>> eight republican presidential candidates participated in a debate hosted by cnbc and the michigan republican party. wednesday at oakland university in rochester, michigan, focusing on jobs, taxes, and the deficit. this is an hour and 45 minutes. >> the count down is on. the candidates, eight of them, battling for the nomination. >> we have a super mess in this country. >> the mission? take back the white house. the issue? fixing the economy. we're live in michigan, a state bruised and battered by the great recession, a snapshot of

america's pain, massive unemployment, foreclosures in every neighborhood, empty factories littering the landscape. mission? a state rescue from the brink by a controversial bailout costing u.s. taxpayers billions, but today, the motor city is on the long road to recovery. the big is back in the black. the state's beginning to restore the role. tonight, the candidates come here to face off and face the nation. what is their plan to jump start the american economy? what will they do? if faced with another crippling financial crisis? how will they deal with the growing unrest across america? our nation of hope, a nation of opportunity, a nation --

tonight, the best team in business is pressing questions. nothing is off limits when it comes to your money, your votes. ♪ cnbc presents, so association with the michigan republican party, your money, your vote. the republican presidential debate live from the campus at oakland university in rochester, michigan. ♪ [applause] >> good evening, everyone. i'm maria barttiromo, >> i'm

john hardwood, and welcome to today's cnbc republican presidential debate. ♪ [applause] >> tonight, we are here in the great state of michigan for a debate that will focus almost exclusively on the economy and how to fix the financial problem of our country. on the stage tonight from left to right, senator rick santorum. [applause] congresswoman michelel bachmann. [applause] speaker newt gingrich. [applause] governor mitt romney. [applause] mr. herman cain. [applause] governor rick perry.

[applause] congressman ron paul. [applause] and governor john huntsman. [applause] >> now, the candidates will have 60 seconds to respond to questions, 30 seconds for follow ups and rebuttals at the discretion of the moderators. we also want you, the candidates to help out a little bit to answer the questions as specifically as you can. i know you want to, you proved that, but in case you get off topic, we'll have to interpret you. >> joined by an all-star lineup of the smartest people on cnbc. first, jim, the host of "mad money." [applause] >> we also want to hear your voice. go to our website, debate.cnbc.com and tweet us at hash tag cnbcdebate.

all the candidates will have a motive to impress. >> in the interest of time, the candidates agreed to forego opening and closing statements tonight. let's get started. i begin with you, mr. cain. let's begin with how today was a riff day for our money and 401(k)s. it dropped 400 points today, and the reason? italy is on the brink of financial disaster. it's the world's 7th largest economy. as president, what will you do to make sure their problems do not take down the u.s. financial system? >> start with two things. first, we must grow this economy. we have the biggest economy in the world, and as long as we are stagnant in terms of growth and gdp, we impact the rest of the world. we must do that, but we're not going to be able to do that

until we put fuel in the engine that drives economic growth, which is the business sector. this administration has done nothing but put stuff into the caboose, and it's not moving this economy. we must load the economy. number two, we must assure that our currency is sound. just like a dollar must be a dollar when we wake up in the morning. just like 60 minutes is in an hour, a dollar must be a dollar. if we grow the economy the way it has the ability to do and at the same time we are cutting spending seriously, we will have things moving in the right direction in order to be able to survive these kind of ripple effects. >> to be clear, focus on the domestic economy, let italy to fail? >> focus on the domestic economy, or rewill fail, so, yes, focus on the domestic economy first. there's not a lot that the united states can directly do, but they really are way beyond the point of return that we, as the united states, can save them. >> governor romney, should we

allow italy to fail? should we have a stake in the eurozone now? >> europe can take care of their own problems. we don't want to bail out their governments. they can deal with that themselves. they are a very large economy, and there will be, i i'm sure, if italy defaults, and we don't know that's going to happen, but if they are in crisis and banks that hold italy debt will then face crisis, and there has to be an effort to uphold their financial system. there's some that say here banks in the u.s. with italian debt that we ought to help those as well. my view is no, no, no. we don't need to step in in europe or banks here who may have a tie in debt. >> but theist contributes to the international monetary fund, and the imf gave $150 billion. are you saying the united states should stop contributing to the imf? >> i'm happy to continue to

participate in world efforts, but not happy to have the united states government put in place a t.a.r.p. like program to save u.s. banks with italian debt, foreign banks doing business in the u.s. with italian debt or european banks there. there's an effort to draw us in and talk about how we need to help italy and help europe. europe is able to help europe. we have to fee cows on our own -- focus on our own economy. if we stay on the court we're on with the level of borrowing, this administration is carrying out, and if we're not serious about cutting and capping spending and balancing the budget, we'll be the same position italy is in four years from now, and that's unacceptable of the we have to fix the deficit here. [applause] >> i really get that, but i'm on the front lines of the target. we are down 400 points today. we will not be done if the rates keep going up.

you must recognize this is a moment-to-moment sisks -- situation where people have 401(k) on the line. >> you have to let it little liquidate. we're in a debt crisis we've never seen before in history. the sovereign debt of this world is equal to the gdp as ours is in this country. if you prop it up, we'll do what we did in the depression like prolong the ag agony. if you prop it up, you do what japan did for years. the debt is unsustainable, and the bubble was predictable because 40 years ago we had no restraints, and piled debt on debt, pyramided debt, no restraints on spending, and if you keep bailing people out and profit up, you just prolong the agony like in the housing bubblement right now, they are

demanding more money because we don't let the market to determine what the mortgages are worth. if you don't liquidate this and clear the market, believe me, you're going to perpetuate this for a decade or two more, and that is very, very dangerous. [applause] >> governor -- [applause] >> italy's too big to fail. it's great. i love if we were independent saying it's your fault, your problem, but if this goes, the world banking system could shut down. doesn't that involve our banks too? >> we wake up this morning and find the yield curve with respect to italy are up, and prices are done. if you want a window into what this country's going to look like in the future if we're not on top of our debt, you see it play out in europe right now. you see the effect of the banking sector, and what does it mean here? what am i most concerned about, jim? i'm concerned that it impacts us

in a way that moves into our banking sector. well, we have a huge problem called too big to fail in this country. we have six banks in this country that combined have assets worth 66% of the nation's gdp, $9.4 trillion. if they get hit, they get a bailout from the taxpayers in this country, meaning we set ourselves up for disaster again. jim, as long as there's banks too big to fail in this country, it's going to hurt us. we need institutions that are properly sized institutions. >> thank you. governor romney -- [applause] i want to switch to the bailout drama in this country, and no state understands is better than michigan. let's talk about your record on that. four years ago when you ran for the republican nomination and the auto industry was suffering, you said where's washington. after the election when the bush

administration was considering financial assistance for the auto makers, you said no, let detroit go bankrupt. now that the companies are profitable again, after a bailout supported by your republican governor here in michigan, you said, well, actually, president obama implemented my plan all along or gravitated to my plan. with a record like that on all sides of the issue, why should republicans be confident in your leadership? >> john, i care about the state and auto industry like i guess no one else on this stage being born and raised here, watched my parents make their life here. i was here in the 1950s and 1960s when detroit and michigan was the pride of the nation. i've seen this industry, and i've seen the state go through tough time, and my view years ago was the federal government by putting in place cafe requirements helping foreign automobiles gain market share in the u.s. was hurting detroit, and i said where is washington? they are not doing the job they ought to be doing.

my view with regards to the bailout whether it was by president bush or president obama, it was a wrong way to go. i said from the very beginning, they should go through a managing bankruptcy process. we have capital markets and bankruptcy. it works in the u.s.. the idea of billions of dollars wasted initially, and then adopted the bankruptcy, i was among others who said we needed to do that, and then after that, they gave the company to the uaw to give general motors to the uaw, and chrysler to fiat. we would have had a private sector bailout with proper structuring and the private sector in the direction opposed to government playing its heavy hand. >> governor, let me follow up because -- [applause] the auto bailout is part of a larger issue facing your candidacy as you know. your opponents said you've switchedded positions on many -- switched positions on many issues. it's an issue of character, not

political. you captured it in the last debate saying you're "running for office for pete's sake." what can you say to republicans that things you say in campaign are rooted in something deeper than you are just running for office. >> john, people know we well, particularly in this state of massachusetts, utah, where i served in the olympics. people understand i'm a man of steadiness and constanty. you won't find anybody else with more of those attributes than i do. i've been married to the same woman for 25 -- excuse me, 42 year, i'll get in trouble. [laughter] i've been in the same my entire life. i worked for the same company for 25 years and i left that to save the olympic games. it's outrageous the obama campaign pushes this idea when you have not obama administration the most political presidency we've seen in modern history. they are actually deciding when

to pull out of afghanistan based on politics. if i'm president of the united states, i'll be true to my family, faith, and to our country, and i'll never apologize for the united states of america. that's my belief. [applause] >> now, governor perry, i want to ask you about this because you raised this issue yourself about governor romney, and you're running as a politician with strong convictions. from the flipside, ronald reagan raised taxes when the deficit was too big. gorks w. bush supported t.a.r.p. and the bailout when we might face a second great depression. examples like that tell you that good effective leaders need to show the flexibility that governor romney has shown on some issues? >> the next president of the united states need to send a powerful message, not just to the people of this country, but around the world that america is going to be america again, that we are not going to pick winners

and losers from washington, d.c., that we're going to trust the capital markets in the private sector to make the decisions and let the consumers pick winners and losers, and it doesn't make any difference whether it's wall street or some corporate entity or whether it's some european country, if you are too big to fail, you are too big. [applause] >> the federal reserve chairman, ben bernanke called unemployment a national crisis due to the amount of days and months people are out of work. many of you have come up with tax reform plans. why is tax reform the path to job creation, and if it's not the only path, where else can you implement to get people back to work? >> well, first of all, i think ben bernanke is a large part of the problem and should be fired as rapidly as possible.

[applause] the federal reserve should be audited, and we should have all the documents from 2009, 2010 so we understand who we bailed out, why he bailed them out, or why he did not bail them out. [applause] i'm glad ben bernanke recognizes the wreckage his policies led to. i think most of us are for tax policies that lead to jobs is because we've had two cycles in my lifetime. ronald reagan, and the contract with america, both of which had the same policy. lower taxes, less regulation, more american energy, and have faith in the american job creator as distinct from radicalism of higher taxes, bigger bureaucracy with more regulations, no american energy as the president announced today in his decision on offshore, and finally, class warfare. i say all of us on the stage represent a dramatically greater

likelihood to getting to a paycheck and leaving behind food stamps than does president obama. [cheers and applause] >> congressman, how can you create jobs as quickly as possible? >> i think one thing we know is that taxes lead to jobs leaving the country. all you need to know is that we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, and if you go back to 1981 and you look around the world, we have a lot of high corporate tax countries. there's 47% on average around the world, but if you look today in the united states, we have an effective rate, if you average in state taxes, the federal taxes of about 40%, but the world took a clue because capital is mobile, and capital went to places for corporate tax rates that went to 25 #% and falling. we're still stuck in a 1986 era of about a 40% tax rate. we have to lower the tax rate

because of the cost of doing business, but we have to do so much more than that. our biggest problem right now is our regulatory burden, the biggest regulatory problem we have is obamacare and dodd-frank. i will repeal those bills. i've written the bills to repeal the bills that got to go, but beyond that -- [applause] beyond that, we have to legalize american energy, and here's something else to do to help the economy. we have to build the defense on america's southern border and get a grip on dealing with our immigration problem. >> okay. [applause] >> you proposed a zero tax on manufacturing businesses. >> i have. >> i understand the sentiment behind that and the state of michigan lost hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs in the last few decades. isn't that the kind of distortion in the tax code that people want to get away from in order to get rates down? flatter, simpler, fairer. >> i think getting a rate down to zero is pretty far down.

