John Sarbanes

I take it, if the Senator will yield--I take it this is of such importance now because we are dealing with this problem as to whether intelligence is being misused.

Well, there you are. That underscores the point I am trying to make. I thank the Senator for yielding.

But there is a refusal to provide them to the committee which now has to make a judgment as to whether Mr. Bolton should be confirmed to be the American ambassador to the United Nations?

And Senators who are charged with making this very important decision about whether this nominee should be confirmed for this very important position. It seems to me clearly relevant in reaching some judgment about the nominee to have this…

It seems to me a further question is that if Mr. Bolton went back to get those names for some reason--he must have had a reason for doing so--why the committee, in deciding whether to confirm him, should not have access to that same…

I understand in trying to do due diligence on the Bolton nomination on the part of the committee, the very able Senator from Delaware, who has had extensive experience on investigatory matters, requested that we be provided with the names…

I apologize if I am anticipating his statement. As I understand it, when a policymaker requests the transcripts of intelligence intercepts, let's say the intercept of a conversation, the documents that are provided identify the foreign…

So you don't have policymakers making assertions about intelligence matters that are not supported by the intelligence community. If you stop and think about that, it seems to me that is a very wise rule. Otherwise, policymakers can run…

And that was the very thing that Bolton not only complained about, but for which he sought to have certain intelligence analysts punished; is that right?

We are talking now about math, science, and engineering. Everyone talks about technology, the competition we are engaged in, and so forth. How do you compete in that world if you do not train the people and have the professionals with the…

Absolutely. And the Senator from Massachusetts has been sounding this clarion call. I make reference to the chart the Senator showed earlier, which shows what is happening in terms of our young people going into math and science and…

Isn't it a dramatic demonstration of a choice in priorities, that rather than choosing to fund education, to give young people these opportunities which have been paid for, what they now say is, we had to cut the programs because we have a…

Wasn't the money in order not to do this to education contained in the Senator's amendment coming from closing corporate tax loopholes that had previously been passed by an overwhelming majority in this Senate?

Is the $32 billion--the cost of the tax cut that goes to those making over a million dollars, is that just for 1 year?

The number of people in this country who earn over $200,000 a year is less than 1 percent of all taxpayers, is it not?

It is a tiny group. So this tiny group under this chart will be receiving the overwhelming proportion of this tax cut that is included in this budget resolution.

That gives you a clear picture of what the priorities are in this budget. The priorities are to give $32 billion in tax cuts to millionaires, and yet to cut the education programs to almost below what they were in 2005; is that correct?

Yes. Which had to be done; otherwise, presumably, it never would have happened. All these decisions were made by--and only by--the Republican members of the conference committee from the House and the Senate. Now, it is an abuse of power…

If the debt keeps running up, then the carrying charge on the debt goes up every year. So more and more of the annual budget is consumed in order to pay the interest charge on the debt that was built up because deficits have been run…

Grievously wrong. I gather we will probably see the true picture of what has happened over the succeeding 4 years, but we continue to run these deficits and we are getting deeper into debt all the time. Is that not correct?

Are there other items they have left out besides the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan?

So the budget is not really presenting a true picture of what we can anticipate in terms of expenditures; is that correct?

As I understand it, the President's budget, and this budget resolution, do not provide anything for the long-term costs of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the continuing war on terror?

First of all, if I could just say preliminarily, in order not to split the united front in support of this amendment, I am not going to get into a debate between the quality of the Virginia crabcake and the Maryland crabcake, although I…

The letter we submitted reflected the opinion of the commission. Chairman Donaldson had indicated a personal view in a hearing, and then I sent a letter asking him for the commission's view.