly upon us. Flu kills thousands of people

every year.

Suddenly we find ourselves with a severe shortage of flu vaccine.

How did that happen?

21:08:54 BUSH: Bob, we relied upon a company out of England to provide

about half of the flu vaccines for the United States citizen, and it

turned out that the vaccine they were producing was contaminated. And

so we took the right action and didn't allow contaminated medicine

into our country.

21:09:18 We're working with Canada to hopefully -- that they'll produce a

-- help us realize the vaccine necessary to make sure our citizens

have got flu vaccinations during this upcoming season.

My call to our fellow Americans is if you're healthy, if you're

younger, don't get a flu shot this year. Help us prioritize those who

need to get the flu shot, the elderly and the young.

BUSH: The CDC, responsible for health in the United States, is

setting those priorities and is allocating the flu vaccine

accordingly.

I haven't gotten a flu shot, and I don't intend to because I want

to make sure those who are most vulnerable get treated.

We have a problem with litigation in the United States of

America. Vaccine manufacturers are worried about getting sued, and

21:10:07 therefore they have backed off from providing this kind of vaccine.

One of the reasons I'm such a strong believer in legal reform is

so that people aren't afraid of producing a product that is necessary

for the health of our citizens and then end up getting sued in a court

of law.

But the best thing we can do now, Bob, given the circumstances

with the company in England is for those of us who are younger and

healthy, don't get a flu shot.

CHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

KERRY: This really underscores the problem with the American

health-care system.

21:10:49 It's not working for the American family. And

it's gotten worse under President Bush over the course of the last

years.

Five million Americans have lost their health insurance in this

country. You've got about a million right here in Arizona, just shy,

950,000, who have no health insurance at all. 82,000 Arizonians lost

their health insurance under President Bush's watch. 223,000 kids in

Arizona have no health insurance at all.

21:11:19 All across our country -- go to Ohio, 1.4 million Ohioans have no

health insurance, 114,000 of them lost it under President Bush;

Wisconsin, 82,000, Wisconsites lost it under President Bush.

This president has turned his back on the wellness of America.

And there is no system. In fact, it's starting to fall apart not

because of lawsuits -- though they are a problem, and John Edwards and

I are committed to fixing them -- but because of the larger issue that

21:11:50 we don't cover Americans.

KERRY: Children across our country don't have health care.

We're the richest country on the face of the planet, the only

industrialized nation in the world not to do it.

I have a plan to cover all Americans. We're going to make it

affordable and accessible. We're going to let everybody buy into the

same health-care plan senators and congressmen give themselves.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, would you like to add something?

BUSH: I would. Thank you.

I want to remind people listening tonight that a plan is not a

litany of complaints, and a plan is not to lay out programs that you

can't pay for.

He just said he wants everybody to be able to buy in to the same

plan that senators and congressmen get. That costs the government

$7,700 per family. If every family in America signed up, like the

senator suggested, if would cost us $5 trillion over 10 years.

It's an empty promise. It's called bait and switch.

SCHIEFFER: Time's up.

BUSH: Thank you.

21:12:46 KERRY: Actually, it's not an empty promise.

KERRY: It's really interesting, because the president used that

very plan as a reason for seniors to accept his prescription drug

plan. He said, if it's good enough for the congressmen and senators

to have choice, seniors ought to have choice.

What we do is we have choice. I choose Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

Other senators, other congressmen choose other programs.

But the fact is, we're going to help Americans be able to buy

into it. Those that can afford it are going to buy in themselves.

We're not giving this away for nothing.

SCHIEFFER: All right.

Senator Kerry, a new question. Let's talk about economic

security. You pledged during the last debate that you would not raise

taxes on those making less than $200,000 a year. But the price of

everything is going up, and we all know it. Health care costs, as you

all talking about, is skyrocketing, the cost of the war.

My question is, how can you or any president, whoever is elected

next time, keep that pledge without running this country deeper into

debt and passing on more of the bills that we're running up to our

children?

21:13:51 KERRY: I'll tell you exactly how I can do it: by reinstating

what President Bush took away, which is called pay as you go.

During the 1990s, we had pay-as-you-go rules. If you were going

to pass something in the Congress, you had to show where you are going

to pay for it and how.

President Bush has taken -- he's the only president in history to

do this.

He's also the only president in 72 years to lose jobs -- 1.6

million jobs lost. He's the only president to have incomes of

families go down for the last three years; the only president to see

exports go down; the only president to see the lowest level of

business investment in our country as it is today.

Now, I'm going to reverse that. I'm going to change that. We're

going to restore the fiscal discipline we had in the 1990s.

21:14:45 Every plan that I have laid out -- my health-care plan, my plan

for education, my plan for kids to be able to get better college loans

-- I've shown exactly how I'm going to pay for those.

KERRY: And we start -- we don't do it exclusively -- but we

start by rolling back George Bush's unaffordable tax cut for the

wealthiest people, people earning more than $200,000 a year, and we

pass, hopefully, the McCain-Kerry Commission which identified some $60

billion that we can get.

We shut the loophole which has American workers actually

subsidizing the loss of their own job. They just passed an expansion

of that loophole in the last few days: $43 billion of giveaways,

including favors to the oil and gas industry and the people importing

ceiling fans from China.

I'm going to stand up and fight for the American worker. And I

am going to do it in a way that's fiscally sound. I show how I pay

for the health care, how we pay for the education.

KERRY: I have a manufacturing jobs credit. We pay for it by

shutting that loophole overseas. We raise the student loans. I pay

for it by changing the relationship with the banks.

This president has never once vetoed one bill; the first

president in a hundred years not to do that.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:15:59 KERRY: Well, his rhetoric doesn't match his record.

He been a senator for 20 years. He voted to increase taxes 98

times. When they tried to reduce taxes, he voted against that 127

times. He talks about being a fiscal conservative, or fiscally sound,

but he voted over -- he voted 277 times to waive the budget caps,

which would have cost the taxpayers $4.2 trillion.

He talks about PAYGO. I'll tell you what PAYGO means, when

you're a senator from Massachusetts, when you're a colleague of Ted

Kennedy, pay go means: You pay, and he goes ahead and spends.

BUSH: He's proposed $2.2 trillion of new spending, and yet the

so-called tax on the rich, which is also a tax on many small-business

owners in America, raises $600 million by our account -- billion, $800

billion by his account.

There is a tax gap. And guess who usually ends up filling the

tax gap? The middle class.

I propose a detailed budget, Bob. I sent up my budget man to the

Congress, and he says, here's how we're going to reduce the deficit in

half by five years. It requires pro-growth policies that grow our

21:17:10 economy and fiscal sanity in the halls of Congress.

SCHIEFFER: Let's go to a new question, Mr. President. Two

minutes. And let's continue on jobs.

You know, there are all kind of statistics out there, but I want

to bring it down to an individual.

Mr. President, what do you say to someone in this country who has

lost his job to someone overseas who's being paid a fraction of what

that job paid here in the United States?

21:17:45 BUSH: I'd say, Bob, I've got policies to continue to grow our

economy and create the jobs of the 21st century. And here's some help

for you to go get an education. Here's some help for you to go to a

community college.

We've expanded trade adjustment assistance. We want to help pay

for you to gain the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st

century.

You know, there's a lot of talk about how to keep the economy

growing. We talk about fiscal matters. But perhaps the best way to

keep jobs here in America and to keep this economy growing is to make

sure our education system works.

I went to Washington to solve problems. And I saw a problem in

the public education system in America. They were just shuffling too

many kids through the system, year after year, grade after grade,

without learning the basics.

And so we said: Let's raise the standards. We're spending more

money, but let's raise the standards and measure early and solve

problems now, before it's too late.

BUSH: No, education is how to help the person who's lost a job.

Education is how to make sure we've got a workforce that's productive

and competitive.

Got four more years, I've got more to do to continue to raise

standards, to continue to reward teachers and school districts that

are working, to emphasize math and science in the classrooms, to

continue to expand Pell Grants to make sure that people have an

opportunity to start their career with a college diploma.

And so the person you talked to, I say, here's some help, here's

some trade adjustment assistance money for you to go a community

college in your neighborhood, a community college which is providing

the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st century. And that's

what I would say to that person.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

21:19:35 KERRY: I want you to notice how the president switched away from

jobs and started talking about education principally.

Let me come back in one moment to that, but I want to speak for a

second, if I can, to what the president said about fiscal

responsibility.

KERRY: Being lectured by the president on fiscal responsibility

is a little bit like Tony Soprano talking to me about law and order in

this country.

(LAUGHTER)

This president has taken a $5.6 trillion surplus and turned it

into deficits as far as the eye can see. Health-care costs for the

average American have gone up 64 percent; tuitions have gone up 35

percent; gasoline prices up 30 percent; Medicare premiums went up 17

percent a few days ago; prescription drugs are up 12 percent a year.

But guess what, America? The wages of Americans have gone down.

The jobs that are being created in Arizona right now are paying about

$13,700 less than the jobs that we're losing.

And the president just walks on by this problem. The fact is

that he's cut job-training money. $1 billion was cut. They only

added a little bit back this year because it's an election year.

They've cut the Pell Grants and the Perkins loans to help kids be

able to go to college. KERRY: They've cut the training money. They've wound up not

even extending unemployment benefits and not even extending health

care to those people who are unemployed.

I'm going to do those things, because that's what's right in

America: Help workers to transition in every respect.

SCHIEFFER: New question to you, Senator Kerry, two minutes. And

it's still on jobs. You know, many experts say that a president

really doesn't have much control over jobs. For example, if someone

invents a machine that does the work of five people, that's progress.

That's not the president's fault.

So I ask you, is it fair to blame the administration entirely for

this loss of jobs?

KERRY: I don't blame them entirely for it. I blame the

president for the things the president could do that has an impact on

it.

Outsourcing is going to happen. I've acknowledged that in union

halls across the country. I've had shop stewards stand up and say,

21:21:36 "Will you promise me you're going to stop all this outsourcing?" And

I've looked them in the eye and I've said, "No, I can't do that."

KERRY: What I can promise you is that I will make the playing

field as fair as possible, that I will, for instance, make certain

that with respect to the tax system that you as a worker in America

are not subsidizing the loss of your job.

Today, if you're an American business, you actually get a benefit

for going overseas. You get to defer your taxes.

So if you're looking at a competitive world, you say to yourself,

"Hey, I do better overseas than I do here in America."

That's not smart. I don't want American workers subsidizing the

loss of their own job.

21:22:16 And when I'm president, we're going to shut

that loophole in a nanosecond and we're going to use that money to

lower corporate tax rates in America for all corporations, 5 percent.

And we're going to have a manufacturing jobs credit and a job hiring

credit so we actually help people be able to hire here.

The second thing that we can do is provide a fair trade playing

field. This president didn't stand up for Boeing when Airbus was

violating international rules and subsidies. He discovered Boeing

during the course of this campaign after I'd been talking about it for

months. KERRY: The fact is that the president had an opportunity to

stand up and take on China for currency manipulation. There are

companies that wanted to petition the administration. They were told:

Don't even bother; we're not going to listen to it.

The fact is that there have been markets shut to us that we

haven't stood up and fought for.

21:23:09 I'm going to fight for a fair trade

playing field for the American worker. And I will fight for the

American worker just as hard as I fight for my own job. That's what

the American worker wants. And if we do that, we can have an impact.

Plus, we need fiscal discipline. Restore fiscal discipline,

we'll do a lot better.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:23:28 BUSH: Whew!

Let me start with the Pell Grants. In his last litany of

misstatements. He said we cut Pell Grants. We've increased Pell

Grants by a million students. That's a fact.

BUSH: You know, he talks to the workers. Let me talk to the

workers.

You've got more money in your pocket as a result of the tax

relief we passed and he opposed.

If you have a child, you got a $1,000 child credit. That's money

in your pocket.

If you're married, we reduced the marriage penalty. The code

ought to encourage marriage, not discourage marriage.

We created a 10 percent bracket to help lower-income Americans.

A family of four making $40,000 received about $1,700 in tax relief.

It's your money. The way my opponent talks, he said, "We're

going to spend the government's money." No, we're spending your

money. And when you have more money in your pocket, you're able to

better afford things you want.

I believe the role of government is to stand side by side with

our citizens to help them realize their dreams, not tell citizens how

to live their lives.

My opponent talks about fiscal sanity. His record in the United

States Senate does not match his rhetoric.

USH: He voted to increase taxes 98 times and to bust the budget

277 times.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

KERRY: Bob, anybody can play with these votes. Everybody knows

that.

21:25:00 I have supported or voted for tax cuts over 600 times. I broke

with my party in order to balance the budget, and Ronald Reagan signed

into law the tax cut that we voted for. I voted for IRA tax cuts. I

voted for small-business tax cuts.

But you know why the Pell Grants have gone up in their numbers?

21:25:17 Because more people qualify for them because they don't have money.

But they're not getting the $5,100 the president promised them.

They're getting less money.

We have more people who qualify. That's not what we want.

21:25:32 BUSH: Senator, no one's playing with your votes. You voted to

increase taxes 98 times. When they voted -- when they proposed

reducing taxes, you voted against it 126 times.

BUSH: He voted to violate the budget cap 277 times. You know,

there's a main stream in American politics and you sit right on the

far left bank. As a matter of fact, your record is such that Ted

Kennedy, your colleague, is the conservative senator from

Massachusetts.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, let's get back to economic issues.

But let's shift to some other questions here.

21:26:05 Both of you are opposed to gay marriage. But to understand how

you have come to that conclusion, I want to ask you a more basic

question. Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?

21:26:22 BUSH: You know, Bob, I don't know. I just don't know. I do

know that we have a choice to make in America and that is to treat

people with tolerance and respect and dignity. It's important that we

do that.

And I also know in a free society people, consenting adults can

live the way they want to live.

BUSH: And that's to be honored.

But as we respect someone's rights, and as we profess tolerance,

we shouldn't change -- or have to change -- our basic views on the

sanctity of marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I think

it's very important that we protect marriage as an institution,

between a man and a woman.

I proposed a constitutional amendment. The reason I did so was

21:27:03 because I was worried that activist judges are actually defining the

definition of marriage, and the surest way to protect marriage between

a man and woman is to amend the Constitution.

It has also the benefit of allowing citizens to participate in

the process. After all, when you amend the Constitution, state

21:17:18 legislatures must participate in the ratification of the Constitution.

I'm deeply concerned that judges are making those decisions and

21:27:27 not the citizenry of the United States. You know, Congress passed a

law called DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act.

BUSH: My opponent was against it. It basically protected states

from the action of one state to another. It also defined marriage as

between a man and woman.

But I'm concerned that that will get overturned. And if it gets

overturned, then we'll end up with marriage being defined by courts,

and I don't think that's in our nation's interests.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

21:28:00 KERRY: We're all God's children, Bob. And I think if you were

to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell

you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.

I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice. I've met people

who struggled with this for years, people who were in a marriage

because they were living a sort of convention, and they struggled with

it.

And I've met wives who are supportive of their husbands or vice

versa when they finally sort of broke out and allowed themselves to

live who they were, who they felt God had made them.

KERRY: I think we have to respect that.

The president and I share the belief that marriage is between a

man and a woman. I believe that.

21:28:52 I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.

But I also believe that because we are the United States of

America, we're a country with a great, unbelievable Constitution, with

rights that we afford people, that you can't discriminate in the

workplace. You can't discriminate in the rights that you afford

people.

You can't disallow someone the right to visit their partner in a

hospital.

21:29:15 You have to allow people to transfer property, which is why

I'm for partnership rights and so forth.

Now, with respect to DOMA and the marriage laws, the states have

always been able to manage those laws. And they're proving today,

every state, that they can manage them adequately.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry, a new question for you.

The New York Times reports that some Catholic archbishops are

telling their church members that it would be a sin to vote for a

candidate like you because you support a woman's right to choose an

abortion and unlimited stem-cell research.

What is your reaction to that?

KERRY: I respect their views. I completely respect their views.

21:29:52 I am a Catholic. And I grew up learning how to respect those views.

But I disagree with them, as do many.

I believe that I can't legislate or transfer to another American

citizen my article of faith. What is an article of faith for me is

not something that I can legislate on somebody who doesn't share that

article of faith.

21:30:22 I believe that choice is a woman's choice. It's between a woman,

God and her doctor. And that's why I support that.

Now, I will not allow somebody to come in and change Roe v. Wade.

KERRY: The president has never said whether or not he would do

that. But we know from the people he's tried to appoint to the court

he wants to.

21:30:40 I will not. I will defend the right of Roe v. Wade.

Now, with respect to religion, you know, as I said, I grew up a

Catholic. I was an altar boy. I know that throughout my life this

has made a difference to me.

And as President Kennedy said when he ran for president, he said,

"I'm not running to be a Catholic president. I'm running to be a

president who happens to be Catholic."

My faith affects everything that I do, in truth. There's a great

passage of the Bible that says, "What does it mean, my brother, to say

you have faith if there are no deeds? Faith without works is dead."

21:31:14 And I think that everything you do in public life has to be

guided by your faith, affected by your faith, but without transferring

it in any official way to other people.

That's why I fight against poverty. That's why I fight to clean

up the environment and protect this earth.

KERRY: That's why I fight for equality and justice. All of

those things come out of that fundamental teaching and belief of

faith.

But I know this, that President Kennedy in his inaugural address

told all of us that here on Earth,

21:31:45 God's work must truly be our own.

And that's what we have to -- I think that's the test of public

service.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:31:55 BUSH: I think it's important to promote a culture of life. I

think a hospitable society is a society where every being counts and

every person matters.

I believe the ideal world is one in which every child is

protected in law and welcomed to life. I understand there's great

differences on this issue of abortion, but I believe reasonable people

can come together and put good law in place that will help reduce the

number of abortions.

Take, for example, the ban on partial birth abortion. It's a

21:32:24 brutal practice. People from both political parties came together in

the halls of Congress and voted overwhelmingly to ban that practice.

It made a lot of sense. My opponent, in that he's out of the

mainstream, voted against that law.

BUSH: What I'm saying is is that as we promote life and promote

a culture of life, surely there are ways we can work together to

reduce the number of abortions: continue to promote adoption laws --

it's a great alternative to abortion -- continue to fund and promote

21:33:02 maternity group homes; I will continue to promote abstinence programs.

The last debate, my opponent said his wife was involved with

those programs. That's great. I appreciate that very much. All of

us ought to be involved with programs that provide a viable

alternative to abortion.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, let's have a new question. It goes to

you. And let's get back to economic issues.

Health insurance costs have risen over 36 percent over the last

four years according to The Washington Post. We're paying more.

We're getting less.

I would like to ask you: Who bears responsibility for this? Is

it the government? Is it the insurance companies? Is it the lawyers?

Is it the doctors? Is it the administration?

21:33:43 BUSH: Gosh, I sure hope it's not the administration.

There's a -- no, look, there's a systemic problem. Health care

costs are on the rise because the consumers are not involved in the

decision-making process. Most health care costs are covered by third

parties. And therefore, the actual user of health care is not the

purchaser of health care. And there's no market forces involved with

health care.

It's one of the reasons I'm a strong believer in what they call

health savings accounts. These are accounts that allow somebody to

buy a low-premium, high-deductible catastrophic plan and couple it

with tax-free savings. Businesses can contribute, employees can

contribute on a contractual basis. But this is a way to make sure

people are actually involved with the decision-making process on

health care.

21:34:26 Secondly, I do believe the lawsuits -- I don't believe, I know --

that the lawsuits are causing health care costs to rise in America.

That's why I'm such a strong believer in medical liability reform.

BUSH: In the last debate, my opponent said those lawsuits only

caused the cost to go up by 1 percent.

21:34:53 Well, he didn't include the defensive practice of medicine that costs the federal government some $28 billion a year and costs our society between $60 billion and $100

billion a year.

Thirdly, one of the reasons why there's still high cost in

medicine is because this is -- they don't use any information

technology. It's like if you looked at the -- it's the equivalent of

the buggy and horse days, compared to other industries here in

America.

And so, we've got to introduce high technology into health care.

We're beginning to do it. We're changing the language. We want there

to be electronic medical records to cut down on error, as well as

reduce cost.

People tell me that when the health-care field is fully

integrated with information technology, it'll wring some 20 percent of

the cost out of the system.

And finally, moving generic drugs to the market quicker.

21:35:37 And so, those are four ways to help control the costs in health

care.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

21:35:48 KERRY: The reason health care costs are getting higher, one of

the principal reasons is that this administration has stood in the way

of common-sense efforts that would have reduced the costs. Let me

give you a prime example.

21:36:02 In the Senate we passed the right of Americans to import drugs

from Canada. But the president and his friends took it out in the

House, and now you don't have that right. The president blocked you

from the right to have less expensive drugs from Canada.

We also wanted Medicare to be able to negotiate bulk purchasing.

The VA does that. The VA provides lower-cost drugs to our veterans.

We could have done that in Medicare.

Medicare is paid for by the American taxpayer. Medicare belongs

to you. Medicare is for seniors, who many of them are on fixed

income, to lift them out of poverty.