that's good. >> but it's down for the manufacturing industry opposed to other people doing other things. isn't that picking winners and losers? >> it's done for the entire sector of the economy that we get our hat handed to us by losing jobs. we see that here in michigan and across the country, and the reason is government has made us uncompetitive. we need to compete on taxes. we have to compete on regulations. we need to repeal obama care, we need -- i said i'm going to repeal every single obama era regulation that cost businesses over $100 million. we'll send a clear message out to manufacturers in this country and all over the world that america will compete -- some suggested we have to go into a trade war with china. that just taxes you. i don't want to tax you i. lower taxes, repatriating funds, 0% tax, if you repatriate the funds and invest in plants and equipment, and of course, an

energy policy that everyone here will agree with that says we are going to produce energy in this country. i'm different than many of them that i'm going to cut all the subsidies out and let the market work opposed to creating incentives for different forms of energy that the government supports. [applause] >> you all said you'll repeal the president's health care legislation. we'll get into that because we want to know then what? what's the plan once you repeal obamacare. mr. cain, the american people want jobs, leadership, and character in a president. in recent days we learned four women accused you of inappropriate behavior. here, we're focusing on character and judgment. you've been a ceo -- [audience reacts] you know that chair holders are reluctant to see the character issues. why should the american people hire a president if they feel they have character issues? >> the american people deserve

better than someone being tried because of public opinion based on unfounded accusations. [cheers and applause] i value my character and my integrity more than anything else and for every one person that comes forward with a false acquisition, there are probably -- there are thousands who would say none of that sort of activity ever came from herman cain. you were right. this country is looking for leadership, and this is why a lot of people despite what happened over the last nine days are still very enthusiastic behind my candidacy. over the last nine days -- [applause] over the last anyone days, the voters have voted with their ballot, and they are saying they don't care about the character assassination, but they care

about leadership and getting the economy growing and all of the other problems we face. [applause] >> governor romney, when you were in capital, you purchased a lot of companies. you could fire the ceo, the management team, or you could keep them. are you persuaded by what mr. cain said? would you keep him on if you bought his company? [audience reacts] >> look, look, herman cain is the person to respond to these questions, he just did, the people in the room and across the country can make their own assessment. i'm not going to answer that. [applause] >> governor huntsman, back to the economy. [cheers and applause] many republicans have criticized

the occupy wall street movement. we had an nbc wall street news journal poll this week showing a large proportion of the american people, 76%, say they believe there's something wrong with the economy that tilts towards the wealthy at the exeans of others. -- expense of others. do you consider something wrong with the structure of our economy in the income inequality it produces. is that something government should do something about, and if so, what? >> let me just say i want to be the president of the 99%. i also want to be the president of the 1%. this nation is divided, and it's painful, and it is unnatural for the most optimistic blew skyed people -- blue skyed people this world's ever known. we are problem solvers. when i hear about the people part of the wall street protest, i say thank goodness we have the ability to speak out. i might not agree with everything they say. i don't like the anti-capitalism message, but i do agree this country is never again to to

bailout corporations. i do agree -- [applause] i do agree we've blown through trillions and trillions of dollars with nothing to sthoa on the balance -- show on the balance sheet by debt, and no uplift in our ability to compete, and no addressing our level of unemployment, and i do agree that we have institutions, banks that are too big to fail in this country, and until we address that problem, we can fix taxes, we can fix the regulatory environment, we can move towards energy independence so long as we have instant banks that are too big to fail, we're feting ourselves up for long term disaster and failure. >> you agree that the bailout supported in mental anguish was a mistake -- michigan was a mistake? >> the bailout here in the auto sector, $68 billion worth, we're going to end up p footing a bill. governor snyder knows that, probably $15 billion when it's done. that's not a good use of

taxpayer money. we have to take the auto sector through reorganization, get them on their feet, but people in the country are sick and tired of seeing taxpayer dollars going towards bailouts, and we're not going to have it anymore in this country. [applause] >> governor romney, do you believe public companies have any social responsibility to create jobs? do you believe the most important, most influ enissue concern that corporations should exist solely to create maximum profit for their shareholders? >> this is a wonderful philosophical debate, but we don't have decide between the two because they go together. our democratic friends think when a corporation is profitable, that's a bad thing. i remember asking someone where do you think profits go? when you hear a profit is profitable, where does it go? well, they said to pay their

executives, their big bonuses. nothing does. profit is left over after they have been paid. what happens with profit is you can grow the business, expand it. you add working capital, and you hire people. the right thing for america is to have profitable enterprises that can hire people. i want american businesses to be successful and thrive. what we have in washington today is 5 president and administration that doesn't like business. they think they want jobs, but they don't like businesses. look, i want to see our businesses thrive and grow and expand and be profitable. i want to see more. [applause] >> governor -- [inaudible] 30 seconds to you. do you think that companies can both be profitable and be able to create jobs? do you think -- >> they better be. that's the reason the tax plan i laid out, a 20% flat tax on the personal side and 20% corporate tax rate, that will get people

working in this country. [applause] we need to stick a big flag in the middle of america that says "open for business again." [applause] >> mr. speaker, how about to you? can corporations do both? >> obviously, corporations can and should do both, and what it amazing to me is the inability of much of our academic world and news media and of the of the occupy wall street that have a clue about history. [applause] in this town, henry ford started as an eddison supervisor who went home at night and built his first car in the garage. was he the 99% or 1%. bill gates drops out of college to build microsoft. was he the 1% or the 99%. this is the richest country in the history of the world because corporations succeed in creating profits and jobs, and it's sad the news media doesn't report

accurately how the economy works. [cheers and applause] >> [inaudible] i'm sorry, but what is the media reporting inaccurately about the economy? >> what? >> what is the media reporting inaccurately about the economy? [audience reacts] >> i like the reaction from the audience. i have yet to hear a single rational question about the economy that leads them to say, for example, who pays for the park you are occupying if there's no businesses making a profit? [cheers and applause] >> senator santorum, i want to talk about our country. i just came back from north dakota. we made the largest oil discovery in a generation there. not only is it a big step towards creating energy independence, but it can create 300,000 jobs.

what the guys tell me up there is they can't handle the rush without federal help. would you pay for incentives to get workers and businesses to where the jobs are to support this bill? >> no, because we've done it in pennsylvania. it took awhile for us to ramp up, but we drill 3,000 to 4,000 wells. the price of natural gas because of this, the second largest natural gas find in the world, went from $12 to $3.65. the market did the work. we didn't have the federal government come in and bail us out. i want to make the point about manufacturing jobs again because if you're talking about creating jobs that trickle down -- i agree with mitt. we have folks who are innovators, but he talked about innovators that created jobs for blue collar workers. the unemployment rate among non-college educated is well into the double digits in america. it's 4% or 5% with people who

have college degrees. the reason i put forth this manufacturing plan is not just so we can say made here in america, but we can create opportunities for everyone in america, including those who don't have the college skill set. people who built this country like my grandfather who was a coal miner. that is a very important part that republicans, unfortunately, are not talking about. we need to talk about income mobility. we need to talk about people at the bottom of the income scale being able to get necessary skills and rise so they it support themselves and a family, and that's what manufacturing does, and that's why i'm laser beam focused on it. [applause] . >> let's get back to tax reform. mr. cain, fairness in taxation. ever since this country started taxing income 100 years ago, our system charges those people who make more money a higher rate than those people who make less money. governor perry said he doesn't believe in that approach, and your 9-9-9 plan suggests you don't either. why now when the higher income

group is doing better than the rest of america is the time to switch to the same rate for all of us? >> my proposal is the only one that solves the problem by throwing out the current tax codes which have been a mess for decades, and we need to put in something different that i have proposed, 9-9-9 satisfies five criteria. it's simple. the complexity costs us $435 million a year. it's transparent. there's hundreds of loopholes in the tax code. i want to throw it out. it's fair. the reason it's fair is because the definition in webster that says everybody is treated the same, all businesses are treated the same, not wushz dc pick -- washington, d.c. pick winners and losers, and that's why i have 9% business flat tax, 9%

tax on personal income, and 9% sales tack. it treats everybody the same and will build the economy. >> how do you ensure when the government needs more revenue the tax doesn't go up and it doesn't turn into 19-19-19 >> tax codes don't raise prices, but politicians do. [applause] it's not the code raises taxes, but the politician. because the approach, 9-9-9 would be very visible, the american people are going to hold the rates at 9. >> governor romney, mr. cain's got a flat tax, perry has a flat tax, you don't have a flat tax. you vote to preserve the bush era tax rates. what is wrong with the idea of one rate? why do you believe in a progressive tax system?

>> i'd like to see our tax rates flatter, our code simpler, the special breaks that we have in the code taken out. that's one of the reasons why i take the corporate rate from 35% down to 25% to take out of the special deals that are there. with regards to my tax code, what i want to do is take our precious dollars as a nation and focus them on the people in this country that have been hurt the most, and that's the middle class. the obama economy has really crushed middle income americans. this president has failed us so badly. we have 26 million people out of work, or are in part time jobs who need full time work, or stopped looking for work all together. median incomes dropped 10% in three years, and at the same time food prices are up, health care costs are up. i want to help the people hurt the most, and that's the middle class, and so what i do is focus a substantial tax break on middle income americans. ultimately, i'd love to see us come up with a plan that

simplifies the code and lowers rates for everybody, but right now, let's get the job done first that has to be done immediately, lower the tax rates on middle income americans. >> congresswoman, governor romney is accepting the premises of the democratic argument that you have to have a fair approach to taxation, that preserves different rates for different people. why is he wrong? >> i would say president obama is the one that's wrong because president obama's plan for job creation has absolutely nothing to do with the true people who know how to create jobs. he should be going to job creators if he wants to know how to create jobs. instead, he continues to go to general axelrod in chicago to look for his orders to figure out how to build the economy. that won't work. we know what needs to be done. we have a real problem. we have 53% of americans paying federal income taxes, but you have 47% of americans who pay no federal income taxes, you have a

real problem, and that's why in my tax plan, i have every one paying something because everyone benefits by this magnificent country, so even if it means paying the price of two happy meals a year like $10, everyone can afford to pay at least that, and what it does is create a mentality in the united states that says that freedom is free, but freedom isn't free. we all benefit. we all need to sacrifice. everybody has to be a part of this tax code. [applause] >> congress mapp -- congressman ron paul, you want to close down agencies. tell us about your tax plan including shutting down agencies. where do those jobs go? >> eventually into the private sector. they don't all leave immediately when the plan goes into effect, but what my plan does is address taxes in a little different way. we're talking about the tax code, but that's the consequence, that's the symptom. the disease is spending. every time you spend, spending

is a tax. we tax the people, we borrow, print the money, prices go up, and that's a tax. you have to address the subject of spending. that is the tax. that is the reason i go after the spending. i propose in the first year, cut $1 trillion out of the budget. [cheers and applause] now, the other thing is that you must do, if you want to get the economy going and going again, is you have to get rid of price fixing, and the most significant price fixing that goes on, gave us the bubble, destroyed the economy, and is presenting this from coming out is manipulating interest rates below market rates. you have to do that for a healthy, viable economy. >> you would have more incentive, the elderly get

cheated. they want to go back to the government at 3%. >> higher interest rates makes it more expensive to borrow mortgages -- >> what you want is the market to determine whoever thought that one person, the federal reserve board chairman knows what the money supply should be? just in the past six months, m11 went up at a rate of 30%. that's spells inflation. that spells lower standard of living and higher prices and watch out, they are coming. [applause] >> just getting started tonight. when we return, how will the candidates breathe a new life into the housing markets. >> the economy from the view of the corner office. >> we are in serious problem. business people are struggling. >> the economy didn't arrive in 20 minutes, and it's not going to be resolved in 20 minutes. >> the age of concern to me is lack of leadership and

government and the lack of any focus on building confidence for consumers and the business community. >> how are the candidates going to turn things around? the cnbc's presidential debate will be right back. stay with us. [applause] ♪ ♪ >> welcome back to cnbc's presidential republican debate. with us for this portion of the program, senior economic supporter, steve laseman. >> thank you. >> welcome, steve. there can be no economic recovery without a recovery in housing.

american families have lost some $7 trillion in home value in the last five years. right now, four million people are behind on their mortgage or in foreclosure. 25% of homeowners owe more to the banks than their house is actually worth. governor romney had said they should let the foreclosure process play out so the housing market can recover and the free markets can work. speaker newt gingrich, is governor romney right? >> he's certainly right in the sense that you want to get through to the real value of the houses as fast as you can because they're not going to rise in value as long as you stay trapped like japan has in 20 years. understand this about housing. to pick up on what was said, if the republican house next week would repeal dodd-frank and allow us to put pressure in the senate to repeal dodd-frank, you'd see the housing market improves overnight. dodd-frank kills small banks,

small business. the federal regulators are an anti-housing loan, and that maximized the pain level. there's rules for a short sale where the house is worth less than the mortgage than to do a foreclosure. the banks are now profiting more by fore closing than short sales. you want the housing market to come back, the economy has to come back. when you're at 4% unemployment, you suddenly have a dramatic increase in demand for housing. when it's 9%-plus unemployment, it's hard to come back. >> governor romney, respond in 30 seconds. not one point in your plan addresses housing. tell us why. >> yeah, it's a jobs plan, not a housing plan, and the right way to get -- [applause] the best thing you can do for housing is to get the economy going, get people working again, seeing incomes instead of going down, coming up so people can afford to buy a home, the thing

the speaker indicated are excellent ideas as well. you have to let the market work and get people in homes again, and the best way for that to happen is to allow the economy to reboot. we know what works is what this president's done which is to try and hold off the foreclosure process, to put money into a stimulus that failed, and put in a place of series of policies from obama care to dodd-frank that make it hard for the economy to get going. we want america's economy to get going. do exact opposite of what president obama has done. [applause] >> governor romney, we've created 2.7 million jobs since february 2010. over that period of time, the housing market has continued to decline. we're at 2003 price levels now. if we continue to go the way we go, it'll be at 1999 price levels, the $7 billion figure

mentioned could double. are you willing to let that happen in america? >> what would you do instead? >> i'm asking you. >> have the federal government buy all the homes in america? that's not going to happen 234 this country. markets work. when government lays its heavy hand, markets blow up. that's the reason of the crisis. the federal government played too heavy a role in the markets. the federal government came in with fannie and freddie and barnny frank and chris dodd say they couldn't afford to pay them back, so the friends in washington today say, oh, if there's a problem in the housing, let's let government play the role. that's the wrong way to go. let markets work, get people back to work, buy home, and home prices come back up if we allow the market to work. >> governor perry, every quarter, i get the gdp figures, and it's a negative number for housing, and we lost 2 million construction jobs. housing creates jobs as well?

>> one of the reasons is because we've put policies into place that follow my plan to get america back working again. >> okay. translate that plan to america. >> when you look at what i've laid out whether it's the energy side and getting the energy industry going and rick santorum is absolutely correct on that, get the energy freed up, pull back owl the regulations. everybody on this stage understands that it's the regulatory world that is killing america. [applause] the tax -- [inaudible] [applause] a 4% tax in there as well, but the real issue facing america are regulations. it doesn't make a difference whether it's the epa, federal banks, dodd-frank or obamacare, that's what is killing america. the next president of the united states has to have the courage to go forward, pull back every regulation since 2008, audit

them for one thing, is it creating jobs or is it killing jobs? if that regulation is killing jobs, do away with it. [applause] >> congresswoman bachmann, in one of the last debates, you were asked about foreclosures, and you told moms to hang on. your advice as your colleagues mentioned was let the economy recover. you agree with governor romney that the way to fix the housing market is let the foreclosure process proceed more rapidly? >> well, what i agree with is we have got to stop what we're doing now. when we have this financial meltdown, 50% of the homes are being financed by fannie and frayedly. today, it's 90% of the homes. in other words, the government is the backer of the homes. let's take a look in an analysis of what a great job they are doing. they just applied this week for another $7 billion bailout because they are failing.

the other one, for a $5 billion bailout because they are failing. what did they do? they just gave bonuses of almost $13 million to ten top executives. this is the epicenter of capitalism -- crony capitalism. that's what is wrong with washington, d.c.. for these geniuses to give ten of their top executives bonuses at $12 million, and then have the guts to come to the american people and say give us another $13 billion to bail us out just for the quarter, that's crazy. we need to put them back into bankruptcy and get them out of business. [applause] it's destroying the housing market. >> you mentioned them, speaker newt gingrich, 30 seconds to you, your firm was paid $300,000 in 2006, what did you do with that money? >> are you asking me? >> yes. >> i offered them advice on presicily on what they didn't do.

[laughter] look, look, 24 is not -- >> were you not trying to help them fend off the effort by the bush administration? >> i assume i get a second question? i have never done any lobbying, every contractor was with me during the period while i was out of office, said i'd do no lobbying, and i offered my advice, and my advice as a historian when they walked into me saying they are making loans with no credit history or record of paying back anything. that's what the government wanted to do. this is a bubble. this is insane. this is impossible. turned out urn fortunately, i was right, and the people who were doing what congresswoman talked about were wrong. it's a good case for breaking them up and getting smaller institutions back into the private sector to be competitive and to be responsible for their behavior. [applause]

>> mr. herman cain, government sponsored entities as congresswoman said underwrite or guarantee 90% of the home financing in this country. what would you do with these -- with fannie and freddie? would you shut them down even if it means higher interest rates? >> you don't start there. you start with fixing the real problem which is growing this economy which is why i have put a bold solution on the table, 9-9-9. secondly, then you get the regulators off of the backs of the banks like someone mentioned, get the regulators out of the way such that the small banks and the medium sized banks are not being forced out of the business, they would then be in a better position, and they might develop a desire in order to help homeowners reset their mortgages if they were

able to see, number three, some certainty. uncertainty is what's killing this economy, and until we throw out the tax code and put in something bold, get government out of the way by reducing the regulatory environment, we are going to still have the housing crisis. >> you would come into office and fannie and freddie would be there. the question was what would you do with them? >> okay. after i did those three things i outlined, then deal with them. you don't start solving the problem in the middle of it. we have to do that first. i would also turn those gse's into private entities. the government does not need to be in that business. i would find a way to unwind fannie and freddie such that the marketplace can be turning with the housing market. >> governor huntsman, back to the issue you raised before about too big to fail. if anything, that problem has got worse since the financial

crisis than before. the ten top holding banks in the country hold 90% of all the assets in the banking system up from 75% in 2006. what would you do? would you break up the banks to remove the risk or diminish the rirveg for american taxpayers? >> let me just say on the housing discussion here, lost in all of this debate is the fact that there are people tuning in tonight who are upside down in terms of the financing of their home, feeling real pain, people today hearing they lost a job. these issues are very real and complicated. for us to say there's an easy solution to housing, that's just not right or fair. the economy does have to recover in order trt housing -- for the housing market to pick up its slack. this should be 15% of the nation's gdp, but today, it's 2%. with respect to the banks too big to fail, you know, today we have six institutions equal to

65% of the gdp, they have an implied guarantee by the taxpayers they will be protected. that's not fair. >> you break them out? >> we need to right size them. in the 1990s, you had goldman sachs, for example, that was 1-- that was $200 billion in size. by 2008, it was $1.1 trillion in size. was that good for the people of this? >> how would you accomplish that? >> i think we ought to set up a fund. i think we ought to charge a fee from the banks that mitigates the risk that otherwise the taxpayers are carrying. there's got to be something that takes the risk from the taxpayers off the table so that these institutions don't go forward with this implied assumption we'll bail them out at the end of the day. it's not right or fair for the taxpayers of the country. >> staying on regulation for a moment. you all said you'll repeal president obama's health care legislation, down the line, 30

seconds, if you repeal obamacare, what's the answer, john huntsman? >> i would say and meet with the 50 governor governors of this country and say, i did health care reform in my state, took us three years to get it done. we delivered an insurance connector that was not a costly mandate. you can sit down with the 50 governors and address cost containment. this is a $3 trillion industry, half of which any expert says it's nonsense spending. how do you get cost out of the system? how do you empower patients to better understand what they are getting when they go into the doctor's office? number two, we have to do a better job of harmonizing records to pull up on a consistent basis the best course of treatment for patient, and third, we have to close the gap on the uninsured without a costly mandate letting the free market work in bringing people together with truly affordable insurance. >> next, we want each of your comments on what the plan is. ron paul? >> we need to get the government

out of the business, and we do need to have the right to opt out of obamacare, but we ought to have the right to opt out of everything, and the answer to it is turn it back over to the patient and the doctor relationship with medical savings accounts so i would say that we had too much government. i've been in medicine. it's gone downhill, the quality's down, prices skyrocketed because of the inflation. you need a market force in there that medical savings accounts, but this message being created is a bipartisan mess. it's been there for awhile, so what we need is the doctor-patient relationship and medical savingsing thes where you can deduct it from your taxes and get a major medical policy and prices would then come down. >> governor perry? >> on the medicare side, you need an insurance program where people have options of which give them a menu of options to choose from. you have to have the doctors, hospitals, and other health care

providers given incentives on health care rather than sick care, and then on medicaid, it's pretty simple, just like john and mitt both know, you send it back to the state and let the states figure out how to make medicaid work because i guarantee you, we'll do it safely, appropriately, and we will save a ton of money. [applause] >> the legislation has already been written. hr3000. in the previous congress was hr3400. it's already written. we didn't hear about it in the previous congress because princess nancy sent it to the committee, and it stayed there. it never came out. hr3000 allows the decisions to be with the doctors and patients, not with the bureaucrats in washington, d.c.. the legislation has already been written. >> governor romney? >> health care in 30 seconds is tough, but let me try. number one, return to the states the responsibility for caring

for their own unensured, and you send the medicaid money back to the states 10 they can craft their own programs. that's one. number two, let individuals purchase their own insurance, not just getting it through their country, but on their own if they want to and no longer discriminate against individuals who want to buy their insurance. three, do what ron paul said. i don't always say that, but i will now. [laughter] get health care to work like a market, and for that to happen, people have to have a stake in what the cost and the quality is as well in their health care. health savingsing the or something called co-insurance. that's the way to help make that happen, and finally, our malpractice system in the country is nuts. we got to take that over and make sure we don't burden the system in that way. [applause] >> i just want to say my colleagues have done a terrific job of answering an uncertain question. [laughter] to say in 30 seconds -- >> you said you want to repeal

obamacare; correct? >> let me defend this to say in 30 seconds what you do with 18% of the economy, life and death for the american people, a topic i worked on since 1974 on which a wrote a book about and founded the center for himself transformation is the perfect case why i'm challenging the president to seven lincoln-douglas style three hour debate with a time keeper and no moderators, two of which on health care so you can have a serious discussion on a several hour period that affects the lives of every person in the country. [applause] >> would you like to try to explain -- [applause] would you like to -- [applause] would you like to try to explain in simple speak to the american people what you would do after you repeal the president's health care legislation. >> in 30 seconds? >> take the time you need. >> i can't, they'll gang up on me. >> go now.

you want to try to answer the question, speaker? >> one, go back to a doctor-patient relationship and involve the family in those periods where the patient, by themselves, can't make key decisions. relocallize it. two, you put medicaid back at the state level and allow the states 20 experiment because we don't know what we are doing nationally. three, focus on a program with brain singes. the fact is the largest outyear of costs we are faced with are alzheimer's, autism, mental health, and things directly from the brain, and i'm for fixing our health rather than fixing our health bureaucracy because the iron lung is the perfect model of saving people so you don't need to pay for a federal program of iron lung centers because the polio vaccine eliminated the problem. that's a very short explanation. >> congressman? [applause] >> the main problem with health care in the united states today is the issue of cost.

it's just too expensive, and president obama said that's what he would solve with obamacare and weed save $2500 a year in premiums. well, we have that, but we didn't have the savings, so what i would do to replace it is to a low every american to buy any health insurance policy they want anywhere in the united states without any federal minimum mandate. today, there's an insurance monopoly in every state in they. -- in the country. i would end that. that's the free market. number two, allow every american to pay for the insurance policy, their deductible, co-pay, pharmaceuticals, whatever that's medical related with their own tax free money, and then finally, have true medical malpractice liability reform. if you do that, it's very simple. people own their own insurance policies, and you drive the cost down because what we have to get rid of is government bureaucracy in health care. that's all we bought in

obamacare was a huge bureaucracy. that has to go away. >> senator? [applause] >> this is, i think, the difference between me and a lot of candidates. i heard a lot of responses, but i have not seen consistency in some of the responses of the last few questions. when it comes to health care, back in 1992, i introduced the first health savings bill that everybody said was the basis for consumer driven health care. ..