21:36:37 KERRY: But rather than help you, the taxpayer, have lower cost,

rather than help seniors have less expensive drugs, the president made

it illegal -- illegal -- for Medicare to actually go out and bargain

for lower prices.

Result: $139 billion windfall profit to the drug companies

coming out of your pockets. That's a large part of your 17 percent

increase in Medicare premiums.

When I'm president, I'm sending that back to Congress and we're

21:37:05 going to get a real prescription drug benefit.

Now, we also have people sicker because they don't have health

insurance. So whether it's diabetes or cancer, they come to hospitals

later and it costs America more.

21:37:13 We got to have health care for all Americans.

SCHIEFFER: Go ahead, Mr. President.

BUSH: I think it's important, since he talked about the Medicare

plan, has he been in the United States Senate for 20 years? He has no

record on reforming of health care. No record at all.

He introduced some 300 bills and he's passed five.

BUSH: No record of leadership.

I came to Washington to solve problems. I was deeply concerned

about seniors having to choose between prescription drugs and food.

And so I led. And in 2006, our seniors will get a prescription drug

coverage in Medicare.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry? Thirty seconds.

KERRY: Once again, the president is misleading America. I've

actually passed 56 individual bills that I've personally written and,

in addition to that, and not always under my name, there is amendments

on certain bills.

But more importantly, with respect to the question of no record,

I helped write -- I did write, I was one of the original authors of

the early childhood health care and the expansion of health care that

we did in the middle of the 1990s. And I'm very proud of that.

So the president's wrong.

SCHIEFFER: Let me direct the next question to you, Senator

Kerry, and again, let's stay on health care.

You have, as you have proposed and as the president has commented

on tonight, proposed a massive plan to extend health-care coverage to

children. You're also talking about the government picking up a big

part of the catastrophic bills that people get at the hospital.

SCHIEFFER: And you have said that you can pay for this by

rolling back the president's tax cut on the upper 2 percent.

You heard the president say earlier tonight that it's going to

cost a whole lot more money than that.

I'd just ask you, where are you going to get the money?

21:38:54 KERRY: Well, two leading national news networks have both said

the president's characterization of my health-care plan is incorrect.

One called it fiction. The other called it untrue.

21:39:08 The fact is that my health-care plan, America, is very simple.

It gives you the choice. I don't force you to do anything. It's not

a government plan. The government doesn't require you to do anything.

You choose your doctor. You choose your plan.

If you don't want to take the offer of the plan that I want to

put forward, you don't have do. You can keep what you have today,

keep a high deductible, keep high premiums, keep a high co-pay, keep

low benefits.

21:39:35 But I got a better plan. And I don't think a lot of people are

going to want to keep what they have today.

KERRY: Here's what I do: We take over Medicaid children from

the states so that every child in America is covered. And in

exchange, if the states want to -- they're not forced to, they can

choose to -- they cover individuals up to 300 percent of poverty.

It's their choice.

I think they'll choose it, because it's a net plus of $5 billion

to them.

21:40:26 We allow you -- if you choose to, you don't have to -- but we

give you broader competition to allow you to buy into the same health

care plan that senators and congressmen give themselves. If it's good

enough for us, it's good enough for every American. I believe that

your health care is just as important as any politician in Washington,

D.C.

You want to buy into it, you can. We give you broader

competition. That helps lower prices.

In addition to that, we're going to allow people 55 to 64 to buy

into Medicare early. And most importantly, we give small business a

50 percent tax credit so that after we lower the costs of health care,

they also get, whether they're self-employed or a small business, a

lower cost to be able to cover their employees.

KERRY: Now, what happens is when you begin to get people covered

like that -- for instance in diabetes, if you diagnose diabetes early,

you could save $50 billion in the health care system of America by

avoiding surgery and dialysis. It works. And I'm going to offer it

to America.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:40:59 BUSH: In all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote

leading news organizations about -- oh, nevermind. Anyway, let me

quote the Lewin report. The Lewin report is a group of folks who are

not politically affiliated. They analyzed the senator's plan. It

cost $1.2 trillion.

The Lewin report accurately noted that there are going to be 20

million people, over 20 million people added to government-controlled

health care.

21:41:34 It would be the largest increase in government health

care ever.

BUSH: If you raise the Medicaid to 300 percent, it provides an

incentive for small businesses not to provide private insurance to

their employees. Why should they insure somebody when the

government's going to insure it for them?

It's estimated that 8 million people will go from private

insurance to government insurance.

We have a fundamental difference of opinion. I think government-

run health will lead to poor-quality health, will lead to rationing,

will lead to less choice.

21:42:08 Once a health-care program ends up in a line item in the federal

government budget, it leads to more controls.

And just look at other countries that have tried to have

federally controlled health care. They have poor-quality health care.

Our health-care system is the envy of the world because we

believe in making sure that the decisions are made by doctors and

patients, not by officials in the nation's capital.

SCHIEFFER: Senator?

KERRY: The president just said that government-run health care

results in poor quality.

KERRY: Now, maybe that explains why he hasn't fully funded the

21:42:37 VA, and the VA hospital is having trouble, and veterans are

complaining. Maybe that explains why Medicare patients are

complaining about being pushed off of Medicare. He doesn't adequately

fund it.

But let me just say to America: I am not proposing a government-

run program. That's not what I have. I have Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

Senators and congressmen have a wide choice. Americans ought to have

it, too.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:43:11 BUSH: Talk about the VA: We've increased VA funding by $22

billion in the four years since I've been president. That's twice the

amount that my predecessor increased VA funding.

Of course we're meeting our obligation to our veterans, and the

veterans know that.

We're expanding veterans' health care throughout the country.

We're aligning facilities where the veterans live now. Veterans are

getting very good health care under my administration, and they will

continue to do so during the next four years.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, the next question is to you. We all

know that

21:43:34 Social Security is running out of money, and it has to be

fixed. You have proposed to fix it by letting people put some of the

money collected to pay benefits into private savings accounts. But

the critics are saying that's going to mean finding $1 trillion over

the next 10 years to continue paying benefits as those accounts are

being set up.

So where do you get the money? Are you going to have to increase

the deficit by that much over 10 years?

BUSH: First, let me make sure that every senior listening today

understands that when we're talking about reforming Social Security,

that they'll still get their checks.

I remember the 2000 campaign, people said: if George W. gets

elected, your check will be taken away.

Well, people got their checks, and they'll continue to get their

checks.

21:44:17 There is a problem for our youngsters, a real problem. And if we

don't act today, the problem will be valued in the trillions.

BUSH: And so I think we need to think differently.

We'll honor our commitment to our seniors. But for our children

and our grandchildren, we need to have a different strategy.

And recognizing that, I called together a group of our fellow

citizens to study the issue. It was a committee chaired by the late

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York, a Democrat. And they

21:44:52 came up with a variety of ideas for people to look at.

I believe that younger workers ought to be allowed to take some

of their own money and put it in a personal savings account, because I

understand that they need to get better rates of return than the rates

of return being given in the current Social Security trust.

And the compounding rate of interest effect will make it more

21:45:17 likely that the Social Security system is solvent for our children and

our grandchildren.

I will work with Republicans and Democrats. It'll be a vital

issue in my second term. It is an issue that I am willing to take on,

and so I'll bring Republicans and Democrats together.

BUSH: And we're of course going to have to consider the costs.

But I want to warn my fellow citizens: The cost of doing nothing, the

cost of saying the current system is OK, far exceeds the costs of

trying to make sure we save the system for our children.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry?

KERRY: You just heard the president say that young people ought

to be able to take money out of Social Security and put it in their

own accounts.

21:45:55 Now, my fellow Americans, that's an invitation to disaster.

The CBO said very clearly that if you were to adopt the

president's plan, there would be a $2 trillion hole in Social

Security, because today's workers pay in to the system for today's

retirees. And the CBO said -- that's the Congressional Budget Office;

it's bipartisan -- they said that there would have to be a cut in

21:46:21 benefits of 25 percent to 40 percent.

Now, the president has never explained to America, ever, hasn't

done it tonight, where does the transitional money, that $2 trillion,

come from?

KERRY: He's already got $3 trillion, according to The Washington

Post, of expenses that he's put on the line from his convention and

the promises of this campaign, none of which are paid for. Not one of

them are paid for.

21:46:52 The fact is that the president is driving the largest deficits in

American history. He's broken the pay-as-you-go rules.

I have a record of fighting for fiscal responsibility. In 1985,

I was one of the first Democrats -- broke with my party. We balanced

the budget in the '90s. We paid down the debt for two years.

And that's what we're going to do. We're going to protect Social

Security. I will not privatize it. I will not cut the benefits. And

we're going to be fiscally responsible. And we will take care of

Social Security.

SCHIEFFER: Let me just stay on Social Security with a new

question for Senator Kerry, because, Senator Kerry,

21:47:40 you have just said you will not cut benefits.

Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, says there's

no way that Social Security can pay retirees what we have promised

them unless we recalibrate.

SCHIEFFER: What he's suggesting, we're going to cut benefits or

we're going to have to raise the retirement age. We may have to take

some other reform. But if you've just said, you've promised no

changes, does that mean you're just going to leave this as a problem,

another problem for our children to solve?

21:48:04 KERRY: Not at all. Absolutely not, Bob. This is the same thing

we heard -- remember, I appeared on "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert

in 1990-something. We heard the same thing. We fixed it.

In fact, we put together a $5.6 trillion surplus in the '90s that

was for the purpose of saving Social Security. If you take the tax

cut that the president of the United States has given -- President

Bush gave to Americans in the top 1 percent of America -- just that

tax cut that went to the top 1 percent of America would have saved

Social Security until the year 2075.

The president decided to give it to the wealthiest Americans in a

tax cut.

21:48:34 Now, Alan Greenspan, who I think has done a terrific job in

monetary policy, supports the president's tax cut. I don't. I

support it for the middle class, not that part of it that goes to

people earning more than $200,000 a year.

KERRY: And when I roll it back and we invest in the things that

I have talked about to move our economy, we're going to grow

sufficiently, it would begin to cut the deficit in half, and we get

back to where we were at the end of the 1990s when we balanced the

budget and paid down the debt of this country.

Now, we can do that.

21:49:02 Now, if later on after a period of time we find that Social

Security is in trouble, we'll pull together the top experts of the

country. We'll do exactly what we did it he 1990s. And we'll make

whatever adjustment is necessary.

But the first and most important thing is to start creating jobs

in America. The jobs the president is creating pay $9,000 less than

the jobs that we're losing. And this is the first president in 72

years to preside over an economy in America that has lost jobs, 1.6

million jobs.

Eleven other presidents -- six Democrats and five Republicans --

had wars, had recessions, had great difficulties; none of them lost

jobs the way this president has.

KERRY: I have a plan to put America back to work. And if we're

fiscally responsible and put America back to work, we're going to fix

Social Security.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President?

21:49:53 BUSH: He forgot to tell you he voted to tax Social Security

benefits more than one time. I didn't hear any plan to fix Social

Security. I heard more of the same.

He talks about middle-class tax cuts. That's exactly where the

tax cuts went. Most of the tax cuts went to low- and middle-income

Americans. And now the tax code is more fair. Twenty percent of the

upper-income people pay about 80 percent of the taxes in America today

because of how we structured the tax cuts.

People listening out there know the benefits of the tax cuts we

passed. If you have a child, you got tax relief. If you're married,

you got tax relief. If you pay any tax at all, you got tax relief.

All of which was opposed by my opponent.

21:50:24 And the tax relief was important to spur consumption and

investment to get us out of this recession.

BUSH: People need to remember: Six months prior to my arrival,

the stock market started to go down. And it was one of the largest

declines in our history. And then we had a recession and we got

attacked, which cost us 1 million jobs.

But we acted. I led the Congress. We passed tax relief. And

now this economy is growing.

21:51:09 We added 1.9 million new jobs over the last 13 months.

Sure, there's more work to do. But the way to make sure our

economy grows is not to raise taxes on small-business owners. It's

not to increase the scope of the federal government. It's to make

sure we have fiscal sanity and keep taxes low.

SCHIEFFER: Let's go to a new question, Mr. President.

I got more e-mail this week on this question than any other

question. And it is about immigration.

21:51:35 I'm told that at least 8,000 people cross our borders illegally

every day. Some people believe this is a security issue, as you know.

Some believe it's an economic issue. Some see it as a human-rights

issue.

SCHIEFFER: How do you see it? And what we need to do about it?

BUSH: I see it as a serious problem. I see it as a security

issue, I see it as an economic issue, and I see it as a human-rights

issue.

21:51:52 We're increasing the border security of the United States. We've

got 1,000 more Border Patrol agents on the southern border.

We're using new equipment. We're using unmanned vehicles to spot

people coming across.

And we'll continue to do so over the next four years. It's a

subject I'm very familiar with. After all, I was a border governor

for a while.

Many people are coming to this country for economic reasons.

They're coming here to work. If you can make 50 cents in the heart of

Mexico, for example, or make $5 here in America, $5.15, you're going

to come here if you're worth your salt, if you want to put food on the

table for your families. And that's what's happening.

BUSH: And so in order to take pressure off the borders, in order

to make the borders more secure,

21:52:43 I believe there ought to be a temporary worker card that allows a willing worker and a willing employer to mate up, so long as there's not an American willing to do that job, to join up in order to be able to fulfill the employers'

needs.

That has the benefit of making sure our employers aren't breaking

the law as they try to fill their workforce needs. It makes sure that

the people coming across the border are humanely treated, that they're

not kept in the shadows of our society, that they're able to go back

and forth to see their families. See, the card, it'll have a period

of time attached to it.

It also means it takes pressure off the border. If somebody is

coming here to work with a card, it means they're not going to have to

sneak across the border. It means our border patrol will be more

likely to be able to focus on doing their job.

Now, it's very important for our citizens to also know that I

don't believe we ought to have amnesty. I don't think we ought to

reward illegal behavior. There are plenty of people standing in line

to become a citizen. And we ought not to crowd these people ahead of

them in line.

21:53:46 BUSH: If they want to become a citizen, they can stand in line,

too.

And here is where my opponent and I differ. In September 2003,

he supported amnesty for illegal aliens.

SCHIEFFER: Time's up.

Senator?

KERRY: Let me just answer one part of the last question quickly,

and then I'll come to immigration.

21:54:03 The American middle class family isn't making it right now, Bob.

And what the president said about the tax cuts has been wiped out by

the increase in health care, the increase in gasoline, the increase in

tuitions, the increase in prescription drugs.

The fact is, the take home pay of a typical American family as a

share of national income is lower than it's been since 1929. And the

take home pay of the richest .1 percent of Americans is the highest

it's been since 1928.

21:54:33 Under President Bush, the middle class has seen their tax burden

go up and the wealthiest's tax burden has gone down. Now that's

wrong.

Now with respect to immigration reform, the president broke his

promise on immigration reform. He said he would reform it. Four

years later he is now promising another plan.

KERRY: Here's what I'll do: Number one, the borders are more

leaking today than they were before 9/11. The fact is, we haven't

done what we need to do to toughen up our borders, and I will.

Secondly, we need a guest-worker program, but if it's all we

have, it's not going to solve the problem.

The second thing we need is to crack down on illegal hiring.

It's against the law in the United States to hire people illegally,

and we ought to be enforcing that law properly.

21:55:16 And thirdly, we need an earned-legalization program for people

who have been here for a long time, stayed out of trouble, got a job,

paid their taxes, and their kids are American. We got to start moving

them toward full citizenship, out of the shadows.

SCHIEFFER: Do you want to respond, Mr. President?

BUSH: Well, to say that the borders are not as protected as they

were prior to September the 11th shows he doesn't know the borders.

21:55:35 They're much better protected today than they were when I was the

governor of Texas. BUSH: We have much more manpower and much more equipment there.

He just doesn't understand how the borders work, evidently, to

say that. That is an outrageous claim.

And we'll continue to protect our borders. We're continuing to

increase manpower and equipment.

SCHIEFFER: Senator?

21:55:56 KERRY: Four thousand people a day are coming across the border.

The fact is that we now have people from the Middle East,

allegedly, coming across the border.

And we're not doing what we ought to do in terms of the

technology. We have iris-identification technology. We have

thumbprint, fingerprint technology today. We can know who the people

are, that they're really the people they say they are when the cross

the border.

21:56:15 We could speed it up. There are huge delays.

The fact is our borders are not as secure as they ought to be,

and I'll make them secure.

SCHIEFFER: Next question to you, Senator Kerry.

The gap between rich and poor is growing wider. More people are

dropping into poverty. Yet the minimum wage has been stuck at, what,

$5.15 an hour now for about seven years. Is it time to raise it?

KERRY: Well, I'm glad you raised that question.

21:56:46 It's long overdue time to raise the minimum wage.

And, America, this is one of those issues that separates the

president and myself.

KERRY: We have fought to try to raise the minimum wage in the

last years. But the Republican leadership of the House and Senate

won't even let us have a vote on it. We're not allowed to vote on it.

They don't want to raise the minimum wage. The minimum wage is the

lowest minimum wage value it has been in our nation in 50 years.

If we raise the minimum wage, which I will do over several years

to $7 an hour, 9.2 million women who are trying to raise their

21:57:16 families would earn another $3,800 a year.

The president has denied 9.2 million women $3,800 a year, but he

doesn't hesitate to fight for $136,000 to a millionaire.

KERRY: One percent of America got $89 billion last year in a tax

cut, but people working hard, playing by the rules, trying to take

care of their kids, family values, that we're supposed to value so

much in America -- I'm tired of politicians who talk about family

values and don't value families.

What we need to do is raise the minimum wage. We also need to

hold onto equal pay.

21:58:02 Women work for 76 cents on the dollar for the

same work that men do. That's not right in America.

And we had an initiative that we were working on to raise women's

pay. They've cut it off. They've stopped it. They don't enforce

these kinds of things.

Now, I think that it a matter of fundamental right that if we

raise the minimum wage, 15 million Americans would be positively

affected. We'd put money into the hands of people who work hard, who

obey the rules, who play for the American Dream.

And if we did that, we'd have more consumption ability in

America, which is what we need right in order to kick our economy into

gear. I will fight tooth and nail to pass the minimum wage.

BUSH: Actually, Mitch McConnell had a minimum-wage plan that I

supported that would have increased the minimum wage.

But let me talk about what's really important for the worker

you're referring to.

21:58:57 And that's to make sure the education system

works. It's to make sure we raise standards.

Listen, the No Child Left Behind Act is really a jobs act when

you think about it. The No Child Left Behind Act says, "We'll raise

standards. We'll increase federal spending. But in return for extra

spending, we now want people to measure -- states and local

jurisdictions to measure to show us whether or not a child can read or

write or add and subtract."

You cannot solve a problem unless you diagnose the problem. And

we weren't diagnosing problems. And therefore just kids were being

shuffled through the school.

And guess who would get shuffled through? Children whose parents

wouldn't speak English as a first language just move through.

21:59:33 BUSH: Many inner-city kids just move through. We've stopped

that practice now by measuring early. And when we find a problem, we

spend extra money to correct it.

I remember a lady in Houston, Texas, told me, "Reading is the new

civil right," and she's right. In order to make sure people have jobs

for the 21st century, we've got to get it right in the education

system, and we're beginning to close a minority achievement gap now.

21:59:58 You see, we'll never be able to compete in the 21st century

unless we have an education system that doesn't quit on children, an

education system that raises standards, an education that makes sure

there's excellence in every classroom.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, I want to go back to something Senator

Kerry said earlier tonight and ask a follow-up of my own. He said --

and this will be a new question to you -- he said that you had never

said whether you would like to overturn Roe v. Wade. So I'd ask you

directly, would you like to?

BUSH: What he's asking me is, will I have a litmus test for my

judges?

22:00:36 And the answer is, no, I will not have a litmus test. I will

pick judges who will interpret the Constitution, but I'll have no

litmus test.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Kerry, you'd like to respond?

KERRY: Is that a new question or a 30-second question?

SCHIEFFER: That's a new question for Senator -- for President

Bush.

KERRY: Which time limit...

SCHIEFFER: You have 90 seconds.

KERRY: Thank you very much.

Well, again, the president didn't answer the question.

22:01:02 KERRY: I'll answer it straight to America. I'm not going to

appoint a judge to the court who's going to undo a constitutional

right, whether it's the First Amendment, or the Fifth Amendment, or

some other right that's given under our courts today -- under the

Constitution. And I believe that the right of choice is a

constitutional right.

So I don't intend to see it undone.

Clearly, the president wants to leave in ambivalence or intends

to undo it.

But let me go a step further. We have a long distance yet to

travel in terms of fairness in America. I don't know how you can

govern in this country when you look at New York City and you see that

50 percent of the black males there are unemployed, when you see 40

percent of Hispanic children -- of black children in some cities --

dropping out of high school.

KERRY: And yet the president who talks about No Child Left

Behind refused to fully fund -- by $28 billion -- that particular

program so you can make a difference in the lives of those young

people.

Now right here in Arizona, that difference would have been $131

million to the state of Arizona to help its kids be able to have

better education and to lift the property tax burden from its

citizens. The president reneged on his promise to fund No Child Left

Behind.