i know that we solve problems best from the bottom-up, not the top-down government intervention . >> the work i've done and were in the health care industry,

hospitals and various health institutions. education of acquired traits you build health care businesses. i believe america's work. what is wrong with our health care system in america is that government is played to heavy april. we need to get rockets were to consumers. the patient base date given the transparency they need to know where the opportunities are for lower cost and better quality to make sure providers offer them the broadest array of options they could have. once we have that happening, 18% of our gdp is spent on health care. the next highest in the nation is 12. it's a huge difference. we have took the market tour to get the quality and value america deserves. >> governor, congressman paul said put it back to the dock during the patient. you said a few moments ago that she thought he should have the responsibility for insuring the uninsured in massachusetts to enact an individual mandate subsidies to help people who

don't have insurance get it. >> i think the people have a responsibility to receive their own care what the doctor patient relationship. >> plausibility to force that. >> i didn't know whether ron paul said he was going to get rid of medicaid. i would not get rid of medicaid. what i said it would take medicaid dollars that are currently spent by the federal government, return them to the states of the state can craft their own programs to care for their poor rather than having the federal government and the one size fits all in the entire nation. obama carries wrong. i will repeal it and get it done. [applause] >> congressmen. >> my plan of cutting the budget by a trillion dollars does deal with medicaid and that is that it preserves and there is a transition period with the goal that eventually we would hope to that back into the economy.

but right now it be too much to do when year. finding a trillion dollars is a job in the house and getting ready by department. so yes, my budget takes into consideration health care for the elderly and health care of medicaid as well as child health care. at the same time, we'd so what the bailouts, banks and all the benefits they get from the financial system because we are facing today a crisis on this housing crisis. if i could have one second i'm not come with is that once again because it's price-fixing. this is why nobody will buy them. this is why you have to get rid of fannie mae and freddie mac in that all of that into the marketplace. the banks have been set in europe. they have invested in the fannie mae and freddie mac in this credit default swaps are in big trouble and that is why they are getting dealt out. and that is why they are not allowing marketers to go down

and that is why we will most likely bailout europe, which will be a real tragedy. [applause] >> congressmen, thank you for that. >> out to give you 15 seconds at the deficit problem. >> when we return, announcing the budget and cutting the deficit, making college education more affordable. >> a little less than a social security. you're watching the presidential republican debate. [applause] >> keep the conversation going. head to cnbc nbc.com and join the discussion. what you share could end up on our debate ticker. >> and welcome back. turning for this portion of the debate, rick santelli and shared

by%, are personal-finance cosponsor. first, senator santorum come you're not none of the anonymously test partisan fighter the senate. look where partisan fighting got a massive summer. gridlock and attack rating downgrade. the american people don't like it and neither does to overcome them, ceo of caterpillar. let's take a listen here at >> most people think politicians politicians -- the last two presidents made promises to work across party lines and both failed. how we put our country ahead of your political party of the issues so critical for americans. be specific please. these are promises. >> senator, let me ask you to set up a question. if ever i am the stage without tax increases at a 10 to one ratio spending cuts as you've done, what could you possibly offer democrats to get them to compromise with you on the

things republicans once? >> creative platform that buy into because they see advantages of your plan. for example, one of the reasons i put for this manufacturing plan is because folks in michigan, democrats and republicans go for it. i set the new hampshire house of reps the other day and spoke to a bipartisan group and talked about the taxi, the broad peace plan that i have. i hate to democratic house members go to my chairman, dance and balance that i want them to come to my district and talk about this. we can support it. the republican party is about keeping the top rate lower or cutting taxes, we are not going to be reaching people. we have to look at plans to bring people together. i understand john "the wall street journal" won't like that i think one sector over another. i don't care. i need to bring america together and find a plan that can be implemented right away. it may not be the boldest in the world, but it is one that will

work. you look at the ability of people to rise in our society and help with the jobs out in rural america with the manufacturing lot has been the greatest amount of planet raises the highest. he put a plan like that together to get democrats and republicans to create jobs and get things done. >> governor romney, you've shown you can work with democrats. you collaborated with ted kennedy and the health care plan enacted. he raised fees to balance the budget used that as an argument to get the credit rating of your stay to read it. independent voters mende flight data. should republican voters be nervous about it? >> thanks for reminding everybody. [laughter] what i found in the state like mine, 85% of my legislature was democratic. to get anything done, i was always in an away game if you will. and to get something done i had to see if there were democrats who cared more about the state and they cared about their reelection underwear. right now america faces a

crisis. i think people on both sides of the aisle recognize this is no longer a time for worrying about the next election. this is a time to worry about america. we see what is happening in italy, increase. that is where we're headed if we don't change our course. fair enough to democrats and republicans willing to put aside partisanship and do what is right for the country in my view is clear that they by someone who cares more about the country, cares more about the future of america, cares about kids and grandkids and it's going to step forward and lead. what we have now is a president who striven by one thing, his reelection. it is unbelievable we have a crisis going on in america -- [applause] and a president is focused on getting himself reelected. >> out of time, governor. governor perry come you play only home games in texas. to give points for winning on the road? >> there is a recent caterpillar moved its hydraulics manufacturing and engineering

manufacturing to the state of texas. it didn't have anything to do with republicans first democrat. it had everything to do with creating a climate in our state for the job creators knew that they were going to have the opportunity to keep more of what they work for. that's what americans are looking for. a tax plan that basically says he'll keep more of what you work for. they are looking for regulatory climate that doesn't strangle the life out of their businesses who may want to put those dollars are to create the wealth. that is that americans are looking for. i think we are getting all tangled up around the issue of kidney work with democrats or republicans? yeah, we cannot do that. the fact of the matter is we need to have a plan in place that americans get their hands around and that is the reason my flat tax is the only evolve the folks on this state if it bounces the budget in 2020. it doesn't think so regular term a client has to happen. i will say, it is three agencies of government when i get there

that are on. commerce, education and what is the third one there? let's see. >> five. >> commerce, education and the epa. there you go. [laughter] >> seriously? is the epa the one you're talking about? >> no commissary, agencies of government. epa needs to be rebuilt. >> but you cannot name the third one? >> that. government i would do away with the commerce. and let's see -- the third one i can. sorry. whoops. >> what about the epa and the new rules coming out of the epa? mr. kane can do right now there is a situation with the epa getting aggressive in the national light-year relations wanting to shut down.

what would you tell going to do? >> absolutely not. that is what is wrong with government. [applause] the government has no business trying to pick one of the losers we have sent letters to the front doors legislation for the back door through regulations. now if i make -- >> what about manufacturing? >> well, this is 19999 plan made every sect to her. how about helping everybody, not just one sack or? that is the power of my plan. and yes, i am the only one that put a bolt plan on the table and not afraid to go out and defend it. as far as both sides of the outs were together, i don't see that yet. in terms of getting both sides, it will provide a compelling

solution and the american people understand it will demand it. that's how you get both sides of the aisle to work together. [applause] >> speaker gingrich. >> for the first time in its 75 year history, social security is going to be in the rent. according to the washington post at october 29, 105 early in this. the reason political parties, both sides at the end of last year agreed they wanted a tax cut in the area cut was payroll taxes, demand funding for social security. if we continue that in there seems to be agreement on both sides of the aisle to extend the tax cut, 32011 and 22 of the cumulative will not be closer to 260 billion. carl tax cut is created equal? is this a tax cut he would not? >> i have not been prepared to raise taxes on working americans

the middle of a recession this fact. let me put social security in context. in 1968 in order to take a balanced budget, lyndon johnson by social security into the general budget. covers politicians have hid behind social security, now will be a disadvantage to do so. the first step is to take social security off the federal budget and don't try to solve the problem on the back for working americans and retirees. you do a social security is a freestanding issue. the fact is if you allow younger americans to have the choice to go to galveston for trillion style personal social security savings account, the long-term effect is scored by the social security actuary is absolutely stabilized in the system and taking care of it. the key is there is $2,000,000,000,400 in social security, which should be off budget and no president of the united states should i very can

say because of the political fight in washington and may not be up to sending your check. the money is sitting there. the money is available in country had to pay the debt it is people to the money in their. >> if i could follow-up? speaker gingrich is that is not prepared to raise taxes on the american people and the mentally slow economy like this. that is what would happen if the payroll tax cut is not extended. do you agree with him and would you also support when it comes down to an extension of the payroll tax cut? >> and i want to raise taxes in the middle of the recession. that's another reason so we we fought so hard. although, this issue of deficit spending is not about dollars and cents. it is a moral issue, a moral imperative. we cannot continue to pass on massive debts to the next generation. we cannot continue to put at risk the greatest nation because

of the profligate spending going on in washington d.c. >> to agree, the payroll tax cut should be -- >> i don't want to raise any taxes anywhere. what i am looking to do is to cut spending. and that is why this last week i put on the plan for dramatically cut spending in washington that can this to a 20% cap and make sure we have a balanced budget thereafter. i have three major steps. number one, cut programs. gifford of programs program said on have like obamacare. see programs that the state level -- federal level and send them back to the states or they can be better run with less fraud and abuse. and number three, finally bring some purdah davidian management expertise of the federal government. i would cut the workforce by 10%. i want to make sure to link the conversation to that which exists. >> and a candidate on the stage

disagreed? does any candidate disagree and opposed extension of the payroll tax cut. >> does any candidate disagree with governor romney and opposed extension of the payroll tax cut? you oppose that? >> i opposed it what it was first proposed a $111 billion in the social security trust fund. president obama clearly did this for political reasons. so why is made dow corning nine because we actually have already been social security. we are not just about to. we are to have. six years ahead of time. now consider the context. we have baby boomers in their peace earning years. this is when money should be flooding in to social security trust fund. instead, we are already in the red. what type this evening about how much trouble we are in the spending, we are in a tremendous amount of trouble with spending.

we pay a lot of taxes in this country. 2.2 trillion is what we send to washington. the problem is we spent at the government level, 357 trillion. >> governor huntsman. >> our federal government still owns 500 million shares of gm stock, guarantees trillions of dollars of work or just. they are basically the lender to a 90% of all the mortgage origination rate now. when you consider the federal reserve, the federal reserve has purchased 2.62 trillion of treasury security, agency securities in mortgage securities. if he were president, how would your administration and would your administration reverses obligation? >> code cleanup the balance

sheet. that may tell you what i worry about as much as anything else. we talk about failed leadership. president obama had three years to get the economy going into the stores and environment enemies failed miserably. along with that, we may trust crisis in this country. between the american people and institutions of power, congress come executive branch, wall street as well, there is no trust. we have running on an tea. when a democracy runs on empty because of government holdings and bailouts in involved in ways appropriate unconstitutional government and where we should be, that results in a diminution of chess by the american people appear perpetually citrus. then they tell you what i think needs to be done in terms of turning our economy. we've heard about tax plans. i think i'm the only one on the stage was actually delivered delivered a flat tax. i did that as governor of my

stay. i put forward a proposal that is ripe for this country and getting it back on its feet. "the wall street journal" has come out. the most respected editorial page economically maybe in the the entire world has come out and endorsed my plan. it very simply calls out just as i did as governor. by not taking on academic theory. i see and hear as a practitioner. am i to phase out the loopholes and deductions on the individual side and phase out corporate welfare and subsidies on the corporate side and lower the rates to make us more competitive. that is the work that is realistic, can get done in congress and fire engines of growth so desperately needed to be stressed in this country. >> i want to be -- that is it that congressman paul right now we are looking at student loan debt that is near $1 trillion. americans owe more in student