He'll tell you he's raised the money, and he has. But he didn't

put in what he promised, and that makes a difference in the lives of

our children.

SCHIEFFER: Yes, sir?

BUSH: Two things. One, he clearly has a litmus test for his

judges, which I disagree with.

22:02:34 And secondly, only a liberal senator from Massachusetts would say

that a 49 percent increase in funding for education was not enough.

We've increased funds. But more importantly, we've reformed the

system to make sure that we solve problems early, before they're too

This article has been truncated. You can see the rest of this article by contacting ABC .

T/I: 11:02:09

British soldiers who were executed for cowardice during World War I may be offered pardons by the current government. Around 300 British servicemen were shot between 1914 and 1918 after courts-martial which often lasted no more than 20 minutes. Many of them were suffering from shell-shock, and none of them had any right to an appeal.

Some relatives only found out what happened to their loved-ones recently. Tom Stones found out last year how his great-uncle had died -- shot for cowardice during the first world war. In January 1917, Sgt. Joe Stones pushed his broken rifle into a trench to try to delay a German advance. He was found guilty of casting away his weapon, and was shot at dawn. Stones' great-nephew says transcripts and other evidence show the conviction was wrong. Along with many of the other

soldiers, it now appears Stones was wrongly executed.

At its last annual conference, the Royal British Legion of former soldiers voted unanimously to pardon those who were executed. The government is sympathetic, and says the cases will now be reviewed.

At this year's Remembrance Sunday ceremonies, the names of those who were executed may finally be included in the memorials of all those who died serving their country.

SHOWS:

UK 27/5

Tom Stones, great nephew of executed soldier, seated looking at newspaper;

b/w still photo of great-uncle who was executed for cowardice; newspaper headline;

CU tombstone of Sergeant JW Stones;

pan down photocopy of transcripts;

SOT Tom Stones (in english): When I look at the evidence which I have acquired which is full transcriptions of the court martial, a history of my great uncle's behaviour in the trenches, written references to his bravery by his immediate officers, I just think it stinks, the whole thing stinks;

FILE

B/W WW1 footage of bombs exploding over the trenches while soldiers climb over and are shot down;

shell shocked soldiers;

27/5

Pan down gravestone;

SOT Julian Putkowski, military historian: They were dragged up in front of court, they did not have a defending officer, sometimes even their commanding officers were sitting in judgement on them. They had no possibility of challenging evidence that was presented against them by senior officers when they were confirming sentence and then usully after a period of a fortnight they were taken out at night and shot against a wall by their friends;

CU buglers at cenotaph;

WS Royal British legion crowd at cenotaph;

CU buglers;

SOT John Reid, Armed Forces Minister: Over a period of 5 or 10 years views can change as to whether justice has been carried out or whether it wasn't. And therefore this case both in the case of justice being seen to be done and of compassion. I will make every effort to review these as carefully as I can;

Big Ben striking 11;

WS cenotaph;

2.17

HEADLINE: Military kids suffer when parents deploy

---------------------------------------

CAPTION: A new victim of the war in Iraq and the war on terror is coming to light. It's the children of military men and women. (Jan. 17)

----------------------------------------

NATS: "Military brats, my lost tribe, spent their entire childhoods in service to this country and no one even knew we were there."

[Notes:ANCHOR VOICE]

In the history of war, there is an often overlooked victim -- the children of fighting men and women. They live in unusual conditions, all around the world, and they constantly face not knowing if their parent will come home from the battlefront.

SOT: (voice over tape): "we weren't on the front lines, but we were definitely there going through that conflict with them."

They are known commonly as "Brats" and a non-profit group Brats Without Borders estimates there are 15 million of them around the world.

A new documentary, Brats: Our Journey Home, takes a look at the unique problems facing these children. It features some famous faces who grew up on military bases sharing some of their experiences growing up as brats.

SOT: H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Army Brat, Retired Army General: "to a small boy, when your father hands you a sword and says 'you're now the man of the house take car of your mother and sisters,' um, you take that very seriously ."

SOT: Kris Kristofferson, Army Brat: "I taught me courage and tenacity and honor and duty."

Growing up with the knowledge that your parent can be sent into harm's way also teaches the sons and daughters of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines how to deal with an absent parent early on.

SOT: Michelle Green, Air Force Brat: "that was just something that came with the deal, it was part of the deal. And so, if, if we had to give up some personal freedoms, we had to give up some conveniences in order to support my dad, we were willing to do it...and we didn't question it."

SOT: (voice over tape): "Parents are not free to make decisions around the needs of children. The parents in the military must do what they are told to do."

But that doesn't mean they ever get used to it.

SOT: Olga Ramos, Air Force Brat: "it's a little odd to see people walking down the street with rifles and M-16s and you know, it's normal, that's their job."

The Brats Group, as it is called, is on tour, letting brats around the country know that even though they aren't like everyone else, they are not alone.

SOT: Heather Wilson-DeSpain, Air Force Brat: "my life has been dedicated to you, because my dad's life is."

Brats Without Borders plans to bring together kids of Vietnam-era vets and kids of those men and women now serving. The hope is that former combat vet "brats" can help today's brats cope a little better.

SOT: "They can understand that they had to be sacrificed to some extent to further the greater good, namely the career of their father, the maintenance of their family and the protection of the United States of America...and it's really quite noble when you think about it."

The mentoring program will be unveiled by Spring 2007.

FTG OF THE SAMUEL ALITO CONFIRMATION HEARINGS / JUDGE SAM ALITO IS A NOMINEE TO BE A SUPREME COURT JUDGE

12:03:22 TESTAMENT. THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

12:03:26 WILL NOW PROCEED TO THE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS OF JUDGE

12:03:29 SAMUEL ALITO JR. FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED

12:03:34 STATES. A FEW MATTERS OF ADMINISTRATION

12:03:39 OR HOUSEKEEPING, AND THEN WE WILL PROCEED TO THE OPENING

12:03:41 STATEMENTS. TODAY, WE WILL HEAR FIRST FROM

12:03:48 JUDGE ALITO AND THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS FAMILY.

12:03:52 JUDGE, THE FLOOR IS YOURS TO INTRODUCE YOUR FAMILY.

12:03:56>DATE YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN.

12:04:01 BUT ME INTRODUCE MY WIFE MARTHA HERE TODAY AND MY SISTER

12:04:08 ROSEMARY, WHO IS A LAWYER IN NEW JERSEY AND A TOP TRIAL LAWYER.

12:04:12 SHE TOOK TIME FROM THE SCHEDULE TO COME TO THE HEARING TODAY.

12:04:17 MY DAUGHTER LAURA, WAS A SENIOR AT JAMES CALDWELL HIGH-SCHOOL IN

12:04:22 WEST CALDWELL, NEW JERSEY. IF A FATHER CAN BE PERMITTED TO

12:04:27 BRAG, A REALLY GREAT SWIMMER WHO LED HER HIGH SCHOOL TEAM TO A

12:04:31 CHAMPIONSHIP LAST WEEK. MY SON PHILIP, WHO IS A SECOND

12:04:36 YEAR STUDENT AT UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGINIA.

12:04:39 WHEN I HAD MY CONFIRMATION HEARING FOR THE COURT OF

12:04:43 APPEALS, PHILIP WAS 3 YEARS OLD. WHEN I WAS CALLED UP TO THE

12:04:46 CHAIR, HE TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF TO RUN UP AND SIT NEXT TO ME IN

12:04:50 CASE ANY HARD QUESTIONS CAME UP. I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER HE'S GOING

12:04:54 TO TRY THE SAME THING TOMORROW, BUT PROBABLY I COULD USE THE

12:04:58 HELP. I'M GLAD MY IN-LAWS ARE ABLE TO

12:05:01 BE HERE TODAY. MY FATHER-IN-LAW GENE

12:05:05 BAUMGARTNER, WHO IS A RETIRED AIR FORCE AND CEO, AND MY

12:05:08 MOTHER-IN-LAW, BARBARA BAUMGARTNER, WHO IS A RETIRED

12:05:12 AIR FORCE LIBRARIAN, AND MY COUSINS, BOTH FROM PENNSYLVANIA,

12:05:19 ARE ALSO HERE. MY MOTHER, WHO TURNS 91 A COUPLE

12:05:23 OF WEEKS AGO, UNFORTUNATELY, IS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY, BUT

12:05:28 I'M SURE SHE IS WATCHING AT HOME.

12:05:29 THINK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN.

12:05:32>THANK YOU, JUDGE ALITO. YOU HAVE A BEAUTIFUL FAMILY AND

12:05:37 WE ARE DELIGHTED TO HAVE THEM WITH US ON THE CONFIRMATION

12:05:40 PROCEEDINGS. WE WILL HAVE 10 MINUTE ROUNDS OF

12:05:45 OPENING STATEMENTS. EACH SENATOR, 10 MINUTES.

12:05:50 WE WILL THEN TURN TO THE PRESENTERS -- THOSE WILL BE

12:05:57 PRESENTING JUDGE ALITO FORMALLY TO THE COMMITTEE, AND THEN WE

12:06:01 WILL ADMINISTER THE OATH TO JUDGE ALITO AND WE WILL HEAR HIS

12:06:05 TESTIMONY. WE WILL BEGIN TOMORROW MORNING

12:06:09 AT 934 THE OPENING ROUND OF QUESTIONS.

12:06:12 EACH SENATOR WILL HAVE 30 MINUTES ON THE OPENING ROUND AND

12:06:16 WE HAVE A SECOND ROUND SCHEDULED OF 20 MINUTES FOR EACH SENATOR,

12:06:22 AND THEN WE WILL SEE HOW WE WILL PROCEED.

12:06:26 OUR PRACTICE IS TO GET HERE TO THE TIME LIMITS.

12:06:30 WE DO THAT FOR A NUMBER REASONS -- ONE OF THEM IS THAT SENATORS

12:06:34 COME AND GO AND IF WE MAINTAIN THE SCHEDULE WHICH IS KNOWN TO

12:06:39 EVERYBODY, THEY KNOW WHEN TO RETURN FOR THEIR NEXT ROUND OF

12:06:42 QUESTIONS. WE WILL TAKE A 15 MINUTE BREAK

12:06:46 AT A CONVENIENT TIME, AND THEN WE WILL HOLD THE BRAKES TO 15

12:06:50 MINUTES. I WILL WORK CLOSELY WITH SENATOR

12:06:54 LEAHY ON SCHEDULING MATTERS AND ALL OTHER MATTERS, AND THIS IS

12:06:59 THE MODEL THAT WE USED TO THE CONFIRMATION OF CHIEF JUSTICE

12:07:03 ROBERTS. IT IS OUR INTENTION TO CONCLUDE

12:07:08 THE HEARINGS THIS WEEK. AS SENATOR LEAHY AND I WORKED

12:07:13 OUT THE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE A MARKUP ON TUESDAY OF JANUARY THE

12:07:21 17TH, SUBJECT TO SOMETHING EXTRAORDINARY HAPPENING.

12:07:25 LET ME YIELD TO THE DISTINGUISHED RANKING MEMBER,

12:07:28 SENATOR LEAHY.>MR. CHAIRMAN, I DO NOT WANT

12:07:32 TO HOLD UP YOUR OPENING STATEMENT OR THE OTHERS.

12:07:35 I DO APPRECIATE PEOPLE BEING HERE.

12:07:39 SENATOR ROBERTS -- THE ROBERTS HEARINGS -- CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN

12:07:43 ROBERTS -- THERE WILL BE WE'LL QUESTIONS ASKED, I WILL HOLD.

12:07:49 ALTHOUGH CERTAINLY BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE WILL DO THAT.

12:07:52 IT IS IMPORTANT, WHEN TALKING ABOUT POSITION REPRESENTING 295

12:07:56 MILLION AMERICANS. ON THE SCHEDULE, I WILL WORK

12:07:59 WITH THE SENIOR SENATOR OF PENNSYLVANIA, THE CHAIRMAN.

12:08:06 I UNDERSTAND HE IS ONE OF OUR LEADERS IN GETTING SENATORS TO

12:08:13 ALL MOVE IN ORDER IS LIKE HAVING BULLFROGS IN A WHEELBARROW -- WE

12:08:18 WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THAT. I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING

12:08:20 IS WE HAVE A GOOD, SOLID HEARING THIS WEEK.

12:08:23 MR. CHAIRMAN, YET TOTALLY PREPARED PROCEDURES FOR THIS AS

12:08:27 ALWAYS.>THANK YOU, SENATOR LEAHY.

12:08:31 NOW WE BEGIN THE OPENING STATEMENT.

12:08:34 NO SENATORS VOTE, EXCEPT FOR THE DECLARATION OF WAR OR THE

12:08:37 AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF FORCE, IS MORE PORTMAN THE

12:08:42 CONFIRMATION OF A NOMINEE FOR THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE

12:08:45 LIFETIME APPOINTMENT. JUDGE ALITO COMES TO THIS

12:08:49 PROCEEDING WITH EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE AS A GOVERNMENT

12:08:54 LAWYER, AS A PROSECUTOR, AND AS A JUDGE.

12:08:57 HE HAS RISEN SOME 361 OPINIONS. HE HAS VOTED IN MORE THAN 4800

12:09:04 CASES AND IT IS POSSIBLE TO SELECT A FEW OF HIS CASES TO

12:09:10 PLACE THEM AT ANY AND EVERY POSITION ON THE JUDICIAL

12:09:14 SPECTRUM BY SELECTING THE RIGHT CASES, HE CAN LOOK LIKE A

12:09:18 FLAMING LIBERAL OR HE CAN WORK -- LOOK LIKE AN ARCH

12:09:22 CONSERVATIVE. THIS HEARING WILL GIVE JUDGE

12:09:24 ALITO THE FULL OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF 280

12:09:30 MILLION AMERICANS ON PROBING QUESTIONS WHICH WILL BE PUT TO

12:09:34 HIM BY 18 SENATORS REPRESENTING THEIR DIVERSE CONSTITUENCIES.

12:09:40 I HAVE RESERVED MY OWN NOMINATION -- MY OWN VOTE ON

12:09:45 THIS NOMINATION UNTIL THE HEARING IS CONCLUDED.

12:09:48 I AM COMMITTED AS CHAIRMAN TO A FULL, FAIR, AND DIGNIFIED

12:09:54 HEARING. HEARINGS FOR A SUPREME COURT

12:09:57 NOMINEE SHOULD NOT HAVE A POLITICAL TILT FOR EITHER

12:10:01 REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS. THEY SHOULD BE IN SUBSTANCE AND

12:10:06 IN RECEPTION FOR ALL AMERICANS. THERE IS NO FIRMLY ESTABLISHED

12:10:10 RULE AS TO HOW MUCH A NOMINEE MUST SAY TO BE CONFIRMED.

12:10:15 WHILE I PERSONALLY CONSIDER IT INAPPROPRIATE TO ASK A NOMINEE

12:10:19 HOW HE WOULD VOTE ON A SPECIFIC MATTER LIKELY TO COME BEFORE THE

12:10:24 COURT, SENATORS MAY ASK WHATEVER THEY CHOOSE AND THE NOMINEE IS

12:10:30 SIMPLY FREE TO RESPOND AS HE CHOOSES.

12:10:32 IT HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE THAT THE HEARINGS ARE REALLY, ANY

12:10:36 FACTS, A SUBTLE MINUET WITH THE NOMINEE ANSWERING AS MANY

12:10:41 QUESTIONS AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDERO BE CONFIRMED.

12:10:45 LAST YEAR WHEN PRESIDENT BUSH HAD TWO VACANCIES TO FILL, THERE

12:10:51 WAS CONCERN EXPRESSED THAT THERE MIGHT BE IN IDEOLOGICAL CHANGE

12:10:55 IN THE COURT. THE PRELIMINARY INDICATIONS ARE

12:11:01 FROM CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS PERFORMANCE ON THE COURT AND HIS

12:11:04 JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TESTIMONY ON MODESTY, STABILITY, AND NOT

12:11:09 JOLTING THE SYSTEM, ALL SUGGEST THAT HE WILL NOT MOVE THE COURT

12:11:13 IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. IF THAT HOLDS TRUE, JUDGE ALITO,

12:11:18 IF CONFIRMED, MAY NOT BE THE SWING VOTE REGARDLESS OF WHAT

12:11:22 POSITION JUDGE ALITO TAKES ON THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM.

12:11:27 PERHAPS THE DOMINANT ISSUE IN THESE HEARINGS IS THE WIDESPREAD

12:11:31 CONCERN ABOUT JUDGE ALITO'S POSITION ON A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO

12:11:36 CHOOSE. THIS HAS RISEN IN PART BECAUSE

12:11:40 OF A 1985 STATEMENT MADE BY JUDGE ALITO THAT THE

12:11:45 CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE RIGHT TO AN ABORTION.

12:11:49 IT HAS RISEN IN PART BECAUSE OF HIS ADVOCACY IN THE SOLICITOR

12:11:55 GENERAL'S OFFICE SEEKING TO LIMIT OR OVERRULE, AND FROM THE

12:12:00 DISSENTING PORTION OF HIS OPINION IN CASEY VERSUS PLANNED

12:12:03 PARENTHOOD IN THE THIRD CIRCUIT. THIS HEARING WILL GIVE JUDGE

12:12:07 ALITO THE PUBLIC FORUM TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE, AS HE HAS

12:12:14 WITH SENATORS IN PRIVATE MEETINGS, THAT HIS PERSONAL

12:12:17 VIEWS AND PRIOR ADVOCACY DO NOT DETERMINE HIS JUDICIAL

12:12:21 DECISIONS. BUT INSTEAD, HE WILL WEIGH

12:12:24 FACTORS SUCH AS WHAT ARE THE PRECEDENTS, THAT HE WILL WAIT

12:12:30 WOMEN'S AND RELIANCE ON ROE, AND HE WILL CONSIDER WHETHER ROE IS

12:12:36 "EMBEDDED IN THE CULTURE OF OUR NATION."

12:12:41 THE HISTORY OF THE COURT IS FULL OF SURPRISES ON THE ISSUE.

12:12:46 THE MAJOR CASE UPHOLDING ROE VS. WADE WAS CASEY VERSUS PLANNED

12:12:52 PARENTHOOD, WHERE THE LANDMARK OPINION WAS WRITTEN JOINTLY BY

12:12:56 THREE JUSTICES -- JUSTICE O'CONNOR, JUSTICE KENNEDY, AND

12:13:00 JUSTICE SOUTER. BEFORE COMING TO THE COURT,

12:13:04 JUSTICE SOUTER, JUSTICE KENNEDY, AND JUSTICE O'CONNOR HAD ALL

12:13:09 EXPRESSED VIEWS AGAINST A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

12:13:15 DAVID SOUTER, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EVEN

12:13:19 OPPOSED CHANGING NEW HAMPSHIRE IS LAW PROHIBITING ABORTION EVEN

12:13:23 AFTER THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HAD DECLARED IT

12:13:28 UNCONSTITUTIONAL. AT THE TIME OF JUSTICE SOUTER'S

12:13:32 CONFIRMATION HEARING, THERE WAS A STOP SOUTER RALLY AT THE

12:13:37 NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN -- A FEW BLOCKS FROM WHERE WE

12:13:43 ARE CURRENTLY HOLDING THIS HEARING -- DISPLAYING IN READ A

12:13:46 BANNER SAYING "STOP SOUTER OR WOMEN WILL DIE.

12:13:52 STOP SOUTER AND MASS LOBBYING." SOMEWHAT SIMILAR TO THIS

12:13:59 MORNING'S PRESS WHERE BRAD -- MANDERS OPERATED IN FRONT OF THE

12:14:04 SUPREME COURT SAYING "SAVE ROW" AND BANNERS SAYING "SAVE WOMEN'S

12:14:12 RIGHTS -- BOTH KNOW ON JUDGE ALITO."

12:14:16 THE HISTORY OF THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ONE OF THE SURPRISES.

12:14:20 THIS HEARING COMES AT A TIME OF GREAT NATIONAL CONCERN ABOUT THE

12:14:24 BALANCE BETWEEN CIVIL RIGHTS AND THE PRESIDENT'S NATIONAL

12:14:28 SECURITY AUTHORITY. THE PRESIDENT'S CONSTITUTIONAL

12:14:32 POWERS AS COMMANDER IN CHIEF TO CONDUCT ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE

12:14:37 APPEAR TO CONFLICT WITH WHAT CONGRESS HAS SAID IN THE FOREIGN

12:14:42 INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT. THIS CONFLICT INVOLVES VERY

12:14:46 MAJOR CONSIDERATIONS RAISED BY JUSTICE JACKSON'S HISTORIC

12:14:52 OCCURRENCE IN THE YOUNGSTOWN STEEL SEIZURE CASES WHERE

12:14:55 JUSTICE JACKSON WROTE "WHEN THE PRESIDENT ACTS PURSUANT TO AN

12:15:00 EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AUTHORIZATION OF CONGRESS, IS UP

12:15:04 40 IS AT ITS MAXIMUM, FOR IT INCLUDES ALL THAT HE POSSESSES

12:15:09 IN HIS OWN RIGHT AND ALL THAT CONGRESS CAN DELEGATE.

12:15:13 WHEN THE PRESIDENT ACTS AN ABSENCE OF JUDICIAL BRANCH OF A

12:15:17 40, HE CAN RELY ONLY ON HIS OWN INDEPENDENT POWERS.

12:15:22 WHEN THE PRESIDENT TAKES MEASURES INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE

12:15:26 EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WILL OF CONGRESS, HIS POWER IS AT ITS

12:15:29 LOWEST EBB. AND AS JUSTICE THAT JACKSON

12:15:34 QUOTED, "WHAT IS AT STAKE IS THE EQUILIBRIUM ESTABLISHED IN OUR

12:15:38 CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM." ANOTHER MAJOR AREA OF CONCERN IS

12:15:45 CONGRESSIONAL POWER. IN RECENT DECISIONS, THE SUPREME

12:15:48 COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS DECLARED ACTS OF CONGRESS

12:15:52 UNCONSTITUTIONAL, REALLY DENIGRATING THE ROLE OF

12:15:56 CONGRESS. IN DECLARING UNCONSTITUTIONAL

12:16:00 LEGISLATION DESIGNED TO PROTECT WOMEN AGAINST VIOLENCE, THE

12:16:04 SUPREME COURT DID SO NOTWITHSTANDING OF THE

12:16:08 VOLUMINOUS RECORD IN SUPPORT OF THAT LEGISLATION BUT BECAUSE OF

12:16:11 CONGRESS'S "METHOD OF REASONING."

12:16:15 RATHER INSULTING TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS SOME SUPERIOR METHOD OF

12:16:19 REASONING IN THE COURT. WHEN THE SUPREME COURT HANDLED

12:16:23 TWO CASES RECENTLY ON THE AMERICANS FOR DISABILITY ACT,

12:16:28 THEY UPHELD THE ACT AS IT APPLIED TO DISCRIMINATION AS TO

12:16:32 ACCESS AND DECLARED IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED TO

12:16:35 DISCRIMINATION. THEY DID SO BY APPLYING A TEST

12:16:41 OF WHAT IS CALLED CONGRUENT AND PROPORTIONATE, WHICH CANDIDLY

12:16:47 STATED NO ONE CAN FIGURE OUT. IN THE SENSE, JUSTICE SCALIA

12:16:52 CALLED IT A TEST WHERE THE COURT SET ITSELF UP AS THE TASKMASTER

12:16:59 TO SEE IF CONGRESS HAD DONE ITS HOMEWORK.

12:17:02 JUSTICE SCALIA SAID THAT IT WAS AN INVITATION TO JUDICIAL

12:17:07 ARBITRARINESS BY POLICY DRIVEN DECISION MAKING.

12:17:10 AND THIS HEARING I KNOW WILL INVOLVE CONSIDERATION AS TO

12:17:16 JUDGE ALITO IS USED ON CONGRESSIONAL POWER.

12:17:20 THERE IS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT OUR SENATE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS

12:17:24 MAY BE HAVING AN EFFECT ON SUPREME COURT NOMINEE IS ON

12:17:29 THEIR LATER JUDICIAL DUTIES. YEARS AFTER THEIR HEARINGS,

12:17:33 SUPREME COURT JUSTICES TALKED TO ME ABOUT OUR DIALOGUE AT THESE

12:17:37 HEARINGS. THIS PROCESS HAS NOW EVOLVED TO

12:17:40 A POINT WHERE NOMINEES MEET MOST OF THE SENATORS.

12:17:44 IN THIS PROCESS, NOMINEES GET AN EARFUL, WHILE NO PROMISES OR

12:17:49 EXTRACTED STATEMENTS ARE MADE BY A NOMINEE WHICH MAY WELL

12:17:53 INFLUENCE THEIR FUTURE DECISIONS.

12:17:56 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, FOR EXAMPLE, WILL HAVE A TOUGH TIME

12:18:00 GIVING A STATEMENT TO THE SYSTEM AFTER PREACHING MODESTY AND

12:18:05 STABILITY. THERE IS, I THINK, A HEAVY SENSE

12:18:08 OF DRAMA AS THESE HEARINGS BEGIN.

12:18:12 THIS IS THE QUINTESSENTIAL EXAMPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS

12:18:17 UNDER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS AS THE PRESIDENT NOMINATES, THE

12:18:21 SENATE CONFIRMS OR REJECTS, AND THE SUCCESSFUL NOMINEE IS SENT

12:18:25 TO THE BENCH. WHILE IT MAY BE PRESUMPTUOUS, I

12:18:28 BELIEVE THAT THE FRAMERS, IF THEY WERE HERE, WOULD BE PROUD

12:18:32 AND PLEASED TO SEE HOW WELL THEIR CONSTITUTION IS BEING

12:18:35 APPLIED. I NOW YIELD TO THE STATEMENTS

12:18:39 FROM MY COLLEAGUE, SENATOR LEAHY.

12:18:42>THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. AFTERNOON, JUDGE, AND MRS.

12:18:48 TOLEDO. THE CHALLENGE FOR JUDGE ALITO

12:18:52 DURING THE COURSE OF THESE HEARINGS IS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT

12:18:55 HE IS GOING TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES OF ALL

12:18:59 AMERICANS, AND IN DOING THAT, SERVED AS AN EFFECTIVE CHECK ON

12:19:03 GOVERNMENT OVERREACHING. I HAVE SAID THAT THE PRESIDENT

12:19:07 DID NOT HELP HIS CAUSE BY WITHDRAWING HIS EARLIER

12:19:11 NOMINATIONS OF PERRY ADMIRERS IN THE FACE OF CRITICISM FROM THE

12:19:14 NARROW FACTIONS OF HIS OWN PARTY OR CONCERN OF HOW SHE MIGHT

12:19:18 VOTE. SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS SHOULD

12:19:20 NOT BE CONDUCTED THREE SERIES OF WINKS AND NODS DESIGNED TO

12:19:24 REASSURE A SMALL FACTION OF OUR POPULATION THAT WILL LEAVE THE

12:19:28 AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THE DARK. NO PRESIDENT SHOULD BE ALLOWED

12:19:32 TO PACK THE COURTS, AND ESPECIALLY THE SUPREME COURT,

12:19:36 WHICH NOMINEES SELECTED TO ENSHRINE PRESIDENTIAL CLAIMS AND

12:19:41 THE GOVERNMENT IN POWER. CHECKS AND BALANCES SHOULD BE

12:19:44 PROVIDED BY THE COURTS, CONGRESS, AND THE CONSTITUTION

12:19:48 ARE SO IMPORTANT TO BE SACRIFICED TO A NARROW PARTISAN

12:19:51 AGENDA. THIS HEARING IS THE OPPORTUNITY

12:19:55 FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLTO LEARN WHAT SAMUEL ALITO THINKS ABOUT

12:19:59 THEIR FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND WHETHER HE -- YOU,

12:20:03 JUDGE -- WILL PROTECT THEIR LIBERTY, THEIR PRIVACY, AND

12:20:08 THEIR ECONOMY FROM GOVERNMENT INTRUSION.

12:20:11 THE SUPREME COURT BELONGS TO ALL AMERICANS.

12:20:14 NOTCHES TO THE PERSON OCCUPYING THE WHITE HOUSE, NOT JUST TO A

12:20:19 NARROW FACTION OF EITHER POLITICAL PARTY.

12:20:23 THE SUPREME COURT IS OUR ULTIMATE CHECK AND BALANCE.

12:20:26 INDEPENDENCE OF THE COURT AND ITS MEMBERS IS CRUCIAL TO OUR

12:20:30 DEMOCRACY AND OUR WAY OF LIFE. THE SENATE SHOULD NEVER BE

12:20:34 ALLOWED TO BE A RUBBER STAMP, NEITHER SHOULD THE SUPREME

12:20:38 COURT. I WILL ASK THE JUDGE TO

12:20:40 DEMONSTRATE HIS INDEPENDENCE FROM THE INTEREST OF THE

12:20:42 PRESIDENT APPOINTING HIM -- OR NOMINATING HIM.

12:20:46 THIS IS A NOMINATION TO A LIFETIME SEAT IN THE NATION'S

12:20:50 HIGHEST COURT. IT IS GOING TO SEE THAT IS OFTEN

12:20:55 REPRESENTED THE DECISIVE VOTE OF CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES -- WE HAVE

12:20:58 TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. THAT MEANS KNOWING MORE ABOUT

12:21:03 SAMUEL ITO'S WORK IN THE GOVERNMENT AND KNOWING MORE

12:21:05 ABOUT HIS VIEWS. I WILL, AS THE JUDGE KNOWS,

12:21:09 ASKED ABOUT THE DISTURBING MEMORANDUM HE WROTE TO BECOME A

12:21:13 POLITICAL APPOINTEE IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.

12:21:16 IN THAT, HE PROFESSED CONCERN WITH THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE

12:21:20 OF ONE-PERSON,NE-VOTE, A PRINCIPAL OF THE QUALITY THAT IS

12:21:25 THE BEDROCK OF OUR LAWS. THIS HEARING IS THE ONLY

12:21:28 OPPORTUNITY THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES

12:21:31 HAVE TO CONSIDER THE SUITABILITY OF THE NOMINEE TO SERVE AS A

12:21:35 FINAL ARBITER ON THE MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTION AND ITS LAWS.

12:21:41 HAS HE DEMONSTRATED COMMITMENT TO THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF ALL

12:21:45 AMERICANS? WILL HE ALLOW THE GOVERNMENT TO

12:21:47 INTRUDE ON AMERICANS' PERSONAL PRIVACY AND FREEDOMS?

12:21:51 AT A TIME WHEN THIS ADMINISTRATION SEEMS INTENT ON

12:21:54 ACCUMULATING UNCHECKED POWER, JUDGE ALITO IS USED ON EXECUTIVE

12:21:58 POWER ARE ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT. IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHETHER

12:22:01 HE WOULD SERVE JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE OR AS A SURROGATE

12:22:05 FOR THE PRESIDENT NOMINATING HIM.

12:22:08 THIS PUBLIC CONVERSATION -- THIS HEARING OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS

12:22:11 -- IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. IT IS THE PEOPLE'S CONSTITUTION

12:22:16 AND THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS THAT WE ARE ALL CHARGED WITH PROTECTING

12:22:20 AND PRESERVING. THIS HEARING MAY EMBARK ON THE

12:22:24 CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS, ONE THAT WAS DESIGNED TO PROTECT THESE

12:22:27 RIGHTS AND HAS SERVED THIS COUNTRY SO VERY WELL FOR MORE

12:22:30 THAN TWO CENTURIES. I'M REMINDED OF A PHOTOGRAPH

12:22:34 THAT HANGS IN THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTION CENTER IN

12:22:37 PHILADELPHIA THAT SHOWS THE FIRST WOMAN EVER TO SERVE ON THE

12:22:40 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TAKING BOTH IN THE OVAL

12:22:44 OFFICE IN 1981. JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR

12:22:47 SERVES AS A MODEL SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.

12:22:50 WIDELY RECOGNIZED AS AURIST WITH PRACTICAL VALUES, A SENSE

12:22:54 OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF LEGAL DECISIONS BEING MADE BY THE

12:22:57 SUPREME COURT. I REGRET THAT SOMEONE ON THE

12:23:02 EXTREME RIGHT HAVE BEEN SO CRITICAL OF JUSTICE O'CONNOR AND

12:23:05 HAVE ADAMANTLY OPPOSED THE NAMING OF A SUCCESSOR WHICH

12:23:08 SHARES HER JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY AND QUALITIES.

12:23:12 IN THEIR CRITICISM, IT REFLECTS POORLY ON POLITICS.

12:23:17 DOES NOTHING TO TARNISH THE RECORD OF THE FIRST WOMAN TO

12:23:20 SERVE AS ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED

12:23:23 STATES. SHE IS A JUSTICE WHOSE

12:23:26 GRACIOUSNESS AND SENSE OF DUTY FUEL FOR CONTINUED SERVICE, EVEN

12:23:30 AGREEING TO SERVE MORE THAN SIX MONTHS AFTER HER RETIREMENT

12:23:33 DATE. I KNOW BOTH YOU AND I COMMEND

12:23:34 HER FOR THAT. THE COURT THAT SERVES AMERICA

12:23:38 SHOULD REFLECT AMERICA. THIS NOMINATION WAS AN

12:23:44 OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PRESIDENT TO MAKE A NOMINATION BASED ON

12:23:48 DIVERSITY. HE DID NOT.

12:23:49 EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO DEARTH OF QUALIFIED HISPANICS OR

12:23:54 AFRICAN-AMERICANS, OTHER INDIVIDUALS LOCAL WELL HAVE

12:23:58 SERVED AS UNIFIED NOMINEES BY ADDING TO DIVERSITY.

12:24:01 OF COURSE, IT IS THE PRESIDENT'S CHOICE, JUDGE, NOT YOURS.

12:24:05 I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING MEMBERSHIP IN THE SUPREME COURT

12:24:09 IS MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE COUNTRY IT SERVES.

12:24:12 AS THE SENATE BEGINS ITS CONSIDERATION OF PRESIDENT

12:24:15 BUSH'S NOMINEE, HIS THIRD TO BESIEGED, TO JUSTICE O'CONNOR'S

12:24:21 SEAT, WE DO SO MINDFUL OF OUR CRITICAL ROLE OF THE SUPREME

12:24:25 COURT. HER LEGACY IS ONE OF FAIRNESS,

12:24:29 AND WHEN I DECIDE HOW TO VOTE IS BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE THAT

12:24:33 LEGACY PRESERVED. JUSTICE O'CONNOR HAS BEEN MADE

12:24:37 IGNITER TO THE PROTECTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT PROVIDES

12:24:40 THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. SHE IS COMFORTABLE BY BALANCE

12:24:43 AND TO CHECK GOVERNMENT INTRUSION INTO OUR PERSONAL

12:24:45 PRIVACY AND FREEDOM IS. IN A DECISION, SHE REJECTED THE

12:24:50 BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S CLAIM THAT THEY COULD INDEFINITELY

12:24:53 DETAINED A UNITED STATES CITIZEN.

12:24:58 SHE UPHELD THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW OF

12:25:01 THE EXERCISE OF GOVERNMENT POWER.

12:25:03 AND SHE WROTE -- AND THIS IS ONE WE SHOULD ALL REMEMBER -- SHE

12:25:07 WROTE THAT EVEN WAR IS NOT A BLANK CHECK FOR THE PRESIDENT

12:25:13 WHEN IT COMES TO THE RIGHTS OF THE NATION'S CITIZENS.

12:25:17 SHE HELD THAT EVEN THIS PRESIDENT IS NOT ABOVE BE LAW.

12:25:22 COURSE, NO PRESIDENT, DEMOCRATIC OR REPUBLICAN, NO PRESIDENT IS

12:25:27 ABOVE LAW AS NEITHER ARE YOU, NOR I, OR ANYONE IN THIS ROOM.

12:25:32 HER JUDGMENTS HAVE BEEN CRITICAL OF PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT OR

12:25:35 RIGHTS. SHE JOINED IN THE JURY'S FOREMAN

12:25:39 REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND THE VOTING

12:25:42 RIGHTS ACT. EACH OF THESE CASES -- AND I

12:25:46 MENTION THAT BECAUSE THEY MAKE IT IMPORTANT THAT A SINGLE

12:25:49 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IS -- AND IT IS CRUCIAL TO BE DETERMINED

12:25:52 WHAT KIND OF JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO WILL BE CONFIRMED.

12:25:55 OF COURSE, JUDGE, MY QUESTION IS WILL YOU BE AN INDEPENDENT

12:25:59 JURIST? IT IS AS THE ELECTED

12:26:04 REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE -- ALL THE PEOPLE --

12:26:08 NEARLY 300 MILLION PEOPLE -- THAT WE IN THE SENATE ARE

12:26:11 CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY TO EXAMINE WHETHER TO ENTRUST

12:26:15 THE PRECIOUS RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES TO THIS NOMINEE.

12:26:18 THE CONSTITUTION IS THEIR DOCUMENT.

12:26:20 IT GUARANTEES THEIR RIGHTS FROM THE HEAVY HAND OF GOVERNMENT

12:26:25 INTRUSION AND THE INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH,

12:26:29 TO RELIGION, TO EQUAL TREATMENT, TO DUE PROCESS AND DO PRIVACY.

12:26:37 ACTUALLY, THIS HEARING, THIS IS THEIR PROCESS.

12:26:40 THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY, ONCE CONFIRMED, HE IS APPOINTED FOR

12:26:47 LIFE. THERE IS NO COURT OF THE SUPREME

12:26:49 COURT. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE THE

12:26:51 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AND DEMONSTRATE THAT HE OR SHE WOULD

12:26:54 NOT BE BEHOLDEN TO THE PRESIDENT BUT OLDEN -- ONLY TO THE LAW.

12:26:59 LAST OCTOBER, THE PRESIDENT SUCCUMBED TO PRESSURE FROM THE

12:27:02 EXTREME RIGHTIST PARTY BY WITHDRAWING HARRIET MYERS.

12:27:06 AND BY WITHDRAWING HER NOMINATION AND SUBSTITUTING THIS

12:27:10 ONE, PRESIDENT HAS ALLOWED HIS CHOICE TO BE VETOED BY AN

12:27:13 EXTREME FACTION IN HIS PARTY BEFORE EVEN A HEARING OR A VOTE.

12:27:17 FRANKLY, THAT WAS AN EYE OPENING EXPERIENCE TO ME.

12:27:20 IT GIVES THE EXPRESSION THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO DO NOT WANT

12:27:23 AN INDEPENDENT FEDERAL JUDICIARY, THEY DEMANDED JUDGES

12:27:28 TO GUARANTEE THE RESULTS THAT THEY WANT.

12:27:29 THAT IS WHY THE QUESTIONS WILL BE ASKED SO SPECIFICALLY OF YOU,

12:27:33 JUDGE. THE NOMINATION IS BEING

12:27:36 CONSIDERED AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF ANOTHER VIOLATION -- THAT THE

12:27:40 PRESIDENT HAS, OUTSIDE THE LAW, THEN CONDUCTING SECRET OR RUNNY

12:27:46 SPYING ON AMERICANS FOR OVER FOUR YEARS.

12:27:48 THIS IS A TIME WHEN THE PROTECTIONS OF AMERICANS

12:27:52 LIBERTIES ARE DIRECTLY AT RISK, AS ARE THE CHECKS AND BALANCES

12:27:56 THAT SERVE TO CONSTRAIN ABUSES OF POWER FOR MORE THAN 200

12:27:59 YEARS. THE SUPREME COURT HAS RELIED --

12:28:04 BEEN RELIED UPON FOR ALL OF US TO PROTECT OUR FUNDAMENTAL

12:28:07 RIGHTS. I HAVE NOT DECIDED HOW WILL VOTE

12:28:09 ON THIS ISSUE, AND LIKE THE CHAIRMAN, I WILL BASE MY

12:28:13 DETERMINATION ON THE WHOLE RECORD AT THE CONCLUSION OF

12:28:16 THESE HEARINGS. JUST AS I DID WITH THE

12:28:20 NOMINATION OF JUDGE ROBERTS TO BE CHIEF JUSTICE.

12:28:23 AT THE CONCLUSION OF THOSE HEARINGS, I DETERMINED THE VOTE

12:28:27 FOR HIM. THE STAKES FOR THE AMERICAN

12:28:29 PEOPLE COULD NOT BE HIGHER. AT THIS CRITICAL MOMENT, SENATE

12:28:33 DEMOCRATS SERVING ON THIS COMMITTEE WILL PERFORM OUR

12:28:38 CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY WITH HEIGHTENED VIGILANCE.

12:28:41 ALL SENATORS, REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, INDEPENDENTS, WILL

12:28:45 JOIN IN THE AND SERIOUS CONSIDERATION.

12:28:48 THE APPOINTMENT OF THE NEXT SUPREME COURT JUSTICE MUST BE

12:28:51 MADE IN THE PEOPLE'S INTERESTS, AND IN THE NATION'S INTERESTS.

12:28:54 NOT IN THE INTERESTS OF ANY PARTISAN FASHION.

12:28:57 MR. CHAIRMAN,>. THANK YOU, VERY MUCH, SENATOR

12:29:03 LEAHY. SENATOR HATCH?

12:29:05>JUDGE ALITO, WELCOME YOU, AND YOUR FAMILY DURING THIS

12:29:10 HEARING IS PART OF THE ONGOING EVALUATION OF JUDGE SAMUEL

12:29:15 LIDO'S NOMINATION TO REPLACE JUDGE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR AS

12:29:18 ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

12:29:20 IT IS REMARKABLE, AFTER A NEARLY RECORD LONG PERIOD WITHOUT A

12:29:25 SUPREME COURT VACANCY, WE ARE HERE CONSIDERING A SECOND

12:29:28 NOMINEE IN LESS THAN SIX MONTHS. MR. CHAIRMAN, LET ME FIRST

12:29:32 COMMEND YOU FOR FIRMLY AND FAIRLY HANDLING THESE HEARINGS.