loans and credit cards than the average debt for a college senior right now is over $25,000. it is obviously a very hot topic on this campus and the students across the country. just listen to what they have to say. >> rates have increased roughly three times over the last three decades. >> where students have to take out loans or forgo college. >> congressman paul, you have talked about the fact you want to get rid of the department of education. he said he went to get rid of federal student loans. so how would you make college more accessible, more affordable for the students and students around the country? >> i think he approved the policy of student loans is a total failure. i mean come a trillion dollars of that dumped on the taxpayers? [applause] process skyrocketed because of inflation and they don't have jobs. there is nothing more dramatic

way feeling the map program. there is no authority in the constitution of the federal government to be dealing with education. we should get rid of loan programs, department of education and give tax credits if you have to help people, but the inflation is the big problem. three times the rates is natural and normal. when governments inflated currency because the government gets involved in. stockmarkets and skyrocketing prices. education. >> how do they pay for college? >> way they pay for cell phones and computers. they are competition. quality goes up on the price goes down. can you imagine what it was like at the department of homeland security control of one company to make a cell phones. i mean, it would've been a total

disaster. but the delivery of any service, medicare or housing, and a cause higher prices, lower quality and give us this mess we are in. that is why we have to eventually get -- we have to wise up and look at where the come from. we should start by auditing the senate and then we should end the fed. [cheers and applause] >> congressman paul just talked about are bubbling many concerned that other types of debts, student loan debt does not have the same type of consumer protection. it cannot be wiped out by law. are you worried about student loan debt to come in the next government bailout? >> this is a good place to talk about the scale of change were about to live through. we are at the end of the welfare state of dependency, debt, distortion and dishonesty. the student loan program because

mclendon johnston announced with a $15 million program. it is an absurdity. what does it do? it expands ability to stay in college longer because they don't see the cost. it actually means they take fewer hours per semester on average. it takes longer to get to school and allows them to tolerate tuitions going up absurdly here by 2014 there'll be one it in a straighter for every teacher on college campuses in the united states. and they give you a contrast that is very startling. the college in the ozarks is a work-study college. you cannot apply unless you need student made and they have a student aid. you have to work 20 hours a week during the year to pay tuition and books. you work 40 hours a week during the summer to pay for room in word. 92% of the students graduate without data. the others so $5000 because they bought a car. that is a model so different of a culture shock pursuance of

america tonight we expect them to go to class, study, could have quickly become a charge as little as possible and emerge debt-free by doing the right things for four years. [cheers and applause] >> governor perry. name the top program said she would cut in terms of long-term deficit reduction. medicare, medicaid, social security and defense spending in the order you see fit. >> every one of those in by the way that was the department of energy of us reaching for her. [laughter] here is what we have to look at us americans. it is the entitlement programs that are enough this huge amount of money out there. it's zero so the spending. when you look at medicaid, medicare, social security and those unfunded liabilities over $115 trillion just in those three programs. those are the places where you

go and make hard decisions in this country. obviously social security is one of those where we can either go to a blended type of a program where we've learned price and wage, with a program that can save billions of dollars they are. but the people in social security need to understand something today. those working their way toward social security, we have made a pledge to ban. those individuals will have those dollars they are. but the young people out there. who will stand up for young people in this country? those of the workforce today stand up and say we are going to transform this program so it will be there for you. i will do that. i will stand up for young people in this country and put a program in place that will be there for them. >> speaking of young people coming to agree with congressman paul we should kill the student loan federal program? >> i call for a $10,000 --

>> would you kill a? >> i don't think the federal government should be in the business of paying for programs and building up huge debt out there. we need to look at how do you for sees universities to be efficient? one of the ways is that the governors to appoint the trustees step in and basically say, listen, you are going to have graduation rates moving upwards. you are going to have tuition moving down. you have to have control over those regions where the legislature has to control. but the bottom line is we have to put powerful economic forces into play. one of those is using our technology to let our kids have the opportunity to get an education through long-distance learning. >> we are going to take one more quick rate. when we return, follow-up

questions to candidates. >> are republican presidential debate will be right that. [applause] >> welcome back to the presidential debate. >> mr. kane, let me ask you a question. and republican governor, state of california hired a company to build the new san francisco oakland bay bridge, create thousands of jobs in china and california did that because it was cheaper. is that smart purchasing by government and a global economy or is there something wrong with that? >> there is something wrong with that, which is why i have bold plan, 999.

allow me to explain how on the 999 that that company would be more inclined to keep the business here. on the first nine, you take sales minus purchase says, net exports and capitals. it levels the playing field between good producing in the united states and the rest of the world. it makes the united states more competitive and businesses won't be tempted to build overseas, send jobs overseas. the tax code is that send jobs overseas or the tax code is what caused them to buy those articles from the chinese. it starts with replacing the tax code. >> governor romney, was a mistake for governor schwarzenegger to build portions of the bridge? >> what china is doing is not playing fairly by the rules that exist in the wto in the world.

china is on almost every dimension chaining and we've got to recognize that. [applause] is good for america to have free trade. it is good for us to build the same goods and services around the world. that is normally a good thing. but china is playing by different rules. one, they are stealing intellectual property. number two, hack into computer systems and send a virtue of of that as well from us and they are manipulating current see me doing so holding on the price of chinese goods and making sure products are artificially low price. it's predatory pricing. if i am president of the united states, and making it very clear. i love free trade. i want to open markets to free trade, but a crack down on cheaters like china. they simply cannot continue to steal our jobs. [applause] >> how are you cracking down? how is your crack down on china?

>> number 10 do something this president should have done a long time ago which is label china a manipulator. and then charge them with being a currency manipulator. number three, were they've stolen intellectual property and hacked into computers and whether artificial pricing is causing the ghost of regulatory levels of pricing a replay of necessary terrorists to make sure they understand we are willing to plan a level playing field. we have to have free trade. that is essential for the function of a strong economy, we cannot allow one nation to font rules and kill our jobs allowing them continue as they have. >> speaker, so many multinational companies want to get a foothold in china and sell to the billion and how people there. they can only do joint ventures. they are not better shake in terms of selling to the 1.5 william population. >> there were two things i might be say in advance i would yield in part to governor huntsman

because he speaks fluent chinese, as were in china and has been ambassador. there are two different parts here. the problem with having the bridge is simple. what is it about american regulations, american taxation, american labor cost and attitudes that makes it cheaper to go to china than the united states? first of all, you have to decide are we going to be more competitive and how will be be the lowest cost and there's anyone that says by 2015, south carolina and alabama will be cheaper than the chinese coastal provinces to manufacture. that can in terms of generous china strategically, i think we find ways to dramatically raise the pain level for the chinese cheating. both on the hack inside, but also on stealing of intellectual property side. i don't think anybody should they have a particularly good strategy for doing that. >> or to seconds. john hunt nine, 30 seconds to respond. >> 30 seconds, for heaven sakes.

let me say with a 40 year relationship with china. it is a troublesome and problematic relationship, very, very complicated. but the bottom line is you can kind of pander here in the air. you start a trade war if you start slapping tariffs principally on chinese products based upon current manipulation. that's not a good idea. the longer term we have to keep doing business with always done. sit down, find solutions and move forward. it isn't easy, isn't irs. for 40 more years we have to do it the same way. >> are you saying governor romney is pandering? >> you can throw at applause lines and slap on tariffs. you know, that doesn't work. >> you are suggesting any standing right here. >> i said it before that policy is one of simply pandering, just during the terrifying for the sake of an artificially valued currency, which is in fact the

case. but here's what they do in response. the city of artificially valued currency with quantitative easing programs. we are going to slap something on your products and before lying at the trade work. >> governor romney, are you pandering? >> look, i've been in business all my life, 25 years. the console businesses around the world. i've been in business where we compete around the world. i understand free trade and i think free trade. you just write about our capacity to manufacture and compete head converses chinese. i've also seen predatory pricing. i think you are as good that an artificial level for an extended period of time such as they can trade for the people out of business. amadeus or people or business they raise prices. china holds down the value of their currency. if the u.s. currency for instance is being inflated, let it flow. let us have a market that can

ascend to determine the value of our respective currencies as opposed to the chinese government continuing to put advantage their producers. this is no longer a time to sit back and say we can let them steal our jobs. >> congress and bought meant, how do you open for american companies? >> chinese have been bad at yours. recently find out the terms counterfeit computer chips here in the united states appears in some of those counterfeit computer chips in the pentagon and some upper weapon system. we also found out that the chinese just finished building 3000 miles of underground tunnels where they are housing the nuclear weapons. there are very real consequence to the united states. overspending to such an extent that we are in hock to them over trillion dollars. we spent so much interest money to the chinese to pay our debt.do we effectively built aircraft carrier.

by 2015, we'll be spending so much interest money over will pay for the entire people's revolution army of china, the number one employer of the world. what we need to do is stop enriching china with our money and we do that day stopping by earning from them and stop spending money we don't have. [applause] >> mr. cain. i want to ask your question that does not relate to 999. or any other site there. this is our final word and it comes from our viewers. it is all about restoring trust and faith in our markets and in our way of life. i'm going to be quoting julian corne beach. she says her stock market has turned into a kiss he know with high-frequency computerized training comprising 70% of all

transactions and hedge fund speculation resulting and volatile market swings before privatizing social security. how do you make the stock markets favor? mr. cain, simple, how do we restore faith in the market for the little guy? >> the first thing we do is restore if a business by providing so businesses can grow. a flood of of volatility has been driven by uncertainty. uncertainty are what the tax rolls would be. all of the uncertainty has the economy stagnated. so the way you restore that his grow this economy. that is job one. many of the things we talked to appear today start with growing the economy and that is why we have to use the bold plan. i won't mention this. in order to turn in the economy.

>> when the economy was going great, people were getting ripped off another's insider trading. people were getting hurt in the stock market. talk about the way the market regulators. >> i feel your pain. >> 90 million people is money in the market. >> income you have to certainty and the in the dynamics of businesses grow. they have been in a mode of survival. they need to be an emotive growth. that is what we should do first. i agree with others who said we have to repeal.frank. it needs to be a top priority to repeal. number one come it doesn't provide oversight for fannie mae and freddie mac and they all agreed that as a catalyst for the melt down in 2008. the two other biggest problems with dodd-frank, god and frank. [laughter] [cheers and applause]

>> governor perry, same question to you and congressman ron paul. how do you restore faith in the public market? >> well, we had the regulations in place well before the meltdown occurred. we have a culture in washington d.c., with these corporate lobbyists have these cozy relationships with the people they are regulating. we have to have leadership in this country that not only recognized that, that demands those individuals who are working for us are in those agencies, whether it's in the stock market or whether it's fannie mae or freddie mac. when there are individuals who are breaking the law, pushing the bounds, that there are clear askers made to take those people out of those jobs are prosecute them for criminality. and you can pass legislation

until a world level. you had to men and women who are committed to the laws of this country and a president that will push his administration to make sure that they are done. >> governor. was just talking about the culture of washington. his critics in the state of texas say crony capitalism is what is practiced at governor. are they right? >> i haven't analyzed well enough to call him a crony or not. i don't know the details of that, but there is a lot of crony capitalism going on in this country and that has to be distinguished from a capitalism because this occupation not on wall street. if you're going to have to go after goes on i am all for it. contracts from government, benefits from all the bailouts, they don't deserve compassion. they deserve taxation are they

deserve to have all the benefits removed. but crony capitalism isn't when somebody makes money and produce a product. that is important. we have to distinguish the two. unfortunately some people mix that. but this team is so vital that we recognize what capitalism is versus crony capitalism. and believe me, when you have an inflationary environment and all the speculation and all the bailout to to the monetary system, believe me, you get a majority aparna capitalism and that is why we face this crisis today. >> that is all the time we have for the presidential debate. we think all candidates for being here tonight. we hope you now have a better understanding of where each of them stand on the economy, jobs in germany. >> would also like to thank our partners, the michigan republican party is another grizzlies of oakland university. [cheers and applause]