12:29:35 THE TIMETABLE WE ARE FOLLOWING REFLECTS YOUR EFFORTS TO

12:29:39 ACCOMMODATE ALL SIGNS, IN THE 70 DAYS SINCE PRESIDENT BUSH

12:29:44 ANNOUNCED THE NOMINATIONS, SEEMINGLY EXCEEDS THE AVERAGE

12:29:47 FOR MOST OF RECORD NOMINEES. THE DEBATE OVER THIS AND OTHER

12:29:50 JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS IS A DEBATE OVER THE JUDICIARY ITSELF.

12:29:54 IT IS A DEBATE OVER HOW MUCH PAR ELECTED JUDGES SHOULD HAVE

12:29:59 IN OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT -- HOW MUCH CONTROL JETTISON HAVE

12:30:03 ALL OR A WRITTEN CONSTITUTION THAT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE.

12:30:05 ENDING UP IN THE RIGHT PLACE IN THIS DEBATE REQUIRES STARTING IN

12:30:09 THE RIGHT PLACE. THE RIGHT PLACE TO START IS THE

12:30:12 PROPER DESCRIPTION OF WHAT JUDGES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO AND

12:30:16 THE REST OF THE PROCESS SHOULD REFLECT THIS JUDICIAL JOB

12:30:19 DESCRIPTION. THE PROCESS FOR EVALUATING JUDGE

12:30:22 ALITO'S NOMINATION BEGAN WHEN PRESIDENT BUSH ANNOUNCED IT MORE

12:30:25 THAN TWO MONTHS AGO. IT CONTINUED WITH HIS MEETINGS

12:30:28 WITH JUDGE ALITO -- MEETING WITH MORE THAN TWO-THIRDS OF THE

12:30:32 SENATORS IN A VIGOROUS DEBATE IN THE MEDIA AND AMONG ANALYSTS,

12:30:37 SCHOLARS, AND OTHERS. AS THE SENATE COMPLETES THE

12:30:40 VALUATION PROCESS, WE MUST KEEP SOME VERY IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES

12:30:43 IN MIND. THEY FOLLOW A FEW BASIC RULES.

12:30:47 THE FIRST PRINCIPLE IS THAT IN THIS JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS

12:30:52 THE SENATE AND THE PRESIDENT HAD DIFFERENT ROLES.

12:30:55 UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, THE PRESIDENT, NOT THE SENATE,

12:30:59 NOMINATES AND SUPPORTS -- APPOINTS JUDGES PUREES THAT HAS

12:31:03 A DIFFERENT ROLE. WE MUST GET OUR ALLIES ABOUT

12:31:05 WHETHER PRESIDENT BUSH SHOULD ACT TO APPOINT JUDGE TOLEDO WITH

12:31:09 GIVING OR WITHHOLDING OUR CONSENT, ABIDING BY THE

12:31:14 CONSTITUTION'S DESIGN AND HISTORICAL TRADITIONS REQUIRES

12:31:16 THAT AFTER JUDGE ALITO NOMINATION REACHES THE SENATE

12:31:18 FLOOR IF WE VIGOROUSLY DEBATED AND THEN VOTE UP OR DOWN.

12:31:22 THE SECOND PRINCIPLE IS THAT IN OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT THE

12:31:26 JUDICIAL AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES HAVE DIFFERENT ROLES.

12:31:29 AS CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS DESCRIBED IT WHEN HE WAS BEFORE

12:31:31 THIS COMMITTEE LAST FALL, JUDGES ARE NOT POLITICIANS.

12:31:36 JUDGES MUST DECIDE CASES, NOT CHAMPION CAUSES.

12:31:41 JUDGES MUST SETTLE LEGAL DISPUTES, NOT PURSUE AGENDAS.

12:31:46 JUDGES MUST INTERPRET AND APPLY THE LAW, NOT MAKE THE LAW.

12:31:50 THIS PRINCIPLE THAT JUDGES ARE NOT POLITICIANS LIES AT THE VERY

12:31:54 HEART OF JUDICIAL JOBS AND THEIR DESCRIPTIONS.

12:31:59 IN ADDITION TO THESE TWO PRINCIPLES, A FEW BASIC RULES TO

12:32:02 GUIDE HOW WE COMPLETE THIS CONFIRMATION PROCESS.

12:32:06 FIRST, WE MUST REMEMBER THAT JUDICIAL NOMINEES ARE

12:32:09 CONSTRAINED IN WHAT THEY MAY DISCUSSED AND HOW THEY MAY

12:32:13 DISCUSS IT. LIKE CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS AND

12:32:15 OTHERS BEFORE HIM, JUDGE ALITO IS ALREADY A FEDERAL JUDGE.

12:32:20 HE NOT ONLY WILL BE BOUND BY THE CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS AS A

12:32:24 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, HE IS ALREADY BOUND BY THESE CANNONS

12:32:28 AS AN APPEALS COURT JUDGE. BECAUSE JUDGES MAY NOT ISSUED BY

12:32:32 THREE OPINIONS, JUDICIAL NOMINEES MAY NOT DO SO EITHER.

12:32:36 ESPECIALLY ON ISSUES LIKELY TO COME BEFORE THE COURT.

12:32:40 THAT GOAL HAS ALWAYS BEEN HONORED.

12:32:42 HE WAS TO SAY, THOSE WHO WOULD DEMAND SUCH IT BUYS THREE

12:32:46 OPINIONS IN THIS HEARING WILL DO SO PRECISELY ON THOSE ISSUES

12:32:50 THAT ARE LIKELY TO COME BEFORE THE COURT.

12:32:51 THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS, BUT IS THE VOICES

12:32:56 EDITORIALIZE THIS MORNING, "HE WILL NOT OR SHOULD NOT TELL

12:33:01 AMERICANS HOW HE WILL VOTE ON HOTLY CONTESTED ISSUES."

12:33:06 WHEN JUDGE RALPH NADER GINSBERG WAS BEFORE US IN 1993 SHE SAID

12:33:10 THAT HER STANDARD WAS TO GIVE NO HITS, NO FORECASTS, NO PREVIEWS,

12:33:16 AND DECLINED TO ANSWER DOZENS OF QUESTIONS.

12:33:19 THE SECOND ROLE WE SHOULD FOLLOW IS TO CONSIDER EACH PART OF

12:33:21 JUDGE TOLEDO'S RECORD ON ITS OWN TERMS, FOR WHAT EACH PART

12:33:26 ACTUALLY IS. HE WROTE MEMOS WHEN HE WORKED

12:33:29 FOR THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. HE HAS WRITTEN JUDICIAL OPINIONS

12:33:33 WHILE ON THE OPINIONS COURT. HE WROTE ANSWERS TO THE

12:33:37 QUESTIONS FROM THIS COMMITTEE IN 1990 AND AGAIN LAST YEAR.

12:33:40 HE HAS WRITTEN ARTICLES AND GIVEN SPEECHES.

12:33:43 HE HAS JOINED CERTAIN GROUPS, AND EACH OF THESE IS DIFFERENT.

12:33:46 EACH OF THESE MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS OWN CONTEXT, ON ITS OWN

12:33:51 TERMS, RATHER THAN SQUEEZE, TWISTED, AND DISTORTED INTO

12:33:55 SOMETHING DESIGNED INSTEAD TO SUPPORT A PRECONCEIVED POSITION

12:33:59 OR SURVEY PREPLANNED AGENDA. THE THIRD ROLE WE SHOULD FOLLOW

12:34:03 IS CONSIDERING JUDGE ALITO'S ENTIRE RECORD.

12:34:07 SOME INTEREST GROUPS FOCUS ON -- SOME WOULD SAY THEY OBSESS ABOUT

12:34:12 -- ONE RECUSAL QUESTION PERIOD OR THE CHERRY PICK FROM THE

12:34:17 THOUSANDS OF QUESTIONS IN WHICH JUDGE ALITO PARTICIPATED AND THE

12:34:20 HUNDREDS OF OPINIONS HE AUTHORED OR JOINT.

12:34:23 OR THEY LOOK AT THE RESULTS BUT IGNORE THE FACTS OF THE LAW IN

12:34:26 THOSE CASES. JUDGE ALITO COMES TO US WITH A

12:34:29 RECORD THAT IS LONG, BROAD, AND DEEP.

12:34:33 HE DESERVES, AND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY REQUIRES,

12:34:38 THAT WE CONSIDER HIS ENTIRE RECORD.

12:34:40 BY LEE AND PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANT, WE MUST APPLY

12:34:43 TRADITIONAL RATHER THAN A POLITICAL STANDARD TO THE

12:34:46 INFORMATION BEFORE US. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION.

12:34:49 THE RECORD INCLUDES MORE THAN 360 OPINIONS OF ALL KINDS --

12:34:53 MAJORITY, CONCURRING, AND DISSENTING -- WRITTEN DURING HIS

12:34:57 JUDICIAL TENURE PUREE WITH MORE THAN 36,000 PAGES OF ADDITIONAL

12:35:01 MATERIAL INCLUDING UNPUBLISHED OPINION, ARTICLES, SPEECHES, AND

12:35:05 UPON A JUSTICE DOCUMENTS RELATING TO HIS SERVICE IN THE

12:35:08 OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL AND THE SOLICITOR GENERAL'S OFFICE.

12:35:11 WE MUST APPLY JUDICIAL, NOT POLITICAL STANDARDS, TO THIS

12:35:15 RECORD. ASKING A JUDICIAL NOMINEE WHOSE

12:35:17 SIDE HE WILL BE ON IN FUTURE CASES IS A POLITICAL STANDARD.

12:35:24 EVALUATING JUDGE TOLEDO'S RECORD BY ASKING WHAT SIDE HE HAS BEEN

12:35:27 ON IN PAST CASES IS AGAIN A POLITICAL STANDARD.

12:35:31 SCORECARDS ARE COMMON IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS BUT THEY ARE

12:35:34 INAPPROPRIATE IN THE JUDICIAL PROCESS.

12:35:36 THE MOST IMPORTANT TOOLS IN THE JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION PROCESS

12:35:40 ARE NOT A LITMUS PAPER AND A CALCULATOR.

12:35:43 APPLY A PROPER JUDICIAL STANDARD TO JUDGE TOLEDO'S RECORD MEANS

12:35:47 PUTTING ASIDE THE SCORE CARDS AND LOOKING AT HOW HE DOES WHEN

12:35:52 JUDGES ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. MAINLY, SETTLE LEGAL DISPUTES

12:35:58 PIPELINE ALREADY ESTABLISHED LAW.

12:35:59 THE JUDICIAL STANDARD MEANS THAT A JUDICIAL DECISION CAN BE

12:36:03 ENTIRELY CORRECT EVEN WHEN THE RESULT DOES NOT LINED UP WITH

12:36:07 OUR PREFERRED POLITICAL POSITIONS OR CATER TO CERTAIN

12:36:10 POLITICAL INTEREST. WHEN HE WAS HERE LAST FALL,

12:36:13 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS COMPARED JUSTICE TO UMPIRES THAT APPLY

12:36:16 RULES THEY DID NOT WRITE AND CANNOT CHANGE TO THE COMPETITION

12:36:20 BEFORE THEM. WE DO NOT EVALUATE AND UMPIRES

12:36:23 PERFORMANCE BASED ON WHICH TEAM WON THE GAME, BUT ON HOW THAT

12:36:27 UMPIRE APPLIED THE RULES IN AFTER INNING.

12:36:30 WE DO NOT HIRE UMPIRES BY SHOWING THEM THE ROSTER FOR THE

12:36:33 UPCOMING SEASON AND DEMANDING TO KNOW WHICH TEAMS THEY WILL FAVOR

12:36:39 BEFORE THOSE TEAMS EVEN TAKE THE FIELD.

12:36:42 SIMILARLY, WE SHOULD EVALUATE JUDGES AND JUDICIAL NOMINEES

12:36:45 BASED ON THE GENERAL PROCESS FOR APPLYING THE LAW TO ANY LEGAL

12:36:49 DISPUTES, NOT ON THE SPECIFIC RESULT IN A PARTICULAR CASE OR

12:36:53 DISPUTE. THE FACT THAT JUDGE ALITO IS

12:36:56 SUCH A BASEBALL FAN GIVES ME EVEN MORE CONFIDENCE THAT HE

12:36:59 KNOWS THE PROPER ROLE OF THE JUDGE.

12:37:01 I KNOW THAT THERE IS A PITCHED BATTLE GOING ON OUTSIDE THE

12:37:04 SENATE WAS DUELING PRESS CONFERENCES, TELEVISION ADS,

12:37:09 FEMALE, PETITION DRIVES, AND STACKS OF REPORTS AND PRESS

12:37:12 RELEASES. THE SENATE CAN RISE ABOVE THAT

12:37:15 BATTLE IF WE REMEMBER THE PROPER ROLE FOR THE SENATE AND THE

12:37:18 PROPER ROLE FOR JUDGES. WE CAN RISE ABOVE THAT BATTLE IF

12:37:22 WE REMEMBER THAT JUDICIAL NOMINEES ARE LIMITED IN WHAT

12:37:28 THEY MAY DISCUSS, TAKE EACH PART OF JUDGE ALITO'S RECORD ON ITS

12:37:33 OWN TERMS. CONSIDER JUDGE ALITO'S ENTIRE

12:37:36 RECORD AND APPLY JUDICIAL RATHER THAN POLITICAL STANDARDS.

12:37:40 JUDGE ALITO, I KNOW YOU. I HAVE KNOWN YOU FOR A LONG

12:37:44 TIME. YOU ARE A GOOD MAN.

12:37:46 YOU ARE AN EXCEPTIONAL JUDGE AS WELL.

12:37:48 I WELCOME YOU AND YOUR FAMILY TO THIS COMMITTEE.

12:37:53 I HOPE THE DAYS AHEAD WILL REFLECT MORE LIGHT AND HEAT.

12:37:56 WE CONGRATULATE YOU THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO GO THROUGH THIS

12:37:59 GRUELING PROCESS TO REPRESENT YOUR COUNTRY ON ONE OF THE THREE

12:38:05 SEPARATED POWERS. IT MEANS SO MUCH TO ALL OF US.

12:38:08 I'M GRATEFUL TO PERSONALLY KNOW YOU AS WELL AS I DO.

12:38:10 THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.>SENATOR KENNEDY?

12:38:16>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I JOIN IN WELCOMING YOU AND YOUR

12:38:21 FAMILY TO THIS COMMITTEE. I APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO

12:38:27 VISIT WITH YOU IN MY OFFICE A FEW WEEKS AGO AND I WAS

12:38:31 PARTICULARLY IMPRESSED BY YOUR PERSONAL FAMILY STORY OF HOW YOU

12:38:36 WERE ENCOURAGED TO DO WELL AND CONTRIBUTE TO YOUR COMMUNITY.

12:38:40 I ALSO APPLAUD YOUR DEDICATION TO PUBLIC SERVICE THROUGHOUT

12:38:44 YOUR LIFE TIME. SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS ARE AN

12:38:51 OCCASION TO PAUSE AND REFLECT ON THE VALUES THAT MAKE OUR NATION

12:38:54 STRONG, JUST, AND FAIR. WE MUST DETERMINE WHETHER A

12:38:59 NOMINEE HAS A DEMONSTRATED COMMITMENT TO THOSE BASIC

12:39:02 VALUES. WILL A NOMINEE EMBRACE AND

12:39:07 UPHOLD THE ESSENTIAL MEANING OF THE FOUR WORDS INSCRIBED ABOVE

12:39:12 THE ENTRANCE OF THE SUPREME COURT BUILDING?

12:39:17 EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW. JUSTICE LEWIS POWELL SPOKE FOR

12:39:22 ALL OF US WHEN HE SAID "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW IS PERHAPS THE

12:39:29 MOST INSPIRING IDEA OF OUR SOCIETY.

12:39:32 IT IS ONE OF THE ENDS FOR WHICH OUR ENTIRE LEGAL SYSTEM EXISTS."

12:39:39 AS WE HAVE SEEN FROM JUSTICE O'CONNOR IS EXAMPLE, EVEN ONE

12:39:46 JUSTICE CAN PROFOUNDLY ALTER THE MEANING OF THOSE WORDS FOR OUR

12:39:50 CITIZENS. EVEN ONE JUSTICE CAN DEEPLY

12:39:54 FACT THE RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

12:39:59 EVEN ONE JUSTICE CAN ADVANCE OR REVERSE THE PROGRESS OF OUR

12:40:03 JOURNEY. SO THE QUESTION BEFORE US IN

12:40:07 THESE HEARINGS IS THIS -- DOES JUDGE ALITO'S RECORD HOLD TRUE

12:40:11 TO THE LETTER AND SPIRIT OF EQUAL JUSTICE?

12:40:15 IS HE COMMITTED TO THE CORE BY USE OF OUR CONSTITUTION?

12:40:19 THAT ARE AT THE HEART OF OUR NATION'S PROGRESS.

12:40:23 CAN HE TRULY BE EVEN-HANDED AND FAIR IN HIS DECISIONS?

12:40:28 IN A WAY, JUDGE ALITO HAS FACED THIS ISSUE BEFORE AS A NOMINEE

12:40:32 TO THE COURT OF APPEALS. I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF CHAIRING

12:40:36 HIS CONFIRMATION HEARINGS IN 1990.

12:40:39 AT THAT TIME, HE HAD PRACTICED LAW FOR 14 YEARS, BUT ONLY

12:40:45 REPRESENTED ONE CLIENT -- THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

12:40:47 I ASKED WHETHER HE BELIEVED HE COULD BE IMPARTIAL IN DECIDING

12:40:51 CASES INVOLVING THE GOVERNMENT. AND IN THAT HEARING, JUDGE ALITO

12:40:55 SAID ON THE RECORD THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT QUALITY FOR A JUDGE IS

12:40:59 OPEN-MINDED THIS TO THE ARGUMENTS.

12:41:01 HE PROMISED THE COMMITTEE THAT HE WOULD MAKE A VERY CONSCIOUS

12:41:05 EFFORT TO BE ABSOLUTELY IMPARTIAL.

12:41:07 WE TOOK HIM AT HIS WORD AND OVERWHELMINGLY CONFIRMED HIM TO

12:41:12 THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS. WE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF JUDGE

12:41:16 OF THE THOSE 15 YEARS ON THE BENCH, AND THE BENEFIT OF SOME

12:41:20 OF HIS EARLIER WRITINGS THAT WERE NOT AVAILABLE 15 YEARS AGO.

12:41:24 I REGRET TO SAY THAT THE RECORD TROUBLES ME DEEPLY.

12:41:28 IN AN ERA WHEN THE WHITE HOUSE IS ABUSING POWER, HIS EXCUSING

12:41:36 AND ALL THE RISING TORTURE, AND IS SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS,

12:41:41 I FIND JUDGE TOLEDO'S SUPPORT FOR AN ALL-POWERFUL EXECUTIVE

12:41:46 BRANCH TO BE GENUINELY TROUBLING.

12:41:49 UNDER THE PRESIDENT'S BUYING PROGRAM, THERE ARE NO CHECKS AND

12:41:53 BALANCES. THERE IS NO OUTSIDE REVIEW OF

12:41:56 THE LEGALITY OF THIS BRAZEN INFRINGEMENT ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS

12:42:01 AND LIBERTIES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

12:42:04 UNDETERRED BY THE PUBLIC OUTCRY, THE PRESIDENT VOWS TO CONTINUE

12:42:09 SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS. ULTIMATELY, THE COURTS WILL MAKE

12:42:15 THE FINAL JUDGMENT WHETHER THE WHITE HOUSE HAS GONE TOO FAR.

12:42:20 INDEPENDENT AND IMPARTIAL JUDGES MUCH ASSESS THE PROPER

12:42:24 BALANCE BETWEEN PROTECTING OUR LIBERTIES AND PROTECTING OUR

12:42:28 NATIONAL SECURITY. I AM GRAVELY CONCERNED BY JUDGE

12:42:33 OF ITO'S CLEAR RECORD OF SUPPORT FOR VAST PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY,

12:42:38 UNCHECKED BY THE OTHER TWO BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

12:42:43 IN DECISION AFTER DECISION ON THE BENCH, HE HAS EXCUSED

12:42:47 ABUSIVE ACTIONS BY THE AUTHORITIES THAT INTRUDE ON THE

12:42:50 PERSONAL PRIVACY AND FREEDOMS OF AVERAGE AMERICANS.

12:42:53 AND IN HIS WRITINGS AND SPEECHES, HE HAS SUPPORTED LEVEL

12:42:57 OF OVERREACHING PRESIDENTIAL POWER THAT FRANKLY MOST

12:43:01 AMERICANS FIND DISTURBING AND EVEN FRIGHTENING.

12:43:05 IN FACT, IS EXTRAORDINARY THAT EACH OF THE THREE INDIVIDUALS

12:43:09 THIS PRESIDENT HAS NOMINATED FOR THE SUPREME COURT -- CHIEF

12:43:13 JUSTICE ROBERTS, HARRY ADMIRERS, AND NOW JUDGE ALITO, HAS SERVED

12:43:18 NOT ONLY AS A LAWYER FOR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH BUT HAS

12:43:21 DEFENDED THE MOST EXPANSIVE VIEW OF PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY.

12:43:25 PERHAPS THAT IS WHY THIS PRESIDENT NOMINATED THEM.

12:43:29 BUT AS JUSTICE O'CONNOR STATED, EVEN A STATE OF WAR IS NOT A

12:43:33 BLANK CHECK FOR PRESIDENT TO DO WHATEVER HE WANTS.

12:43:38 THE SUPREME COURT MUST SERVE AS AN INDEPENDENT CHECK ON ABUSES

12:43:42 BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND A PROTECTOR OF OUR LIBERTIES, NOT

12:43:46 A CHEERLEADER FOR AN IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY.

12:43:50 THERE ARE OTHER AREAS OF CONCERN.

12:43:54 IN AN AIR OF WHEN TO MANY AMERICANS ARE LOSING THEIR JOBS

12:43:58 OR WORKING FOR LAST, TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET, IN CLOSE CASES,

12:44:04 JUDGE ALITO'S RULED THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TIME AGAINST THE

12:44:08 CLAIMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS.

12:44:10 HE HAS ACTED IN STEAD IN FAVOR OF GOVERNMENT, LARGE

12:44:15 CORPORATIONS AND OTHER POWERFUL INTERESTS.

12:44:17 IN A STUDY BY THE WELL-RESPECTED EXPERT FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF

12:44:22 CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL, JUDGE ALITO WAS FOUND TO RULE AGAINST THE

12:44:27 INDIVIDUAL IN 84% OF HIS DISSENTS.

12:44:31 TO PUT IT PLAINLY, AVERAGE AMERICANS HAVE HAD A HARD TIME

12:44:36 GETTING A FAIR SHAKE IN HIS COURT ROOM.

12:44:39 IN AN ERA WHEN AMERICA IS STILL TOO DIVIDED BY RACE AND RICH'S,

12:44:47 JUDGE ALITO HAS NOT BEEN ONE SINGLE OPINION ON THE MERITS IN

12:44:53 FAVOR OF A PERSON OF COLOR IN ALLEGING RACE DISCRIMINATION ON

12:44:58 THE JOB. IN 15 YEARS ON THE BENCH, NOT

12:45:02 ONE. AND WHEN I LOOK AT THAT RECORD

12:45:05 IN LIGHT OF THE 1985 JOB OBLIGATION TO THE REAGAN JUSTICE

12:45:09 DEPARTMENT, IS EVEN MORE TROUBLING.

12:45:13 THAT DOCUMENT LAYS OUT AN IDEOLOGICAL AGENDA THAT

12:45:15 HIGHLIGHT HIS PRIDE IN THE LONG -- BELONGING TO AN ALUMNI GROUP

12:45:19 AT PRINCETON THAT OPPOSED THE ADMISSION OF WOMEN AND PROPOSED

12:45:21 TO CURB THE ADMISSION OF RACIAL MINORITIES.

12:45:25 IT PROCLAIMS HIS LEGAL OPINION THAT THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT

12:45:29 PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN TO MAKE THEIR OWN REPRODUCTIVE

12:45:34 DECISIONS. IT EXPRESSES OUTRIGHT HOSTILITY

12:45:38 TO THE BASIC PRINCIPLE OF ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE, AFFIRMED BY

12:45:44 THE SUPREME COURT IS ESSENTIAL TO ENSURING ALL AMERICANS HAVE A

12:45:47 VOICE IN THEIR GOVERNMENT. THIS APPLICATION WAS NOT A

12:45:52 YOUTHFUL INDISCRETION. IT WAS A DOCUMENT PREPARED BY

12:45:58 MENTOR, 35 YEAR-OLD PROFESSIONAL.

12:46:01 FINALLY, MANY OF US ARE CONCERNED ABOUT CONFLICTING

12:46:05 STATEMENTS THAT JUDGE ALITO'S MADE IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS

12:46:08 FROM THIS COMMITTEE AND OTHERS. AS CHAIRMAN SPECTER AS STATED,

12:46:13 THIS CONFIRMATION LARGELY DEPENDS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF

12:46:16 JUDGE ALITO STATEMENTS TO US, AND WE HAVE QUESTIONS.

12:46:20 WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE IDEOLOGICAL STATEMENTS AND SPECIFIC LEGAL

12:46:25 OPINIONS IN HIS 1985 APPLICATION, JUDGE ALITO HAS

12:46:28 DISMISSED THOSE STATEMENTS AS JUST APPLYING FOR A JOB.

12:46:31 WHEN HE WAS BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE IN 1990 APPLYING FOR A

12:46:34 JOB TO THE CIRCUIT, HE PROMISED UNDER OATH THAT HE WOULD RECUSE

12:46:39 HIMSELF FROM CASES INVOLVING VANGUARD.

12:46:42 THE MUTUAL-FUND COMPANY IN WHICH HE HAD MOST OF HIS INVESTMENTS.

12:46:46 AS A JUDGE, HE PARTICIPATED IN THE VANGUARD CASE ANYWAY, AND

12:46:51 HAS OFFERED MANY CONFLICTING REASONS TO EXPLAIN WHY HE BROKE

12:46:54 HIS WORD. WE NEED TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF

12:46:56 THIS MATTER TO INSURE OURSELVES THAT WHAT JUDGE ALITO SAYS IN

12:47:01 THESE HEARINGS WILL NOT BE JUST WORDS BUT PLEDGES THAT GUIDE HIM

12:47:06 IN THE FUTURE IF HE IS CONFIRMED.

12:47:09 JUDGES ARE APPOINTED BY AND WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE

12:47:13 SENATE, AND IS OUR DUTY TO ASK QUESTIONS ON GREAT ISSUES THAT

12:47:18 MATTER TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND TO SPEAK FOR THEM.

12:47:23 MANY REPUBLICAN SENATORS CERTAINLY DEMANDED ANSWERS TO.

12:47:29 MYERS, WE SHOULD EXPECT NO LESS. THERE IS NO TIME FOR A DOUBLE

12:47:36 STANDARD. IF CONFIRMED, JUDGE ALITO COULD

12:47:39 SERVE ON THE COURT FOR REGENERATION OR MORE AND THE

12:47:42 DECISIONS HE WILL MAKE AS JUSTICE WILL HAVE A DIRECT

12:47:45 IMPACT ON THE LIVES AND LIBERTIES OF OUR CHILDREN, OUR

12:47:49 GRANDCHILDREN, AND EVEN OUR GREAT GRANDCHILDREN.

12:47:52 WE HAVE ONLY ONE CHANCE TO GET IT RIGHT AND A SOLEMN OBLIGATION

12:47:56 TO DO SO. JUDGE ALITO, I HAVE SERIOUS

12:47:59 QUESTIONS TO ASK. I CONGRATULATE YOU ON YOUR

12:48:02 NOMINATION AND I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR ANSWERS IN THESE HEARINGS.

12:48:05>THANK YOU, SENATOR KENNEDY. SENATOR GRASSLEY?

12:48:10>I HAVE A MUCH MORE POSITIVE VIEW OF JUDGE ALITO.

12:48:15 [LAUGHTER] I THINK THE RECORD WILL SUSTAIN

12:48:20 MY VIEW. FIRST, JUDGE ALITO, I WELCOME

12:48:23 YOU AND YOUR PROUD FAMILY TO THE COMMITTEE AND CONGRATULATIONS ON

12:48:27 YOUR NOMINATION. I FIRST WANT TO REMIND ALL

12:48:30 AMERICANS WHO MIGHT BE LISTENING THAT THE SENATE HAS A VERY

12:48:33 IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITY TO CONFIRM ONLY WELL QUALIFIED

12:48:38 INDIVIDUALS WHO WILL FAITHFULLY INTERPRET THE LAW AND THE

12:48:41 CONSTITUTION. CONFIRMATION SHOULD BE LIMITED

12:48:45 TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS WILL BE FAIR, UNBIASED, DEVOTED TO

12:48:50 ADDRESSING THE FAX AND THE LOBBY FOR THEM, WITHOUT IMPOSING THEIR

12:48:55 OWN VALUES AND POLITICAL BELIEFS WHEN DECIDING CASES.

12:49:01 NOMINEES SHOULDN'T BE EXPECTED TO PRE COMMIT TO RULING ON

12:49:05 CERTAIN ISSUES IN A CERTAIN WAY, NOR SHOULD SENATORS ASK NOMINEES

12:49:11 TO PLEDGE TO RULE ON CASES IN A PARTICULAR WAY.

12:49:14 SO IF WE FULFILL OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE

12:49:19 CONSTITUTION, THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE FILLED WITH SUPERIOR

12:49:21 LEGAL MINDS WHO WILL PURSUE THE ONE AGENDA THAT OUR FOUNDING

12:49:27 FATHERS INTENDED IN WRITING THE CONSTITUTION -- JUSTICE RATHER

12:49:34 THAN POLITICAL OR PERSONAL GOALS.

12:49:36 THE SUPREME COURT WILL THEN CONSIST OF INDIVIDUALS WHO

12:49:42 METICULOUSLY APPLY THE LAW IN THE CONSTITUTION REGARDLESS OF

12:49:45 WHETHER THE RESULTS THEY REACH OUR POPULAR OR NOT.

12:49:49 IF WE DO OUR JOB RIGHT, THE SUPREME COURT WILL NOT BE MADE

12:49:53 UP OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE LITTLE GUY OR

12:49:57 THE BIG GUY, RATHER THE SUPREME COURT WILL BE MADE UP OF MEN AND

12:50:02 WOMEN WHO ARE ON THE SIDE OF VELOX AND THE CONSTITUTION.

12:50:08 FROM ALL ACCOUNTS, JUDGE ALITO HAS AN IMPRESSIVE AND EXTENSIVE

12:50:14 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL RECORD, CERTAINLY ONE WORTHY OF SOMEONE

12:50:17 ON THE SUPREME COURT. JUDGE ALITO EXCELLED AT TOPKNOT

12:50:22 SCHOOLS, A MEMBER OF LAW REVIEW, TOWARD FOR THE FEDERAL

12:50:26 JUDGE. HE ALSO HELD IMPORTANT POSITIONS

12:50:29 AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ALSO -- OFFICE OF LEGAL

12:50:35 COUNSEL, SOLICITOR GENERAL'S OFFICE, AND WAS U.S. ATTORNEY

12:50:37 FOR NEW JERSEY BEFORE BEING APPOINTED TO THE THIRD CIRCUIT.

12:50:41 I WANT TO REMIND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, THIS NOMINEE, JUDGE

12:50:48 ALITO, HAS BEEN CONFIRMED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE UNITED STATES

12:50:52 SENATE NOT ONCE BUT TWICE. THIS IS A TREMENDOUS RECORD OF

12:50:58 ACCOMPLISHMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICE EQUAL TO ANY SUPREME

12:51:00 COURT NOMINEE THAT I'VE CONSIDERED IT 25 YEARS THAT I

12:51:03 HAVE BEEN ON THIS COMMITTEE, NOT ONLY THAT, JUDGE ALITO HAS A

12:51:07 REPUTATION FOR BEING AN EXCEPTIONAL AND HONEST JUDGES

12:51:11 VOTED TO RULE OF LAW AS WELL AS BEING A MAN OF INTEGRITY.

12:51:16 JUDGE ALITO ENJOYS THE SUPPORT AND RESPECT OF PEOPLE WHO WORK

12:51:19 WITH THEM, PRACTICE WITH HIM, AND THEREFORE KNOW HIM BEST.

12:51:23 EXAMPLE -- 54 OF JUDGE ALITO'S LAW CLERKS, DEMOCRATS,

12:51:30 REPUBLICANS, AND INDEPENDENTS ALIKE, SIGNED A LETTER TO THE

12:51:33 COMMITTEE THAT STATED "THEY COLLECTIVELY WERE INVOLVED IN

12:51:36 THOUSANDS OF CASES AND IT NEVER APPEARED TO US THAT JUDGE ALITO

12:51:40 AS PREJUDGED THE CASE OR RULE BASED ON POLITICAL IDEOLOGY."

12:51:47 CONTINUING TO "IT IS OUR EXPERIENCE THAT JUDGE ALITO WAS

12:51:53 GUIDED BY HIS PROFOUND RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND THE

12:51:56 LIMITED ROLE OF THE JUDICIAL BRANCH."

12:52:00 THOSE 54 OPINION SAY A LOT ABOUT JUDGE DID -- JUDGE ALITO AND HIS

12:52:04 APPROACH TO JUDICIAL FUNCTION. LIKE CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, IT

12:52:07 APPEARS THAT JUDGE ALITO TRIES TO ACT LIKE AN UMPIRE, CALLING

12:52:11 THE BALLS AND STRIKES RATHER THAN ADVOCATING A PARTICULAR

12:52:14 OUTCOME. I AM ALSO IMPRESSED WITH THE

12:52:17 VERY COMPLIMENTARY THINGS THAT SOME LAWYERS HAVE HAD TO SAY

12:52:19 ABOUT JUDGE ALITO IN THE WAR IS EVALUATION SECTION OF THE

12:52:24 ALMANAC OF FEDERAL JUDICIARY. WITH RESPECT TO HIS LEGAL

12:52:27 ABILITY, LAWYERS PRAISED HIM SAYING THAT JUDGE ALITO WAS

12:52:31 "EXCEPTIONAL, A BRILLIANT JURIST."

12:52:36 OTHER LAWYERS STATED THAT TO SAY THAT HE IS OUTSTANDING IS TO USE

12:52:41 UNDERSTATEMENT. HE'S THE BEST JUDGE ON THE

12:52:43 CIRCUIT, MAYBE IN THE COUNTRY. WITH RESPECT TO HIS DEMEANOR AND

12:52:48 TEMPERAMENT, WHERE SOUND JUDGE ALITO TO BE MEASURED AND

12:52:51 JUDICIAL WHILE ON THE BENCH. ONE LAWYER COMMENTED THAT HE IS

12:52:57 DEMANDING BUT ALWAYS COURTEOUS. HE MAY OCCASIONALLY "DEMONSTRATE

12:53:02 A LITTLE BIT OF IMPATIENCE WITH WARES THAT ARE NOT QUITE GETTING

12:53:06 IT. THIS CAN BE DIRECTED AT EITHER

12:53:08 SIDE, IT IS JUST A SIGN THAT HIS MIND IS WORKING MORE EFFICIENTLY

12:53:12 THAN YOURS. HE IS NEVER DISCOURTEOUS, NEVER

12:53:15 ABUSIVE." OTHER LAWYERS SAID THAT HE IS

12:53:19 PLEASANT AND COURTEOUS. OTRS COMMENTED ABOUT THE

12:53:22 IMPRESSION THAT JUDGE ALITO IS A CONSERVATIVE JUDGE, BUT

12:53:26 CERTAINLY NOT OUT TO IMPOSE HIS OWN PERSONAL AGENDA WHILE ON THE

12:53:30 BENCH. ONE LAWYER COMMENTED THAT HE "IS

12:53:34 A CONSERVATIVE BUT REACHES ON ITS DECISIONS."

12:53:38 WHILE ANOTHER SAID "BY REPUTATION HE IS KNOWN TO BE ONE

12:53:42 OF THE MORE CONSERVATIVE JUDGES ON THE COURT BUT HE IS

12:53:45 FORTHRIGHT AND FAIR. HE TRIES TO DECIDE CASES IN

12:53:50 FRONT OF HIM IN THE RIGHT WAY." AND THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

12:53:56 CAME OUT JUST LAST WEEK WITH AN EVALUATION OF JUDGE ALITO TO BE

12:53:59 A JUSTICE. THEY CONSIDERED THINGS LIKE

12:54:03 INTEGRITY, JUDGMENT, COMPASSION, OPEN MINDEDNESS, AND

12:54:07 FREEDOM FROM BIAS AND COMMITMENT TO EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW.

12:54:10 THE ABA ONCE AGAIN FOUND JUDGE ALITO TO BE UNIMOUSLY WELL

12:54:16 QUALIFIED. THIS RECOMMENDATION SHOULD HAVE

12:54:18 MUCH WEIGHT OFF FOR MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE WHO

12:54:23 HAVE TIME AND TIME AGAIN DESCRIBED THE WEIGHTING OF THE

12:54:27 ABA AS "GOLD STANDARD." YET, SOME LIBERAL INTEREST

12:54:32 GROUPS HAVE COME OUT IN FULL FORCE AND HAVE ATTEMPTED TO

12:54:36 PAINT JUDGE ALITO TO BE AN EXTREMIST AND TO BE AN ACTIVIST.

12:54:40 THEY HAVE CRITICIZED A NOMINEE WHO HAS, FROM WHAT I SEE,

12:54:44 DESCRIBED BY HIS LAWYERS AND FELLOW JUDGES A REPUTATION OF

12:54:48 BEING A RESTRAINED JURISTS COMMITTED TO THE RULE OF LAW AND

12:54:52 THE CONSTITUTION. THAT IS WHAT THESE OUTSIDE THE

12:54:57 MAINSTREAM GROUP'S ALWAYS DO. THEY ATTACK INDIVIDUALS.

12:55:01 INDIVIDUALS WHO THEY BELIEVE WILL NOT IMPLEMENT THEIR AGENDA

12:55:05 BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT. SO JUDGE ALITO SHOULD SEEK --

12:55:09 SEE CRITICISM AS A BADGE OF HONOR WORN BY MANY PAST AND

12:55:13 PRESENT MEMBERS OF THE COURT. YET, I AM GLAD TO SEE THE PUBLIC

12:55:18 FULLY PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS BECAUSE THIS IS THE

12:55:21 NATURE OF OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT.

12:55:23 I DO NOT LIKE TO SEE FACTS TWISTED, UNTRUTHS' FABRICATED TO

12:55:28 GIVE THE NOMINEE A BLACK EYE EVEN BEFORE HE COMES BEFORE OUR

12:55:30 COMMITTEE. SO, JUDGE ALITO, NOW YOU HAVE

12:55:35 THE OPPORTUNITY TO SET EVERYONE STRAIGHT ON YOUR RECORD AND

12:55:38 APPROACH TO DECIDING CASES. THESE HEARINGS ARE ALSO AN

12:55:41 OPPORTUNITY -- A VERY GOOD OPPORTUNITY -- TO REMIND THE

12:55:45 PUBLIC ABOUT THE PROPER ROLE OF A JUDGE IN OUR SYSTEM OF CHECKS

12:55:48 AND BALANCES AND LIMITED GOVERNMENT.

12:55:53 JUDGES ARE REQUIRED BY A DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM TO NOT

12:55:56 OVERSTEP THEIR POSITIONS TO BECOME POLICY MAKERS ARE SUPER

12:56:00 LEGISLATORS. SUPREME COURT NOMINEES SHOULD

12:56:03 KNOW, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, THAT THEIR JOB IS NOT TO IMPOSE THEIR

12:56:06 OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS OF WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG, BUT TO SAY

12:56:10 WHAT THE LOT IS RATHER THAN WHAT THEY PERSONALLY THINK YOU OUGHT

12:56:14 TO BE. SUPREME COURT NOMINEES SHOULD

12:56:17 KNOW THAT THIS EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL RESTRAINT IS THE KEY

12:56:21 INGREDIENT OF BEING A GOOD JUDGE, AS THE CONSTITUTION

12:56:26 CONSTRAINS JUDGES EVER BEEN AS MUCH AS THE CONSTRAINTS WE

12:56:31 LEGISLATORS, EXECUTIVES, AND CITIZENS IN THEIR ACTIONS.

12:56:35 MOREOVER, SUPREME COURT NOMINEES SHOULD BE INDIVIDUALS WHO NOT

12:56:39 ONLY UNDERSTAND WHAT TRULY RESPECT THE EQUAL ROLES AND

12:56:43 RESPONSIBILITIES OF DIFFERENT BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT AND OUR

12:56:46 STATE GOVERNMENTS. AS ALEXANDER HAMILTON SAID IN

12:56:50 "FEDERALIST NO. 78" "THE COURTS MUST DECIDE THE SENSE OF LAW AND

12:56:57 THE CONSEQUENCES SHOULD BE THE SUBSTITUTION OF THEIR PLEASURE

12:57:01 TO THAT OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY. OUR FRAMERS EXPECTED THE

12:57:05 JUDICIAL BRANCH TO BE THE LEAST DANGEROUS BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT."

12:57:10 OUR MEETING IN MY OFFICE IN NOVEMBER, I HEARD JUDGE ALITO

12:57:14 PLACE EMPHASIS ON THE LIMITED ROLE OF THE COURTS IN THE

12:57:19 DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY. HE ALSO REITERATED ITS BELIEF IN

12:57:22 A QUESTIONNAIRE HE SUBMITTED TO THIS COMMITTEE.