>> power debate may be over, but our coverage continues. complete postdebate analysis. stay with us on the. -- cnbc. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> on thursday, vice president joe biden was the keynote speaker at the annual nokia love school communications first words. these awards honor new hampshire free-speech advocates. from the capitol center for the arts in concord, new hampshire, this is an hour and 15 minutes. >> my name is joe mcquaid and i am the president of the stack nackey s. loeb school of communications and i.t. thank you for being here this evening and for that tonight, which i think will be very exciting. the sponsors names are in your programs. you know who you are. better than i do. i keep mispronouncing diane mercer's bang. we'll raid or has been a

supporter of this event school for an awful long time and it allows us a level of calm for to do what we do and get the speakers began. mark wieden is in new hampshire and i've asked him to say a few words. we please welcome him. [applause] >> thank you very much. on behalf of the waste management, our employees and their families, i am very pleased to welcome you all to this evening celebration of the nackey s. loeb first amendment award. both we'll greater waste management have been a part of this trading business community. we've been married for quality, integrity and community commitment of one of the state's greatest cultural and

intellectual asset. since reopened for business or than 40 years. fortunate readers have enjoyed this publication since the end of the 19th century. so we are delighted to join you at the ports "the portsmouth herald" and accept this prestigious award. most important of all, we honor to share with you in recognizing an enterprise that for more than a century has steadfastly upheld the pair tradition of american freedoms. the herald's achievement helpings change state laws to better protect free enterprise, free expression and expand the right to know firing for us all. it is also a vivid affirmation of the intent of the founding fathers, leaders who fought for all the free speech and infringed upon a free press. sounding of the nackey s. loeb

school and the maturation of the first amendment award in 2003 both result of the enduring legacy of the family have continued to defend these import racer widespread education and opportunity. two nights event is from the generosity of new hampshire businesses and citizens throughout the year to enable the school to offer free topics that embrace the first amendment classes include news, sports, editorial, political and feature writing, social media, and broadcasting. since 1999, 5000 people people people people the nackey s. loeb school. advocating first amendment rights is a list of previous award recipients. montgomery of former new hampshire attorney general, political activist, city counselor, high school teacher and school board member.

with the deepest congratulations of the wheelabrator organization to the loeb family come between conscience and professional plug-ins add the "the portsmouth herald" and insightful journalism of howard altschiller and elizabeth dimond and the leadership represented here tonight they distinguished by its president joe biden. we are pleased to acknowledge the first amendment in this great state and country is well guarded. thank you for coming this evening in paris stringy and congratulating "the portsmouth herald." [applause] >> well said, mark. i think you spare david toles saki a lot of what we are going to say about the school. it is very near and dear to all of our hearts and quite an

exceptional institution. he stole my thunder are saying that the first amendment is doing pretty well. protection and protection is a signature part of the school. i would say the first amendment that complements here in new hampshire have seen some pretty bright moments. we honor one of those in the "the portsmouth herald" work and a recent union later case in which attorney katie sullivan won a unanimous state supreme court ruling concerning public pension fund. our speaker knows a few things for freedom of speech and assembly and crafting laws under our constitution. before you as vice president, joe biden was u.s. senator. before he was a senator, he was the son of blue-collar in scranton pennsylvania.

small world. that newspaper, one of its owners served until recently on the directors. joe biden was said among the youngest man ever to be made to the u.s. senate. this is just a wild guess, but other than the late ted kennedy, he may have been the latest center ever to feel the sting of a patron editorial by union later publisher william loeb. [laughter] i will leave that to him, but i have an autographed copy in my pocket. i would like to say this about joe biden. in a world where politicians danced around the issues and avoid confrontation or even eye contact, this man does not back away. teresa senate, tracy candidate, he lets you know where he stands and he tells you why he will not

shy away from arguments they need past have your a game if you're going to engage with them. he's been a tireless ally confidant in world way troubleshooter for president obama and it's done so in a period in our history that has brought with it unprecedented challenge. he joins on this event and we are grateful for his service to the nation and i am honored to introduce you to vice president of the united states, the honorable joseph eyton. [applause] >> folks, how are you? thank you. thank you very much. please, thank you. you're very kind and joe is very kind in his introduction.

when we were backstage -- by the way, i understand my friend rick santorum is here at last year. if he is here, good luck buddy, hope you did better than i did. rick and i worked together in the delaware valley issues because i represent double for years and he represented pennsylvania. and it used to be we could disagree without being disagreeable. rick, i miss seeing you. and good luck if you're here. if not, so i'll pass it on to you i hope. show and i've have known each other for a while and we were backstage and he was kind enough to welcome you. i looked at him and said show, mr. loeb is probably rolling over in his grave right now. and show immediately pulled out a copy of an editorial i literally have had for the last

35 years hanging in a cold frame on the wall in the bathroom next to name your to remain me that humility is always referred. i was having to debate with jesse helme, who later is shown to us my friend. i was at his funeral and with the preface for his book and i am still friends with his wife and his children. jesse was that blacks and eloquently in her first year in the senate about why senators didn't deserve to be paid. i found that somewhat difficult behemoths as the poorest man in the congress cannot literally, not figuratively and jesse having significant wealth at the time. so i got up and joe says i always say what they mean. the problem is that i say it. i stood up and i said, i can understand what the senator from north carolina doesn't think

he's worth $42,500, but the rest of us are. and with that, mr. loeb did a front page but fox editorial titled such conceit. and this is proof of freedom of speech. he said it and i am here and he has not come back to grab joe. mark, it is an honor to be with you. mark not only in "the portsmouth herald" not only are award winners, the mark is doing something that is remarkable. and that is his company whose beating in the forefront of renewable energy i think is going to be part of the trailblazing possibilities that the united states continues to lead in the 21st century, they thank you for your work. folks, again i want to thank the foundation of the school for

inviting me to be here as you present an award that honors ideas, ideas central to the foundation of our nation, freedom of speech and the free flow of information. it is an honor to be at a school that embodies those principles. and you know, all of you here know your state's motto. live free or die. governor, i can't see, but is the governor here? the governor knows that better than anybody. the only bad thing happening in new hampshire is you're not running again as far as i'm concerned. [applause] i put my hand up, but i can't see what the lie to my face. governor, it's great to be with you. the governor often are made to meet at the motto is live free or die. some of you may not know that that quote came from a toast by a former governor of new hampshire, john stark come at a

dinner celebrating the battle up and attend the victory the revolutionary work. she gazed freedom fighters have at their disposal an array of advanced technologies that john stark and america's founding fathers, even bill loeb could not possibly have imagined. those of instantaneous communication might the internet, text messaging, e-mail and social networks that cross borders literally at the speed of light linking people with diverse cultures and a world more closely connect to it than any time in history. these new technologies in the way they impact on the first amendment and first amendment values are literally capable of changing the world in a sudden and profound ways as we were just beginning to understand. as i would like to talk with you tonight. the link to speech, the march of

technology and the human struggle for freedom. as you all know it has deep historical roots. our revolution was inspired by pamphleteers like thomas paine, our draft constitution was approved after a vigorous public debate, framed widely as a consequence of the circulated essays that we have come to know as the federalist papers. european revolutionaries during the spring of nations, that is the uprising that swept the continent in 1848 benefited from the rise early in the 19th century of mass circulation, popular press that gave ordinary citizens information about landmark events. within and beyond their borders. it was contagious. and during the cold war, radio

and later copying machines gave people trapped behind the iron curtain a window on the outside world and the ability to distribute that material, fueling the drive for a better life to help bring down the berlin wall 22 years ago. parenthetically, i would note that i remember going through checkpoint charlie as a u.s. senator and being searched -- everything being searched. i brought my son with me so he could see and understand what depression was about. and the one thing they let for was any and reading material and any ability to copy the material that was banned. you now, from a control room in the empire state building, radio free europe radio liberty began. and they started off by using a

simple tagline, sane and the american tradition of free speech. and despite propaganda that they were both tools that the u.s. government, and they earned worldwide reputations for journalistic independence and they became recognized as beacons of truth throughout the world. average citizens to use berlin to moscow literally hung around soft -- short wave radios clandestinely listening to the truth denied them by their own governments. it took heart in knowing, knowing that the road had not forgot them. the most damaging thing to oppressed people is convince them that no one else knows and no one else cares.

.. >> all of this was driven home to me by my mother in the nobel prize winning prize winner. on the visit to the united states foreign relations committee in 1991 it is a small

room and as joe those we invite world leaders to come in and have lunch with us, members of the committee with no staff. now that the door, these double doors in the beautiful room in the capitol with a large table about the size of the cabinet room, the size of the table in the cabinet room at the white house coming and we were told he was running a little behind so i was the first in line because i was a ranking member then. our german was not able to be there. i walked to a phone in the corner of the room and just as i got on the phone, in bursts lake, now president of poland the solidarity mo moment that helped topple the communist regime and here he was the newly minted president of the newly free nation. i don't know intentionally if he was supposed to shake hands and

he walked over to me because i had known him and he put his hands and said thank you. solidarity, and you he said no. this is his answer. i will never forget, she said no. radio free europe and the holy father. they brought the walls down. and he is right. one of the things that tyrants have always known is that information is power and it's a powerful, powerful weapon in the hands of a free people. because of some ask why is it rips off the bench of deceit for all to see and emboldens that

hard-pressed to be free. look at today's cutting its technology will be on radio, twitter, facebook, text messaging, cellphone videos. house startlingly rapid the day or unmasking the lives of tyrants. faster than ever before in world history. more than that, they have given everyone in the oppressed land a worldwide platform literally in their pockets in a way to both listen and speak which the printing press, radio, television and the other tools of liberty from earlier times could not and did not.

is neither inherently good more inherently bad. the same networks and devices and internet enable them to take on the oppressive dictators are also using the same dictators to tighten their grip on power. but from the leaders of the world who do not fear their citizens, but rather want to earn the respect and support these technologies are also having a number of overwhelmingly positive effects on government. technology is enabling the government to be more transparent, to give the citizens greater insight into how decisions are made and for those citizens demand that in sight and accountability, to released through the freedom of information act and can be

uploaded on the internet so not just the person who made the request for the whole world to it has a powerful, powerful impact on the government when to withhold information in the first place. flexible the state department places on a historical series on american foreign policy revealing internal papers many of them newly declassified critical of the decisions we made earlier, we as a country. proof of the strength of our system and democracy, part of what i refer to as american exceptional was on and because recent years many americans have lost faith in their ability to manage their tax dollars to handle anything competently.

opportunity to begin to rebuild put out some figures in plain view for all to see. now i know there's a lot of debate particularly in new hampshire about the recovery act. we can argue it is kinsey and consequences. but if you notice there is virtually no debate about the transparency and accountability of that money and how was spent. gave me the incredible privilege of overseeing the implementation of that act having been around washington a long time, i insisted we set a new standard in government of transparency and accountability because people, democrats, republicans, independent have an overwhelming

and a growing cynicism about the ability of any government, republican or democrat to handle their affairs. so we hired first of all the toughest ig democrats and republicans in the house and senate and congress agreed the inspector general there was the integrity of the government asked them to put together a board of nine other independent of me in the white house. we asked them to employ the most evident technology available, the same technology available in the back rooms of major banks and trading houses. to be able to follow the money. to track and account for every dollar. it was over seen as i said by this independent group of inspectors general and monitored on what was called a war room that they dubbed the recovery operation center.

if we will kanwit look by a mini norad. more computers on the wall because it wanted the cia, the fbi, intelligence community's to ask what tools under the first amendment are we able to use in order to track these dollars and fair it out with fraud, waste and abuse before it happened? the result was that anyone could go to recovery.gov and you can do that when you leave here and track the amount of money spent and for what purpose. one of the significant byproducts of the transparency was it had a profound impact. it literally deputized hundreds citizens to go out and tell us, board when the money was being misspent.

tanding there eating their lunch or actually whether or not it was on time who the contractor was. the citizens began to check the lican the house between mr. issa who is clearly not an ally on many issues he and i are working together determined to meet this standard through the recovery act the permanent standard for every government we are not only insisting on transparency and accountability at home, we also are as a nation pursuing a decision that internationally all around the world and every international floor we are involved in. in september we launched the open government partnership which to make our commitment to

transfer into in power citizens to fight corruption and strengthen governments through new technologies with the nation's emerging in seeking assistance and help. it's one of the things we are doing with them. whether it's an iraq as we help them set up their agencies and institutions, orient libya. these technologies also enable governments and the private sector to make important progress in international development programs. to give an example, earlier this year, the u.s. agency for international development launched what they called the grand challenge on savings mothers' lives at birth, tens of thousands die at birth. over 600 innovators submitted their ideas through a web site that was visited by people in more than 100 countries and our government is now identified and funded 20 candidates to take up their innovation to the next

level with the hope of them going viral and making them available to people in the world over. i can give you scores of examples in dozens of countries now farmers use cell phones and the internet to track market prices and decide when to sell and when to grow, but goods to take to market to. it is free now. it's free now. the important point is that of the use of new technology is only going to increase in the years to come. and those of you who are students at the los cool will be the beneficiaries and have to deal with these changes. the united nations estimates that by 2012, more than 5 million people, excuse me, 5 billion people in the world will have access to sell phones, and god knows only what will be in 2018 and what technology will be associated with those.

another advantage of these technologies is their ability to expose atrocities committed by government and others all around where there was genocide, the brutal suppression of the green revolution in iran in 2009 and today in syria the world over because someone with a cellphone, someone with a small video was able to send a viral, exposing the why, the atrocities and the butchery taking place in each of those countries. was not fully anticipated. for the first time they impose a burden on the rest of the world to act because they could no longer say i don't believe it.

or they are a sovereign nation. we will not be engaged. and it is made clear to our friends who in the past were they had to take their coats off as well or lose self-respect world wide. they could no longer plead ignorance to the oppression and brutality that exist in parts of the world. and where the consensus could be built nations of the world have begun to intervene in a way that never happened before. it's become clear that this is not just an american responsibility to be engaged everywhere there is oppression because it's not. it is global. and as nato and our arab

partners proved during the recent libyan operation, the world acted, saved potentially tens of thousands of people from brutality and def, and it could not have been done without our leadership and technology. it was done without losing one single american life but the work has only now begun because now we have to establish in a unified with 14 different tribes and government for the first time in my career not viewed as a sole responsibility of the superpower, but a moral responsibility and obligation in the free world with the capacity and help. and finally, technology is

fueling the universal last purgation for freedom. a vendor indonesia literally set himself aflame to protest the oppression of his government. new technology used by ordinary citizens get oxygen to that flame, and is spread across the entire middle east. the consequences of which we are not fully aware of yet. protesters in tunisia and egypt use social media to organize and outmaneuver government security agencies. video from the cell phone cameras went viral and inspired generations and syria, regimes endured for decades crumbled in a matter of weeks. it was also used as an organizing tool able to setup a call to assemble in some cases

in the tens of thousands bill would require in organizational capacity only possessed by the government in question. we've also seen technology used in more nefarious ways. as i said at the outset it is neither inherently good or bad. i need to only point to 9/11 and the organizational tool used to bring down the world trade towers and kill thousands of americans. terrorists continue to use the internet and other technologies to remotely plan attacks and recruit followers to their cause. rigorous of regimes used cell phones and satellite technology to trace dissidents and ease drop in the communications and just as the iron curtain once sequestered the soviet bloc,

today's repression governments seek to establish an electronic curtain, not an iron curtain but an electronic curtain to wall off people from the outside world. but they are destined to fail. the government for civil has television signals from sends operatives to the remote satellite to remove satellite dishes on the rooftops of apartment buildings to access the internet with a futile effort to control what the people see and hear. they justify the virtual crackdowns by invoking kaput, perceived security threat. it's not only oppressive governments that invoke the security threat to limit the applicability of this technology freedom of speech and the challenges that can allegedly itself or older than this republic and they

arise whenever a new technology seems to threaten security in the mind of some. the federal laws and and and i finalists passionately debate the content of the bill of rights scaling back the draft of the first amendment, which some found sweeping. but the potential ability to undermine government. the alien and sedition act were approved and became controversy of campaign issues from the dawn and during world war i congress passed the laws that criminalize criticism in the war effort. it's easy to forget the freedom of information act which was the cornerstone of the commitment to transparency and government, the wall of a lot of vietnam veterans groups to learn about the composition of agent orange and explain how it was causing the navy hornet jets to crash

was resisted by presidents of both parties not long ago. according to bill moyers the press secretary, quote, the president had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the ceremony. he hated the very idea of the free not information act, hated the thought of journalists rummaging through the government process continuing, he did the challenging, the official view of reality. eight years later, amy and i served with and admired, president ford vetoed a bill that strengthened the freedom of information act. he was a good man, but he saw the strengthening of the freedom of information act would weaken the security of the united states as a young senator ollie was very proud to join those in

the senate who overrode president ford's veto. but the debate as some will remember, none of you women here are old enough to remember but joe remembers. [laughter] the struggle to ensure both liberty and security has always been at the heart of our space experiment and will continue to be. the good news is we, the united states in every case eventually air on the side of liberty. because it is stitched into the fabric of our national tapestry because of our faith in the marketplace of ideas and the common sense of our fellow citizens that is the root in my view of american exceptional was some, and because, because we have in the end always rejected the fallschase between our security and ideals and we have

gone on to encourage all nations to do the same. information have in the past and are continuing to lose the race against time and their fight against the future. just as surely as the truth will ultimately be pantry that the iron curtain, today sensors of the electronic curtain they are erecting will be penetrated and we have an obligation as well as the national security interest in hastening the failure of those who argue we cannot act to increase the flow of information cynicism entitled to because the perceived threats to the national security.

that's why our administration makes no apologies. let me say it again. we make no apologies for helping citizens around the world eve aid the control imposed by their government. meanwhile, countries that try to have it both ways. by making the internet close to free expression but open to business are going to find a fruitless task that will fail. they may try to build walls between the different activities , but there isn't a separate economic internet and a separate political internet and a separate social internet. there is simply the internet and it must, must remain free with all of the potential dangers on

the downside it may present. i saw firsthand earlier this year in my visit to china market and i were talking about it. i was asked by president hu jintao and president obama, vice president and i were asked by respective presidents he was about to become the president of china in january 3 whether or not we would get to know one another better because the only as my dad would say the only conflict that's worse than one that is intended is worse than and intended. although tip o'neill, who i love, but say all politics local, joe biden and say all politics is personal. it matters. not if you like one another but if you understand one another. so why spend time in china traveling the country. i don't think that it's ever occurred before with the

president meeting with him liable times and in multiple cities. but during the visit to china, a nation that still is rationing liberties and that allows its population it was obvious they were seeking to build a world-class economy. as i pointed out there and i point out now, ultimately that cannot be done. when business considers investing in a country with a they know. they know that their web site can be shut down suddenly. their transactions are asked, and their profits confiscated. so they will look elsewhere.

what all you students know. he said the only security of all is in the free press. the force of public opinion cannot be resisted or permitted freely to be expressed. although thomas jefferson could not have imagined a cellphone or the world wide web, prism as of me to say but i am absolutely confident being somewhat of a student of his old enough to be of his. [laughter] at least that is what president obama keeps telling me. were he here today, i believe he would surely understand the enormous consequences of the communications revolution and repressive regimes and its

disseminate innovation and agriculture, medicine technology to democratize access and things over night. and to empower citizens around the globe from concord to cairo to keep town. this will only continue to expand exponentially those here who cannot see because of the lights i'm told you are here. students being educated below the school you will be offered the same false choice not by the school, the same false choice every generation of american has been offered. the choice between liberty and

security. it is a false choice. and i am confident just like generations have gone before you in this country, you will choose and understand that we can have both because i'm confident that this american exceptional was and can and will endure. i'm honored to be with you all today. i want to thank you for listening. and may god protect our troops. thank you for kimmage. [applause] [applause]

>> thinks of course for your remarks. i'm glad that you mentioned and underlining american exceptional as some. i don't think that has been spoken of enough lately. i guess i haven't been listening to your speeches. [laughter] this was crafted by an exceptional american and i think she would be proud that we are giving it to another. [applause] [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [laughter] >> the bad news i don't think they are going to get the teleprompter as to the schools. [laughter] the school is named for mrs. logan, she was the inspiration. the heart and soul the past several years has been david show. a former associate press reporter, great news man and a great lover of free communications, and he puts up from me but from everything that he has to do and he did the work arranging this might which as you can understand the vice

president at security etc was very tightly reined in. evin screwed up our ability to tell the sponsors of the cage to the scope states and elsewhere devotee that is being remedied. long story short i don't think we would have quite as good a school as we do have without david and i would like to introduce him to you. [applause] >> three for the screen to drop. thank you all for being here. it's my job to tell you of the school, and orders people we are proud to have in the audience, and work up to the first amendment award for the evening. thank you very much for sharing you're even in and support the school. it's a small school but it's dedicated to huge ideas many of which vice president biden just talked about and think you for supporting the programs we have

to offer free glasses and low-cost workshops and we've been doing and the last 11 years. thanks very much for vice president joe biden and the sponsors typically you would have seen their names on the side walls and the screen. so far this evening we couldn't do that earlier. we can do it now. when you see the name of the sponsors please take note also in the program and please, thank them for us. thanks also to mrs. low for the wonderful gift she left. the school named in her honor you can read the facts and figures about the school in the program but i want to share what makes it exciting to be the director. people often ask what kind of kids go to this school? well our kids aren't kids. they ranged in age from 9-years-old to retirees. they included legislators come police officers, teachers, bankers, student journalists, home schoolers and people who just want to learn something new. because the class is in the workshops are free, our students

show up because they want to be there. they are not watching the watch or tapping their foot. that is exciting enough. but when they arrive defined instructors from many newspapers from around the stage, radio stations, tv stations, businesses, colleges and its people who've spent the day writing stories or columns promoting businesses on the internet and taking photographs or arguing first amendment cases in court. how often have you been to a class where the instructor comes in and says he will never guess what i did today and that becomes the lesson. you can't put a price on it, so we don't. thanks in large part to our sponsors and all of you here today the class's are free and we charge just enough to cover expenses. many students return class after class which we think is a pretty good endorsement to recognize the dedication a fellowship program. to become a fellow students must complete five class's or

workshops or first amendment s.a. and this year we recognize to veteran students and will prevent them later with pens and significance. first is jerry russell a retired teacher and newspaper correspondent as part of her essay she wrote simply freedom of speech and assembly, press, religion, and the right to petition the government make up the first amendment. they make our country unique. i can't say it much better than that. second as manchester he is right here. where are you, neil? he didn't want to come up on stage. [applause] >> neil has been a longtime student. he outlined how important investigative reporting is especially in fighting for transparency in the government and we will hear a lot more about that in a bit from the free press recipients. neil wrote without the freedom of deliberate, detailed and allowable investigative reporting the concept of the free society is nonexistent.