12:57:24 I HAVE SOME IDEA OF HOW JUDGE ALITO APPROACH IS THE LOT AND

12:57:29 USE THE ROLE OF THE JUDGE. I AM HOPEFUL THAT HIS

12:57:33 COMMITMENT TO JUDICIAL RESTRAINT AND TO CONFINING

12:57:36 DECISIONS TO ALL AND THE CONSTITUTION WILL SHINE THROUGH

12:57:39 IN THIS HEARING. I BELIEVE IT WILL AND I'M

12:57:41 HOPEFUL THAT MY COLLEAGUES WILL GIVE JUDGE ALITO THE SYMBOL OF

12:57:45 THEIR AND A DIGNIFIED PROCESS AS WELL AS AN UP OR DOWN VOTE.

12:57:51 BECAUSE, AS ALWAYS, THE CONSTITUTION SETS THE STANDARD,

12:57:56 THE PRESIDENT NOMINATES, THE SENATE DELIBERATES, AND THEN WE

12:57:59 ARE OBLIGATED TO GIVE OUR ADVICE AND CONSENT IN AN UP OR DOWN

12:58:03 VOTE. TOLEDO, I CONGRATULATE YOU.

12:58:07>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SENATOR GRASSLEY.

12:58:10 SENATOR BIDEN?>JUDGE, WELCOME, MRS. TOLEDO,

12:58:17 WELCOME. IT IS AN INCREDIBLE HONOR TO BE

12:58:19 NOMINATED BY THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES TO BE AN ASSOCIATE

12:58:22 JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT. YOU ARE TO BE CONGRATULATED.

12:58:27 JUDGE, THIS MAY BE ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENTIAL

12:58:31 NOMINATIONS THAT THE SENATE WILL VOTE ON.

12:58:33 SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE IN THE LAST THREE DECADES, THAT IS.

12:58:38 I THINK HISTORY HAS DELIVERED YOU, FORTUNATELY OR

12:58:43 UNFORTUNATELY, TO A MOMENT WHEN SUPREME COURT HISTORIANS OR INTO

12:58:46 THE FUTURE WILL LOOK BACK ON THIS NOMINATION AND MAKE A

12:58:50 JUDGMENT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WITH YOUR NOMINATION, AND IF YOU

12:58:55 ARE CONFIRMED, WHETHER THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE UNITED

12:58:58 STATES SUPREME COURT BEGAN TO CHANGE FROM THE CONSENSUS THAT

12:59:01 EXISTED LAST 70 YEARS OR WHETHER CONTINUING ON THE SAME PATH THAT

12:59:06 HAS OVER THE PAST SIX OR SEVEN DECADES.

12:59:10 THAT MOMENT IS RIGHT NOW. LEST WE THINK -- IT'S KIND

13:00:00 SAID, BUT IN YOUR JOB APPLICATION WHEN YOU

13:00:03 TALKED ABOUT BEING PROUD -- AS YOU SHOULD BE -- TO BE PROUD OF

13:00:07 YOUR SUBSCRIPTION TO AND ADHERING TO NOTIONS PUT BOARD IN

13:00:12 THE NATIONAL REVIEW THAT YOU ARE A PROUD MEMBER OF THE FEDERALIST

13:00:16 SOCIETY, NATIONAL COERVATIVE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE, THE

13:00:20 AMERICAN SPECTATOR IS SOMETHING YOU LOOK TO -- THESE ARE ALL

13:00:23 RIGHT FOLKS.. WHILE AT THE SAME

13:01:29 TIME EMPOWERING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT THE LESS

13:01:32 POWERFUL. ONLY RECENTLY IS THE DEBATE COME

13:01:35 THAT STATE'S RIGHTS ARE BEING TRUMPED IN A FUNDAMENTAL WAY,

13:01:40 READING OF THE TENTH AMENDMENT AND LEVENTED AMENDMENT.

13:01:42 THAT'S A LA YT MATE DEBATE. ANYBODY WHO PRETENDS THAT HOW

13:01:47 YOU READ THE 10TH AND 11TH AMENDMENT DOESN'T HAVE A

13:01:51 FUNDAMENTAL IMPACT ON THE THINGS WE CARE ABOUT IS KIDDING

13:01:54 THEMSELVES. THEY'RE EITHER UNINFORMED OR

13:01:56 THEY'RE KIDDING THEMSELVES. SO, JUDGE, THERE'S A GENERAL --

13:02:00 A GENUINE STRUGGLE GOING ON, WELL BEYOND YOU, WELL BEYOND THE

13:02:05 CONGRESS IN AMERICA ABOUT HOW TO READ THE CONSTITUTION.

13:02:09 AND I BELIEVE AT ITS CORE WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION AS OUR

13:02:13 SUPREME COURT'S FIRST GREAT JUSTICE MARSHALL SAID, IN 1819

13:02:18 AND I QUOTE, "INTENDED TO INDID YOU FOR THE AGES TO COME AND

13:02:22 CONSEQUENTIAL TO BE ADAPTED TO THE VARIOUS CRISIS OF HUMAN

13:02:27 AFFAIRS." THAT'S THE CRUX OF THE DEBATE WE'RE HAVING NOW,

13:02:30 WHETHER IT'S AN ADAPTABLE CONSTITUTION.

13:02:31 A LOT OF MY FRIENDS MAKE VERY POWERFUL AND CONVINCING

13:02:34 ARGUMENTS AND THEY MAY BE RIGHT, THAT, NO, NO, NO, NO, IT IS NOT

13:02:38 ADAPTABLE. IT IS NOT ADAPTABLE.

13:02:40 AND SINCE OUR COUNTRY'S G FOUNDING, WE'VE TRIED TO KEEP

13:02:44 GOVERNMENT'S HEAVY HAND OUT OF OUR PERSONAL LIVES WHILE

13:02:46 ENSURING THAT WE DO THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, WHICH IS TO

13:02:50 PROTECT THOSE WHO CANNOT PROTECT THEMSELVES.

13:02:53 AND THE DEBATE RAGING TODAY IS ABOUT WHETHER WE'LL CONTINUE

13:02:56 ALONG THAT PATH OR WHETHER OUR COURTS WILL CONTINUE TO BE --

13:03:01 AND WHETHER OUR COURTS WILL CONTINUE TO BE ONE OF THE PLACES

13:03:03 WHERE SOCIETY PUTS THE LITTLE GUY, AND I KNOW THIS IS NOT

13:03:07 SOMETHING YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SAY, THE LITTLE GUY THE SAME

13:03:09 FOOTING WITH THE BIG GUY, THE ONE PLACE DAVID IS EQUAL TO GO

13:03:12 LITH IN THE SUPREME COURT. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT

13:03:17 YOU'RE SLATED TO REPLACE THE FIRST WOMAN EVER NOMINATED TO

13:03:20 THE SUPREME COURT. WEAN PRETEND THAT'S NOT THE

13:03:23 FACT BUT IT IS. AND THROUGH NO FAULT OF YOUR

13:03:25 OWN, WE'RE CUTTING THE NUMBER OF WOMEN IN HALF ON THE COURT AND

13:03:28 NOW AS I SAID, THAT'S NOT YOUR FAULT.

13:03:30 BUT I THINK IT MEANS WE HAVE TO TAKE AT LEAST SPEAKING FOR

13:03:33 MYSELF, A CLOSER LOOK AT YOUR STANDS ON ISSUES THAT ARE

13:03:36 IMPORTANT TO WOMEN. AND MOREOVER, JUSTICE COE CONER

13:03:40 BROUGHT CRITICAL QUALITIES OF THE HIGH COURT THAT NOT

13:03:42 EVERYBODY THINKS ARE QUALITIES. I HAPPEN TO THINK THEY ARE.

13:03:46 HER PRACTICING MA TESTIMONY AND HER STATE CRAFT.

13:03:49 NOT THAT I'VE ALWAYS AGREED WITH WHAT SHE SAID.

13:03:52 FAR FROM IT. BUT JUSTICE O'CONNOR HAS BEEN

13:03:55 PROPERLY ALLOWEDED IN MY VIEW AS A JUDGE WHO APPROACHED HER

13:03:58 DUTIES WITH OPEN MINDEDNESS AND WITH A SENSITIVITY OF THE

13:04:02 EFFECTS HER DECISIONS WOULD HAVE ON EVERYDAY ORDINARY PEOPLE.

13:04:06 SHE, UNLIKE JUDGE BORK DID NOT THINK THAT BEING ON THE COURT

13:04:11 WOULD BE AN INTELLECTUAL FEAST, TO QUOFT JUDGE WORK.

13:04:15 JUSTICE O'CONNOR ALSO BROUGHT BALANCE TO OUR HIGHEST

13:04:19 COURT MOST RECENTLY AS BEEN REPEATED

13:04:22 MANY TIMES SHE CAUTIONED ABOUT WAR DOESN'T GIVE A BLANK CHECK.

13:04:25 HER DECISIONS REFLECT IN MY VIEW THAT OUR SOCIETY'S WORKED VERY

13:04:28 HARD TO APPROVE - GLOF THE WORK A DAY WORLD, TO OPEN DOORS TO

13:04:33 WORKERS, CONFRONTED BY POWERFUL EMPLOYERS AND FOR WOMEN FACING

13:04:37 HARASSMENT AND STEREO TYPES. NOW, I ACKNOWLEDGE THESE ARE

13:04:42 VERY TOUGH JOCKS, A JUDGE HAS IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THERE

13:04:45 IS AN OPENNESS THAT IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.

13:04:48 BUT I ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PREJUDICE RUNS VERY DEEP IN OUR

13:04:52 SOCIETY AND IN THE ROLE WORLD, DISCRIMINATION REARS ITS UGLY

13:04:55 HEAD IN THE SHADOWS. WORDS VERY DIFFICULT TO ROUTED

13:04:59 OUT BUT JUSTICE O'CONNOR WAS NOT AFRAID TO GO INTO THE SHADOWS.

13:05:04 THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES FOR ONE DEMOCRATIC MOMENT, JUDGE,

13:05:07 BEFORE A LIFETIME OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE, WHEN THE PEOPLE OF

13:05:11 THE UNITED STATES ARE ENTITLED TO KNOW AS MUCH AS WE CAN ABOUT

13:05:16 THE PERSON THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO ENTRUST WITH SAFEGUARDING OUR

13:05:20 FUTURE AND THE FUTURE OF OUR KIDS, AND, JUDGE, SIMPLY PUT,

13:05:26 THAT IS THIS MOMENT, THE ONE DEMOCRATIC MOMENT IN A LIFETIME

13:05:32 OF ABSOLUTE JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE.

13:05:35 AND THAT'S WHAT THESE HEARINGS ARE ABOUT IN MY VIEW.

13:05:38 IN THE COMING DAYS, WENT TO KNOW A

13:05:40 WE WANT TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT YOU BELIEVE, JUDGE, HOW YOU VIEW THE

13:05:44 CONSTITUTION, HOW YOU ENVISION THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL COURTS,

13:05:46 WHAT KIND OF JUSTICE YOU WOULD SEEK TO BECOME.

13:05:49 AS I SAID, THIS ONE DEMOCRATIC MOMENT WHEN THE PEOPLE, THROUGH

13:05:53 THEIR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES GET TO ASK QUESTIONS OF A

13:05:56 PRESIDENT'S CHOICE FOR THE HIGHEST COURT.

13:05:59 AND I HOPE YOU'LL BE G FORTHCOMING.

13:06:02 I CANNOT IMAGINE NOTWITHSTANDING WHAT MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO I

13:06:05 HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR BELIEVE, I CAN'T IMAGINE T FOUNDERS

13:06:08 WHEN THEY STAT DOWN AND WROTE THE DOCUMENT AND GOT TO THE

13:06:11 APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT?

13:06:14 THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE ENTITLED TO KNOW BEFORE WE MAKE HIM

13:06:17 PRESIDENT, BEFORE WE MAKE HER SENATOR, BEFORE WE MAKE HIM

13:06:21 CONGRESSMAN, WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN THE MAJOR ISSUES OF THE DAY.

13:06:25 BUT JUDGES SUPREME COURT NOMINEES AS LONG AS THEY'RE

13:06:29 SMART AND HONEST AND DECENT, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHAT HAD

13:06:33 HE THEY THINK. WE DON'T HAVE TO KNOW.

13:06:37 I CAN'T FATHOM, CAN'T FATHOM THAT THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE

13:06:41 FOUNDERS. THEY INTENDED THE AMERICAN

13:06:44 PEOPLE TO KNOW WHAT THEIR NOMINEES THOUGHT AND I MIGHT ADD

13:06:50 AND I'LL END WITH THIS, WE JUST HAD TWO SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

13:06:55 BEFORE OUR CAUCUS JUST BEFORE I THINK THEY WERE BEFORE THE

13:06:59 REPUBLICAN CAUCUS. THEY VENTURED OPINIONS ON

13:07:02 EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING.

13:07:03 THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO COME BEFORE THE COURT.

13:07:05 IT DID NOT IN ANY WAY JEOPARDIZE THEIR JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE.

13:07:09 SO, JUDGE, I REALLY HOPE THAT THIS DOESN'T TURN OUT TO BE A

13:07:13 MINIMUM USE WET. I HOPE IT TURNS OUT TO BELIEVE A

13:07:16 CONVERSATION. I BELIEVE WE, YOU AND I AND THIS

13:07:19 COMMITTEE, OWE IT TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THIS ONE

13:07:23 DEMOCRATIC MOMENT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ISSUES

13:07:28 THAT WILL AFFECT THEIR LIVES PROFOUNDLY.

13:07:31 THEY'RE ENTITLED TO KNOW WHAT YOU THINK AND I REMIND MY

13:07:35 COLLEAGUES, MANY OF WHICH ARE ON THIS COMMITTEE, THEY SURE WANTED

13:07:38 TO KNOW WHAT HARRIET MYERS THOUGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING, THEY

13:07:41 SURE WANTED TO KNOW IN GREAT DETAIL.

13:07:44 THEY WERE ABOUT READY TO ADMINISTER BLOOD TESTS.

13:07:46 THE GOOD NEWS IS NO BLOOD TESTS HERE.

13:07:49 THE GOOD NEWS IS NO BLOOD THE OUTSET I'M PLEASED TO

13:08:15 NOTE THAT YOU HAVE MORE JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE THAN ANY SUPREME

13:08:19 COURT NOMINEE IN MORE THAN 70 YEARS.

13:08:22 INDEED ONLY ONE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IN HISTORY, NOMINATED BY

13:08:30 PRESIDENT TAFT, HAD MORE FEDERAL APPEALS COURT EXPERIENCE.

13:08:35 MOREOVER, YOU'VE DEVOTED VIRTUALLY YOUR ENTITLE PROFDING

13:08:39 AL LIFE TO PUBLIC SERVICE AND THE NATION OWES YOU GRATITUDE

13:08:42 FOR THAT SERVICE. I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO A DIGNIFIED

13:08:46 HEARING FOLLOWED BY A FAIR UP OR DOWN VOTE ON THE SENATE FLOOR.

13:08:50 PLAINTIFF DISCUSSING YOUR NOMINATION I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS

13:08:53 MY ADMIRATION FOR THE JUSTICE WHOM YOU'RE NOMINATED TO

13:08:56 REPLACE. MY FELLOW ARIZONAN SANDRA DAY

13:09:00 O'CONNOR WHO I'VE KNOWN MORE THAN 30 YEARS.

13:09:02 SHE HAS SERVED WITH GREAT DISTINCTION DURING HER CAREER IN

13:09:05 THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURE, ON THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS AND FOR

13:09:09 WHAT HAS BEEN A QUARTER OF A CENTURY ON THE UNITED STATES

13:09:12 SUPREME COURT. ARIZONAS ARE DEEPLY PROUD OF HER

13:09:19 SERVICE TO THIS COUNTRY. SHE WILL ALWAYS BE REMEMBERED BY

13:09:22 ARIZONAIANS AND OUGHT AMERICANS AS AN EXTRAORDINARY PUBLIC SER

13:09:27 VABTS.>I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS YOUR

13:09:28 BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE IN THE CONTINENTAL TEXT OF OTHER

13:09:30 JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME COURT. SO THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS HOW

13:09:34 WELL YOU SATISFY WHAT WE HAVE COME TO EXPECT FROM OUR TOP

13:09:38 JUDGES. LIKE ALL THE SITTING JUSTICES,

13:09:43 YOU HAD AN OUTSTANDING EDUCATION.

13:09:45 ONE OF YOUR CLASSMATES AT YALE LAW SCHOOL WHO LATER WENT ON TO

13:09:49 BE THE DEAN OF THE LAW SCHOOL AND COULD I BELIEVE BE FAIRLY

13:09:54 DESCRIBED AS A POLITICAL LIBERAL AS RECENTLY REMARKED AND I

13:09:57 QUOTE, HE IMPRESSED ME, SPEAKING OF YOU, AS BEING MORE INTERESTED

13:10:01 IN THE TECHNIC, INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGES OF THE LAW AND ITS

13:10:04 LEGAL REASONING THAN ITS POLITICAL USES OR RAMIFICATIONS.

13:10:07 THUS, EACH IN YOUR EARLY 20'S, IT APPEARS YOU WERE FOCUSED ON

13:10:11 THE LAW AS AN INDEPENDENT PURSUIT RATHER THAN USING LAW TO

13:10:15 INFLUENCE POLITICAL ENDS. WITH YOUR EDUCATION YOU COULD

13:10:23 HAVE BECOME A WEALTHY ATTORNEY BUT INSTEAD YOU DEVOTED

13:10:25 VIRTUALLY ALL OF YOUR LEGAL CAREER TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE.

13:10:28 IN DOING SO, YOU MEET AND EVEN EXCEED THE STELLAR EXAMPLES SET

13:10:32 BY JUSTICES THOMAS AND SOUTER. EACH OF THEM DEVOTED MOST OF

13:10:37 THEIR PREJUDICIAL CAREERS TO PUBLIC SERVICE.

13:10:39 PERHAPS THIS IS BECAUSE LIKE JUSTICES GINSBURG AND SCALIA,

13:10:43 YOU HAVE A FATHER WHO IS AN I AM GRANT OF THIS NATION.

13:10:46 IT SEEMS I AM GRAVENLINGTS OFTEN HAVE A SPECIAL UNDERSTANDING OF

13:10:48 THE INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THIS NATION AFTERWARDS ITS

13:10:51 CITIZENS. MOREOVER YOUR FATHER'S LONG

13:10:54 SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC OF NEW JERSEY, BOTH AS A SCHOOL TEACHER

13:10:57 AND AS A CIVIL SER VANLET IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE PLAINLY SERVED

13:11:01 AS A MODEL FOR YOU. I ALSO NOTE THAT YOU SERVED IN

13:11:06 THE U U.S. ARMY RESERVES FROM 1972 UNTIL 1980.

13:11:09 IF CONFIRMED, ONLY YOU AND JUSTICE STEVENS WOULD HAVE ANY

13:11:11 MILITARY EXPERIENCE. YOU WOULDLESS BE THE FIRST

13:11:15 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE TO HAVE SERVED IN THE ARMY RESERVES

13:11:18 SINCE JUSTICE FRANK MURPHY DID SO DURING WORLD WAR II.

13:11:22 YOU'VE SPENT MUCH OF YOUR CAREER AS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR PURSUING

13:11:28 TERRORISTS, MOB KING PINS AND DRUG DEALERS AND OTHERS WHO

13:11:31 THREATEN OUR SAFETY AND Y SECURITY.

13:11:34 JUSTICE SOUTER HAD A DISTINGUISHED CAREER AS A --

13:11:40 AGAIN THIS EXPERIENCES COULD PROVE HELP PHYSICAL GIVEN THAT

13:11:44 APPROXIMATELY 40 INVOLVES CRIMINAL MATTERS.

13:11:49 DISL YOU ALSO SERVED AS AN ATTORNEY IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

13:11:52 LIKE CHIEF JUSTICE ROBER YOU SERVED IN THE SOLICITOR

13:11:55 GENERAL'S OFFICE REPRESENTING OUR GOVERNMENT BEFORE THE

13:11:58 SUPREME COURT. LIKE JUSTICE SCALIA YOU PROVIDED

13:12:02 EXECUTIVE ADVICE TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE RECEIPT OF THE

13:12:06 EXECUTIVE BRANCH. YOUR ROLE WAS TO ADVANCE THE

13:12:09 POLICIES OF A PRESIDENT WHO TWICE 1 AN ELECTRIC TO RECALL

13:12:12 COLLEGE LAND LIED. YOU SET THE AGENDA AND YOU

13:12:15 HELPED HIM IMPLEMENT IT. SIMILARLY JUSTICE THOMAS SERVED

13:12:20 PRESIDENT'S REAGAN AND BUSH IN POLITICAL LEGAL CAPACITIES AND

13:12:24 JUDGE BREYER AND ALSO AS A LAWYER TO THIS COMMITTEE.

13:12:29 I I THINK YOU WERE JUST 39 WHEN

13:12:32 NOMINATED TO SERVE ON THE THIRD CIRCUIT.

13:12:34 JUSTICE CONCERN DAY WAS ONLY 38 WHEN NOMINATED FROM THE -- OR TO

13:12:37 THE 9TH SCIRKT AND JUSTICE PRIOR ONLY 42 WHEN NOMINATED TO THE

13:12:42 FIRST CIRCUITS. LIKE THEN, YOU NOW HAVE A GREAT

13:12:44 DEAL OF HANDS ON EXPERIENCE THAT YOU CAN BRING TO THE COURT FOR

13:12:46 YEARS TO COME. DURING YOUR JUDICIAL SERVICE,

13:12:50 YOU AMASSED AN IMPRESSIVE RECORD FROM THE SENATE TO REVIEW.

13:12:53 INCLUDING MORE THAN 350 AWE T

13:12:57 AUTHORED OPINIONS. IT IS THIS JUDICIAL RECORD THAT

13:12:59 SHOULD BE THE FOCUS OF THIS COMMITTEE, JUST AS IT WAS WITH

13:13:01 ALL OF THE OTHER SITTING JUSTICES ON THE COURT.

13:13:06 IT APPEARS TO ME YOU EASILY FIT INTO THE MOLD OF WHAT THIS

13:13:08 NATION HAS COME TO EXPECT FROM SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.

13:13:11 A FIRST RATE INTEKT ELECTRICITY, DEMONSTRATED ACADEMIC E

13:13:16 EXCELLENCE, A LIFE OF ENGAGEMENT WITH SERIOUS CONSTITUTIONAL

13:13:18 ANALYSIS, AND A REPUTATION FOR FAIR MINDEDNESS AND MODESTY.

13:13:22 THESE ARE THE STANDARDS FOR A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE AND YOU

13:13:25 PLAINLY MEET THESE EXPECTATIONS. AS A CONSEQUENCE I VIEW YOUR

13:13:31 NOMINATION WITH A HEAVY PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF

13:13:33 CONFIRMATION. BEFORE I CONCLUDE, I LIKE TO

13:13:37 ADDRESS TWO OTHER POINTS. FIRST, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE

13:13:39 FONLED OF ASKING THE QUESTION, WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON?

13:13:43 YOU'VE HEARD THAT TODAY. POLITICIANS MUST PICK SIDES

13:13:46 REGULARLY. EVERY TIME THEY VOTE.

13:13:49 SO IT'S PERHAPS NATURAL THAT THEY SEE THE WORLD AS A BATTLE

13:13:52 BETWEEN COMPETE GROUPS, BUT IT IS WHOLLY INAPPROPRIATE AS AN

13:13:56 APPROACH TO THE JUDICIAL ROLE. THE ONLY RELEVANT SIDE IS THAT

13:14:00 OF A LAW IN THE CONSTITUTION. WE DID HE GREAT INJURY TO THE

13:14:04 INTEGRITY OF THE COURT SYSTEM WHEN WE DISTORT SPEAKING OF

13:14:09 SIDES. DURING CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS

13:14:13 CONFIRMATION HEARINGS I WAS STRUCK BY THE WAY HE ANSWERED

13:14:16 THE QUESTION. HE EXPLAINED THAT HE HAD BEEN

13:14:19 ASKED IN THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS ARE YOU GOING TO BE ON

13:14:21 THE SIDE OF THE LITTLE GUY. ROBERTS EXPLAINED THAT THIS

13:14:23 QUESTION TROUBLED HIM AND THIS IS HOW HE ANSWERED.

13:14:25 HE SAID, "IF THE QUESTION SAYS THAT THE LITTLE GUY SHOULD WIN,

13:14:28 THE LITTLE GUY IS GOING TO WIN.

13:14:31 G BUT IF THE CONSTITUTION SAYS

13:14:33 THAT THE BIG GUY WILL WIN, THEN THE BIG GUY IS GOING TO WIN

13:14:37 BECAUSE MY OBLIGATION IS TO THE CONSTITUTION.

13:14:40 THAT'S THE OATH. THE OATH IS NOT A THAT I WILL

13:14:43 LOOK FOR FOR A PARTICULAR INTEREST.

13:14:44 THE OATH IS TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE

13:14:47 UNITED STATES. THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF JUSTICE.

13:14:50 OUR COURTS PROVIDE A NEUTRAL FORUM FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF

13:14:53 DISPUTES UNDER THE LAW, NOT BASED ON ECONOMIC OR POLITICAL

13:14:57 POWER, ON RACE, ON SEX OR ANY OTHER PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS.

13:15:01 BIG GUY, LITTLE GUY, IT SHOULD MAKE NO DIFFERENCE THE RULE ITH RESPECT TO CASES, CONTROVERSIES

13:15:27 OR ISSUES THAT ARE LIKELY TO COME BEFORE THE COURT, MAKE

13:15:30 PLEDGES, PROMISES OR COMMITMENTS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE

13:15:34 IMPARTIAL PERFORMANCE OF THE JUDE INDICATIVE DUTIES OF THE

13:15:38 OFFICE. IN OTHER WORDS, NO JUDICIAL

13:15:39 NOMINATION SHOULD ANSWER ANY Q

13:15:42 QUESTION THAT IS DESIGNED TO REVEAL HOW THE NOM ME WILL RULE

13:15:44 ON ANY ISSUE THAT COULD COME BEFORE THE COURT.

13:15:47 THIS RULE HAS COME TO BE KNOWN AS THE GINSBURG STANDARD BECAUSE

13:15:53 JUSTICE GINSBURG STATED DURING HER OWN CONFIRMATION HEARINGS

13:15:55 THAT SHE WOULD GIVE NO S FORECASTS, NO HINLETS ABOUT HOW

13:15:58 SHE WOULD RULE ON ISSUES. I WAS PLEASED TO SEE THAT CHIEF

13:16:02 JUSTICE ROBERTS REFUSED TO PREJUDGE ISSUES OR MAKE

13:16:05 PROMISES IN EXCHANGE FOR CONFIRMATION

13:16:07 VOTES. WE'RE OUGHT BETTER OFF BECAUSE

13:16:09 OF HIS PRINCIPAL PELED STAND.>SINCE AFTER HIS CONFIRMATION,

13:16:15 JUSTICE GINSBURG WAS ASKED ABOUT THIS GINSBURG STANDARD AS

13:16:18 APPLIED TO THE ROBERTS HEARING. SHE SAYS JUDGE ROBERTS WAS

13:16:21 UNQUESTIONABLY RIGHT. MY RULE WAS I WILL NOT ANSWER A

13:16:24 QUESTION THAT ATTEMPTS TO PROJECT HOW I WILL RULE ON A

13:16:26 CASE THAT MIGHT COME BEFORE THE COURT.

13:16:30 IN OTHER WORDS, JUSTICE GINSBURG REFIRMED THE GINSBURG STANDARD.

13:16:35 ? IN LIGHT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICES

13:16:37 CONFIRMATION HEARINGS AND JUSTICE GINSBURG'S LATER S

13:16:41 REMARKS, I ASKED MY COLLEAGUES FOR A BASIC FAIR PLAY.

13:16:44 APPLY THE SAME STANDARDS TO JUDGE ALITO THAT WE A APPLIED TO

13:16:48 JN JOBTS, RUTH BADER BEGINSBURG AND ALL OF THE OTHER SITTING

13:16:51 JUSTICES. LET'S NOT IN70 A NEW STANDARD

13:16:54 FOR JUDGE ALITO OR CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME.

13:16:57 POLITICIANS MUST LET VOTERS KNOW WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT ISSUES

13:17:00 BEFORE THE ELECTION. JUDGES SHOULD NOT.

13:17:04 AND IT'S NOT A HYPOTHETICAL MATTER.

13:17:05 SENATOR KENNEDY IN HIS HOPING STATEMENT EXPRESSED CONCERNED

13:17:08 ABOUT THE EXTENT OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH'S AUTHORITY TO

13:17:11 CONDUCT SURVEILLANCE OF THE TERRORISTS AND SAID, ULTIMATELY

13:17:14 THE COURTS WILL DECIDE WHETHER THE PRESIDENT HAS GONE TOO FAR.

13:17:18 S INDEED THEY WILL.>JUDGE ALITO, I'LL TELL YOU

13:17:22 THE SAME THING I TOLD JOHN ROBERTS.

13:17:25 I EXPECTED YOU TO ADHERE TO THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT AND I

13:17:28 WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I WILL STRONGLY DEFEND YOUR REFUSAL TO

13:17:32 GIVE ANY INDICATION OF HOW YOU MIGHT RULE ON ANY MATTER THAT

13:17:35 MIGHT COME BEFORE YOU AS A JUDGE.

13:17:37 OR TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION THAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE IMPROPER UNDER

13:17:40 THE CIRCUMSTANCES. CONGRATULATIONS, JUDGE ALITO, ON

13:17:43 YOUR NOMINATION.>THANK YOU SENATOR KEEL.

13:17:49>LET ME ALSO EXTEND MY WELCOME TO YOU THIS AFTERNOON AND TO

13:17:52 YOUR FAMILY. YOU ARE TO BE COULD BE

13:17:54 CONGRATULATED ON YOUR N NOMINATION.

13:17:57 THROUGH ITS INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION, THE SUPREME

13:17:59 COURT HUGELY STATES THE FABRIC OF OUR SOCIETY.

13:18:03 FOR US AND FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.

13:18:05 OVER THE COURSE OF MORE THAN 200 Y

13:18:08 YEARS, IT HAS A RIGHT TO EQUAL EDUCATION REGARDLESS OF RACE.

13:18:11 IT HAS GUARANTEED AN ATTORNEY AND A FAIR TRIAL TO ALL

13:18:14 AMERICANS, RICH AND POOR ALIKE. IT HAS ALLOWED WOMEN TO KEEP

13:18:18 PRIVATE MEDICAL DECISIONS PRIVATE.

13:18:20 AND IT HAS ALLOWED AMERICANS TO SPEAK, VOTE AND WORSHIP WITHOUT

13:18:24 INTRRNS FROM THEIR GOVERNMENT. IT WAS THESE DECISIONS AND MANY

13:18:28 MORE, THE JUDICIAL BRANCH IN ITS FINEST HOUR HAS STOOD FIRMLY ON

13:18:34 THE SIDE OF INDIVIDUALS AGAINST THOSE WHO WOULD TRAMMEL THEIR

13:18:38 RIGHTS. THE COURT STANDS AGAINST ANY

13:18:41 WISHDZ THAT BELOW AS HAVENZ OF REFUGE FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT OWES

13:18:45 SUFFER, BECAUSE THEY ARE HELPLESS, WEAK, OUTNUMBERED OR

13:18:48 BECAUSE THEY ARE NONCONFORMING VICTIMS OF PREJUDICE ORAL PUBLIC

13:18:51 EXCITEMENT.>AS THE GUARDIAN OF OUR

13:18:53 RIGHTS, THE SUPREME COURT MAKES DECISIONS EVERY YEAR WHICH

13:18:56 EITHER PROTECT THE INDIVIDUAL OR LEAVE THEM AT THE MERCY OF MORE

13:19:01 POWERFUL FORZ IN OUR SOCIETY. THEY CONSIDER QUESTIONS LIKE

13:19:05 WHEN CAN A DISABLED INDIVIDUAL SUE TO GAIN ACCESS TO A

13:19:08 COURTHOUSE. WHEN CAN A PATIENT LEAVE WORK TO

13:19:10 CARE FOR A SICK CHILD. WHEN SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT BE

13:19:12 ALLOWED TO LISTEN TO A PRIVATE CONVERSATION?

13:19:15 AND WHEN WILL THE COURTHOUSE S

13:19:19 DOORS OPEN OR CLOSE TO AN EMPLOYEE SUFFERING

13:19:21 DISCRIMINATION AT WORK. WHETHER INTERPRETING THE

13:19:23 CONSTITUTION OR FILLING IN THE BLANKS OF A LAW OR A REGULATION,

13:19:27 EVERY WORD OF THE COURT'S OPINION CAN WIDEN OR NARROW OUR

13:19:30 RIGHTS AS AMERICANS AND EITHER PROTECT US OR LEAF US MORE

13:19:35 VULNERAB TO ANY WINDS THAT BELOW.

13:19:37 IF CONFIRMED, YOU WILL RIGHT THE WORDS THAT WILL EITHER BROADEN

13:19:40 OR THEIR OTHER OUR RIGHTS FOR THE REST OF YOUR WORKING LIFE.

13:19:43 YOU WILL BE INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION IN WHICH WE AS THE

13:19:46 PEOPLE PLACE OUR FAITH AND ON WHICH OUR FREEDOMS AS A NATION

13:19:50 REST. AND ON A DAILY BASIS, THE WORDS

13:19:53 OF YOUR OPINIONS WILL AFFECT COUNTLESS INDIVIDUALS AS THEY

13:19:57 SEEK PROTECTION BEHIND THE COURTHOUSE DOORS.

13:20:00 DESPITE YOUR ENORMOUS POWER YOU WILL BE FREE OF ALL CONSTRAINTS,

13:20:05 YOU KNOW ACCOUNTABLE AND UNRECALLABLE.

13:20:08 WE GIVE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES THIS FREEDOM BECAUSE WE EXPECT

13:20:10 THEM TO REMAIN ABOVE THE POLITICS.

13:20:15 TO AVOID THE EFFECTS OF PUBLIC EXCITEMENT AND ALLOW A BROADER

13:20:18 VIEW NOT TIED TO THE WHIMS OF THE MAJORITY AT A CERTAIN MOMENT

13:20:21 IN HISTORY. SO FOR ONLY A SHORT TIME THIS

13:20:25 MONTH WILL THE PEOPLE THROUGH THEIR SENATORS BE ABLE TO

13:20:29 QUESTION AND TO JUDGE YOU. IN SHORT, BEFORE WE GIVE YOU THE

13:20:32 KEYS TO THE CAR, WE'D LIKE TO KNOW WHERE YOU PLAN TO TAKE US.

13:20:36 TO A CERTAIN EXTENT WE KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT IS IN YOUR HEART AND

13:20:39 IN YOUR MIND THAN WE DID WITH NOW JUSTICE ROBERTS.

13:20:43 YOU HAVE A LONG TRACK RECORD AS A JUDGE AND AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL

13:20:46 IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. WHEN WE MET PRIVATELY AND I

13:20:49 ASKED YOU WHAT SORT OF SUPREME COURT JUSTICE YOU WOULD MAKE,

13:20:52 YOUR ANSWER WAS FAIR WHEN YOU SAID, "IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT

13:20:56 SORT OF A JUSTICE I WILL MAKE, THEN LOOK AT WHAT SORT OF A

13:21:00 JUDGE I HAVE BEEN." TAKING THIS ADVICE, YOUR CRITICS ARGUED THAT

13:21:04 YOUR JUDICIAL RECORD DEMONSTRATES THAT YOU WILL NOT

13:21:07 SUFFICIENTLY PROTECT THE INDIVIDUAL, BUT WILL INSTEAD

13:21:11 SIDE WITH MORE POWERFUL INTERESTS, NARROW THE RIGHTS WE

13:21:13 ENJOY AND LEAVE INDIVIDUAL AMERICANS MORE VULNERABLE TO

13:21:18 ABUSE. FOR EXAMPLE, THEY CITE YOUR

13:21:19 CASEY DISSENT AS DIMINISH THE POWER OF MARRIED WOMAN OVER

13:21:24 THEIR OWN BODIES. THEY IDENTIFY YOUR DECISION IN

13:21:27 THE CHESS HER CASE AS EVIDENCE THAT ULTIMATE MAKE IT HARDER FOR

13:21:29 WORKING PEOPLE TO CARE FOR A FAMILY.

13:21:32 THEY CITE THE PRAY CASE AND OTHERS WHERE YOU OFTEN SIDE WITH

13:21:36 CORPORATIONS TO BLOCK THE VICTIMS OF DISCRIMINATION FROM

13:21:39 GETTING THEIR DAY IN COURT. OTHERS RAISE CONCERNS ABOUT YOUR

13:21:43 VIEWS ON THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED WHEN FACED WITH THE

13:21:46 GOVERNMENT'S ENORMOUS POWER IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS.

13:21:51 IN ADDITION TO YOUR RECORD ON THE B22:12 ASSISTANCE THAT YOU PROVIDED UNDERSTAND CRAFTING SUPREME

13:22:14 COURT BRIEFS URGING THAT, QUOTE, THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT

13:22:17 PROTECT A RIGHT TO AN ABORTION. WHILE THESE STATEMENTS CAME IN

13:22:20 THE CONTEXT OF YOUR WORK ON BEHALF OF THE REAGAN

13:22:22 ADMINISTRATION, THEY WERE NEVERTHELESS YOUR

13:22:26 SELF-PROCLAIMED PERSONAL VIEWS. IN THE SAME JOB APPLICATION YOU

13:22:30 WROTE THAT YOU HAD PURSUED A LEGAL CAREER BECAUSE YOU

13:22:33 DISAGREED WITH MANY OF THE DECISIONS OF THE WARREN COURT,

13:22:36 ESPECIALLY, AND I QUOTE, IN THE AREAS OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, THE

13:22:39 ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSES AND REAPPORTIONMENT.

13:22:43 THESE WAR AND COURT DECISIONS ESTABLISHING ONE PERSON ONE

13:22:47 VOLT, MIRANDA RIGHTS AND PROTECTION FOR RELIGIOUS

13:22:49 MINORITIES ARE SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANTLY CASES PROTECTING OUR

13:22:52 RIGHTS AND OUR LYBLE ADVERTISE. PROTECTING MINORITIES AGAINST

13:22:55 MAJORITY ABUSES AND PROTECTING INDIVIDUALS AGAINST GOVERNMENT

13:22:59 ABUSES. AND YET AN TAG ANYMORE TOWARDS

13:23:05 THESE DECISIONS SEEM TO HAVE MOTIVATED YOUR PURSUIT OF THE

13:23:07 LAW. YOUR SUPPORTERS ON THE OTHER

13:23:10 HAND CONTEND IT IS NOT FAIR TO SELECT A FEW SPECIFIC CASES IN

13:23:13 LIGHT OF A CAREER OF A JUDGE SPANNING 15 YEARS.

13:23:15 FURTHER, THEY DIGS MISS SOME OF YOUR EARLY MEMOS IN A JUSTICE

13:23:19 DEPARTMENT AS OLD AND NOT PARTICULARLY RELEVANT.

13:23:22 THEY ARGUE THAT YOU ARE WELL WITHIN THE MAINSTREAM OF JUDGES,

13:23:25 ESPECIALLY REPUBLICAN APPOINTED JUDGES.

13:23:28 SO IT IS OUR JOB TO SORT OUT THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR RECORD.

13:23:32 SEPARATE THE RHETORIC FRO THE REALITY AND TO DECIDE WHERE YOU

13:23:36 WILL LEAD THE COUNTRY. WE WILL NEED TO EXAMINE WHETHER

13:23:39 AS YOUR CRITICS CONTEND YOU WILL CONSISTENTLY SIDE AGAINST THE

13:23:42 INDIVIDUAL OR WHETHER AS YOUR SUPPORTERS CONTEND, THAT YOU ARE

13:23:46 A MAINSTREAM CONSERVE SIF WHO WILL FAIRLY DECIDE ALL CASES.

13:23:50 I HOPE THESE HEARINGS WILL ADD TO OUR RECORD IN MAKING THIS

13:23:53 CRITICAL DETERMINATION. THIS WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE

13:23:57 TIME TO SHARE MY PERSPECTIVE ON HOW WE WILL JUDGE A NOMINEE.

13:24:01 WE HAVE USED THE SAME TESTS FOR EACH OF THE FIVE PREVIOUS

13:24:04 SUPREME COURT NOMINATION HEARINGS, A TEST OF JUDICIAL

13:24:07 EXCELLENCE. JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE IT STEAMS TO

13:24:10 ME INVOLVES AT LEAST FOUR ELEMENTS.

13:24:12 FIRST A NOM ME MUST POSSESS THE COMPETENCE, CHARACTER, AND

13:24:16 TEMPERATURE RA MEANT TO SERVE ON THE BENCH.

13:24:20 SECOND, JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE MEANS THAT A SUPREME COURT

13:24:24 JUSTICE MUST HAVE A SENSE OF THE VALUES FROM WHICH THE CORPS OF

13:24:29 OUR POLITICAL ECONOMIC SYSTEM GOES.

13:24:31 IN OTHER WORDS, WE SHOULD NOT APPROVE ANY NOMINEE WHOSE

13:24:36 EXTREME JUDICIAL FLOSS ANY WOULD UNDERMINE RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES

13:24:39 RELIED UPON BY ALL AMERICANS. THIRD JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE RISHZ

13:24:42 AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LAW'S MORE THAN AN INTELLECTL GAME

13:24:45 AND MORE THAN A MENTAL EXERCISE. HE OR SHE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT

13:24:49 REAL PEOPLE WITH REAL PROBLEMS ARE AFFECTED BY THE DECISIONS

13:24:53 RENDERED BY THE COURT. JUSTICE AFTER ALL MAY BE BLIND,

13:25:02 BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE DID HE HAVE.

13:25:04 AND FINALLY, JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE REQUIRES CANDOR BEFORE

13:25:07 CONFIRMATION. WE ARE BEING ASKED TO GIVE THE

13:25:09 NOMINEE ENORMOUS POWER. SO WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS IN