if suitable for framing in the cold frame in the bathroom next to the mirror just like vice president joe biden's certificate so you can be reminded of that every day. so congratulations to neil. this year the school also continues coordinating the statewide constitution school as a program with a daily newspaper in the state supreme court. the statewide winners were honored at a reception this week at the court and we are proud to have them here is our guest as well. they are the middle school winner who is julia peery of the elm street school who is over here. wade so we can see you. [applause] >> if you felt the podium at the supreme court was high comedy would be about 3 feet high behind this one. we to put a nice tool up the other day to read the essay. the high school winners attend winds are high school just over the border and vermont and over

here we've so we can see you. [applause] thanks for being here with your family and teachers and your principal. students were asked to write what the schools should be allowed to ban or limit the possession or use of salles phones or other mobile communications devices and school and whether schools should be permitted to confiscate those devices and punish students who bring them in. julia wrote she believes the constitution does not allow schools to ban cell phones but believes schools are justified in setting restrictions such as allowing students to use them only at lunch or only after school. peter wrote the constitution does allow schools to ban, elamite textile or talking on cell phones. he figures the same as a teacher has the right to forbid students from talking in class without permission. so congratulations again to julieanna and peter and the 500 other students statewide who took part in the contest. first amendment while the is one

of the first class is taught at the school and its foundation of all we do, something we all often take for granted, this year through the partnership with the world affairs council of new hampshire, the school hosted visits from foreign delegations and many of the delegations were from the former soviet republic and they were here to learn how the media worked in a democracy. one question kept popping up. who regulates social media in the united states? they were looking for ideas a bureau of social media regulation. we explained the various delegations that aside from libel and slander laws apply to all the media there is no official regulation. we explained postings on the social media sites are critical of the government and critical of elected officials or of the mainstream media permitted under the first amendment and are a common. talk about taking something for granted. in other countries regulation of

the blog or twitter or facebook posts might be common and permitted. regulation of them being permitted and in another country tonight's first amendment recipe and would have gotten into the big trouble. just for exercising the right to free press. to tell that story, i would like to introduce for stand and sponsor kenneth sheldon of bank of america. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. president biden, what a powerful and fantastic public speaker. might want to think about taking that as a career. [laughter] they gave me the a virginia the podium i want to take a second to recognize a couple folks first one to recognize gary and his team who recovered from a surprisingly destructive storm and got norbeck to read a lot of

work there. really appreciate your efforts there. [applause] second, i want to recognize a couple of my colleagues here tonight. mike from the u.s. trust here in the state. john, my good friend and mentor for 20 plus years with the commercial middle-market banking group and last i would like to recognize a good friend and one of the most highly respected business people now approaching his final days and his latest executive with merchants automotives now retiring at the end of this year so thank you for joining us tonight. [applause]

i have a few prepared remarks here i will run through quickly. i will be brief and then we will launch a quick video and on behalf of bank of america and merrill lynch colleagues i would like to acknowledge what an honor it is to support the school and an occasion and to be a sponsor of the 20,111th amendment award. through the school mrs. loeb wanted to encourage young writers and foster an understanding of the appreciation for the first amendment. today an increasing number of students are attending the schools class's and low-cost workshops. the first amendment gives us a free press and speech among other liberties as a fundamental principal of mrs. loeb's legacy. the first amendment which is enacted in 1791 is on the back of your program and bares repeating. congress shall make no law we respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the exercise thereof for bridging

the freedom of speech or the press or the right of the people to assemble to petition the government for the redress bill read these freedoms protected by the first amendment of the foundation of the american democracy is essential for the informed citizenship in the diverse society. recognizing the efforts taken to preserve free speech and free press the school established the award in 2003 and honors the residents to exemplify freedom granted under the first amendment. like mrs. loeb, bank of america we believe the importance of education, the value of an informed and diverse society and providing access and were to mideast to the citizens within the communities. supporting the school and first amendment and the court all you of think of america we are working to help people and communities to make opportunity possible. this year in recognition of the efforts undertaken to change the two state laws to protect free

speech and free press and expand the public right to know the portsmouth herald was elected for the nomination submitted to the public to be honored as the recipient of the 2011 nackey loeb first amendment award. does that sound better? the harold through said to deter successfully organized an effort among the new hampshire newspapers and broadcasters to change the law that made it illegal to the arrest or conviction after the arrest or conviction had been an old and in the herald prompted the changes that now give the right to see information involving public officials. in both cases it went against bill laws that entered the free press, free speech, and erected roadblocks to open the government and twice the herald won. now let's turn to the video in which he will talk about his and the paper's efforts to protect free speech.

♪ >> we are beginning to hear about the amol and law because we would get calls to the newsrooms, not just us but the newsrooms all around the state where people would call and say you have something on your web site about a crime that i committed, and i've had that and called so you have to remove it otherwise you will be liable and i am going to sue. as you look at the law which we started doing really after the

case you actually could interpret that you would be liable for publishing that before the internet age there were few hundred in all months a year and was now numbering in the thousands every year because what happened was records were out there if he were arrested, if there was a story about you that you found on a flattering and you had it annulled and then felt under the law you had the right to force publishers to take off the web and not only did we disagree with that because of this sort of rewriting history but really it would be impossible. once something goes on the web is very difficult to make it disappear even if we take it off of our own website commesso of the of the web sites linked to us pick our stuff up and there's all these news ad creators of their grabbing our stuff. there is no way that you can or at least is very difficult and imagine if you have to do that for a thousand times spread across the publishers in the

state. >> i had been through the 1970's and 80's right of through this decade a number of pieces of legislation dealing with the state's right to and laws and the editor of the herald to the contact and ask me if i would talk with him and others about the annulment. we met him in his conference room. a fellow state representative on the gubernatorial candidate in number of times i invited him to join me and he brought his legal counsel and we talked for about an hour trying to brainstorm the dimensions of the problems. we get into the habit of allowing people to sort of the race what's true because they know how to maneuver. its two classes of people, people could get arrested and don't know how to work and then

they are stuck the rest of their lives and then people who have money and can hire a lawyer and get an element, suddenly their crime doesn't exist anymore. so we thought it was very important. people in need should be able to have the right to have their privacy and at the same time have the right to know what has happened. in the political candidates running for office to develop a business in a city or town they might have had some problems in their background and the public needs to know. >> our photographer shot this image of the cruiser and they thought this is no one's business and i disagree because

clearly this is a publicly funded vehicle the police officer dreading it was on duty to and i thought this was anyone's and that sort of trigger my stubbornness. >> engaged in a high-speed chase and in the process he runs a red light at what we finally learned in speeds of excess of 100 miles an hour he twiddles his cruiser, he injures innocent who are in the wrong place at the wrong time and creates this total mayhem in the middle of the public. >> picked up the phone the next morning to ask who was driving the police cruiser at a time expecting to get the answer. i was told it was under investigation. state police are handling the investigation. we started making calls to state police. at the time we didn't know he was going on hundred miles per hour. i was an impatient and i decided

to go over and had the investigating state trooper, wrote a letter to the department of safety answered by an attorney for the department of safety who decided to start a privacy act. >> the privacy act was passed to protect private citizens exploited for the commercial purposes. in no way intended to shield the activity to public officials to respect a follow-up story i called the attorneys what you think of this, do you think do you interpret the law to say and on duty police officer is exempt from disclosure? none of them heard of it and i spoke with one from concord, attorney king seemed somewhat outraged and agreed to draft a court case for us. >> the case is in court and is

being covered every step of the way through the paper and obviously people are reading it because one day it defines an anonymous, actually i don't know how but somebody leaked to us the actual investigative report and it details more of the details on this three or four clear violations of the law that took place during this pursuit. said the police officer broke three state laws pertaining to the emergency vehicles by failing to proceed to the red light after having slowed as unnecessary operations, for driving at an unreasonable speed which endangered life and property and failing to drive the cruiser with due regard for the safety of all persons. >> the other thing we've learned unless we have that piece of land were able to get the name of the officer is that he was involved in another high-speed chase that involved the ended in

another crash a few years earlier in hampton falls and actually had fired shots at somebody in that case was just resolved we are still waiting to hear how much money was paid. at the end of the day i don't think that this officer has suffered any consequence for either of those high speed chases. >> he's got a police officer in uniform driving 100 miles per hour through red lights crashing into civilians it is important to note that in terms of his employment and an example to all public employees in the state of new hampshire. they need to know that what they do when they are on the job is a matter of public record and they will be held accountable. >> we feel like if we had an unofficial motto it would be portsmouth herald you have a right to know and that is what we are here for. if we are fighting to get people to have access to information they wouldn't have we are fighting to open doors and take them to places they wouldn't be

without, then that's what we feel is important. >> those people, those organizations that do work fighting for the cause protecting the freedom of the media should be recognized and there is no better example that i can think of than a newspaper that puts itself on the line, facing up to the authorities, facing up to government, facing up to the court and saying we have the right to tell the truth when we know the truth to do otherwise would be violating the trust of the people. so i think of course the herald and the reporters and the others ♪

[applause] [applause] >> elizabeth, please join howard >> i'm honored to be able to present to you the award. i'm not sure if i can. i might give it a shot. [applause] >> i'm glad it worked out this

morning and there's also a check that goes with that. i will hand that to howard. you can cash that leader. [laughter] >> congratulations. [applause] >> thank you very much. >> the portsmouth herald a word and to paraphrase the words from the keynote speaker we definitely consider it a big deal. [laughter] my 11 year old is here, so. [laughter] under the state's old criminal laws, reporters, criminals, wall officers and workers could have been jailed or faced serious penalties for speaking and publishing the truth about someone with a criminal record even if it was clearly in the public interest to do so. this was particularly dangerous when public records and news stories live online forever. i remember our publisher saying to me we will just published and go to jail if we have to and i

remember saying to him i don't really want to go to jail. [laughter] i don't want to go to jail and i don't think we should have to sell was one motivation to fix the law. the other and far more important is the public expects us to fight for openness and transparency and the constitution explicitly protect our freedom to do so. we can't just decide not to fight because it doesn't dollars on the bottom line. but with apologies to the lawyers in the room, going to court is ridiculously expensive. in court, financially even when you win, you lose so is not realistic to think every time you see the government infringing on speech and unfettered access to information you can hire lawyers and let them do the fighting. we reporters and editors have to get in the trenches and to the fighting ourselves. to do this, we need allies. with the to changes in the law are being honored for tonight we have many that contributor time,

talent and treasure to the fights. the criminal element in the parts that representative will you just saw and paul introduced the first bill to study the issue and explained through the legislation as an aside representative who is here tonight uses the same process for this as he does in the leadership reading bill law protecting the first in the nation primary legalizing same-sex marriage and creating martin luther king day. kasich just solutions and get support among others and act. a good common sense approach that is not so common these days. along the way we've picked up unexpected allies. the senate committees to listen carefully to that is the money but also heard from assistant attorney general ann rice. representative david welch was here tonight took the committee's work and drafted the bill that eventually became.

all the state's daily newspapers, the associated press, the broadcasters' association, a hired bill chapman in the first amendment award winner from 2009 to draft proposed language to fix the a moment law. the newspapers supported editorials. it took all of this effort to change the law we saw that there was no longer a crime to speak or publish the truth about someone's criminal record. elizabeth called the attention of concord attorney benjamin kang who was outraged he argued the case brno. during a high-speed chase one heard detailed in the video. as you heard as the case made it through the courts to document. lawmakers and the government wants all of this is revealed were eager to help close the loopholes on the state and local officials using to hide their actions from the public and we had to have two of them passed, one for the local and county and one for the state workers. the reporters regularly file state right to know and federal

freedom of information requests and many of them are denied. public officials need to know they can't just say no. they have to defend secrecy makes them less likely to deny information requests. we've even argued in rockingham county superior court they have nothing to worry about from us. in new hampshire a person wanting to hide information has the burden to prove it should be secret and in most cases they are wrong. the laws protecting openness and transparency aren't just important to journalists. if you want to know the power of the state's right to know what to look at the local government center hearings where hundreds of millions of dollars paid by cities and towns for insurance now hang in the balance. the question of all actions refer the right to request by dave and the professional firefighters association. in addition to fighting for openness and transparency it's important for newspapers to print unpopular opinions and

avoid pandering and self-censorship. as the tenth anniversary of 9/11 average we wanted to get muslim voices into the paper to hear how their lives changed during the past decade and we found it very difficult to get people to speak with us. there was too much fear. the president whose muslim and pfizer to muslim students at the academy offered to write a regular column i will admit i was nervous about it because what he was going to say to contradict the strongly held views of the leaders and as he didn't waste time. first written a column about the justified dislike of america and about creating a palestinian state using the 1967 borders. after the column on is really got a call from a man who identified himself as a marina, a vietnam vet and a zionist. i knew it wasn't going to be a short conversation. the caller wanted me to know that roger was wrong on the palestinian issue but added i hate what he's saying but i would table it to protect his right to say it and that is what we are honoring tonight. the shared belief a

self-governing people needs unfettered access to news, information and a wide range of opinions. as journalists we live by the words of the justice louis brandeis who said the sunlight is the best disinfectant. i'm honored to accept the award on behalf of the portsmouth herald and promise you we will keep up the good fight. thank you. [applause] ..