agreements. what is the biggest thing going to in the and pakistan. people see what you see. and south asian economy and there is advantage. pakistan and afghanistan. the question you give me, on the first question nobody can answer that question. that is a question for the president to answer. on the second question how you balance. you can consider this naive, people don't know what is going to happen and my view is the sooner we can find and strategic partnership with afghanistan. people will accommodate you and have to realize there is going to be an american presence in afghanistan for some time to come so the taliban, the region

including iran will say how do i react to that. what is anxiety producing is lack of information rather than a decision, will take some steps to having everybody set their own policies for afghanistan stable, secure and prosperous. thank you. >> i want to thank the audience for your participation, good questions, for attending this session and let me thank the panelists for their participation. thanks so much. [applause] .. .. and ..

>> now in indiana senaterepublie

between six time and, senator richard lugar, and challenger indiana state treasurer richard mourdock. senator lugar was first elected to the senate in 1976, and is currently the ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee. the debate was organized by the indiana debate commission and took place at the wfyi tv studios in indianapolis. indiana's primary is may 8. >> good evening and welcome. the only scheduled debate between u.s. senate, indiana for public and primary. this debate is presented by the indiana debate commission and comes to you from the status of wfyi them in a. i'm phil bremen, i'll be your moderator. for the next hour, voters will ask the questions of hoosiers all of the state will consider the answers from a six term u.s. senator richard lugar and his

challenger and fellow republican, state treasurer richard mourdock. dozens of television radio station websites like hearing this. the candidates drew lots for position and order in which they will answer. richard mourdock, next to mr. mourdock is richard lugar. the candidates and the campaigns have agreed to rules for tonight's debate. here are the highlights. our plan is to give each candidate two minutes for every answer. we may need to shorten that the bit for the end. in that event i will announce a shorter time, as moderate i may cut off the candidate who goes past his allotted time. i may also call for additional rebuttal time is the issue warrants and if time permits. all the questions come from those for a committee reviewed the questions. indian debate commission is fiercely nonpartisan and the sound by more than a dozen civic journalism and other nonpartisan

groups in 2007. the candidates have agreed not to use scripts or props. before this broadcast begin we briefed our studio audience, and particular they are to listen quietly into we're all done talking. the candidates will each have 30 seconds to introduce themselves. we will start with mr. mourdock. >> good evening. it's great to be with you and thank you so much for tuning in tonight. when i was asked to a half years ago to run for the night state senate by members of the republicans take me i was shocked. i thought about for several months and finally came to the realization that competition is a good thing. i believe in competition as i think all republicans do in the commercial marketplace and it is an equally good thing in the marketplace for republican ideas. in this debate tonight you are going to hear that while we're both republicans we agree on much but we'll also disagree on much and toward that end i look forward to this great debate tonight. >> mr. luther? >> i think the debate committee

for this opportunity to talk about my new farm bill, my fight against obamacare and obama tax cuts. secure weapons of mass destruction and to work to make sure we have the keystone pipeline, more jobs and more energy in the united states. >> thank you both. now let's just have the word about pictures. we're broadcasting tonight in the traditional screen format. that's to make this debate accessible to every tv station in indiana. some do not broadcast in widescreen or high definition. there is nothing wrong with your television set. the indiana debate commission is divided up tonight's debate into three subject areas, all are directly related to the job of the united states senate. we will -- poll after poll, voters tell us that is still the number one issue for them. so to get started tonight let's go to our first photo.

a real estate agent from indianapolis. what is your question? >> my question is, the last time gas prices reached current levels, oil was close to $150 a barrel. now they are around $1 ago. why is the price at the pump so high when the prize is nearly $50 a barrel lower, and anything done done by? >> the first question goes to mr. mourdock. >> thank you for the question. i happened to spent 31 is in the energy business, longtime and the private sector before got into this role of politics so i live in a question about the energy business. it's a great question. there's a technical answer which is to say these prices of crude oil went up faster than the refined prices of gasoline back when the last time gas hit, or the $150 of your. but the bigger reason right now is because government regulation. we very quietly have seen the

epa do more and more so that they are been refineries shut down in the united states and as result the demand for gasoline continues to go up, even as world demand for crude oil has relatively stabilized to keep prices in the lower $100 area, and even slightly below at times. what we also did not notice, most of us, but last year at the end of the year a 45 cents a gallon subsidy that had been in place for years on ethanol went away. working in its place was a mandate that more ethanol be added to regular gasoline. most of us, especially republicans, objective mandates from the federal government. we object to in the health care area and yet suddenly we saw more ethanol be mandated into our gasoline and we didn't even have an argument there to make. it's unfortunate. i think clearly to get the price of gasoline back commit to not only to more drilling but we certainly have to do more to get the epa off the backs of the refiners. we can increase our refining

capacity. >> mr. luther? >> in fact, the price of gasoline is much lower because of the addition of corn ethanol which comes from our state, 40% of our corn crops as a matter fact that goes into for corn ethanol, and $3.4 billion of business and hoosier state. but i'm getting to the question, the facts are essentially the predictions are the price of gasoline is now going to go do down. the reason is that essentially tensions in the middle east, straits of hormuz in particular, have been going down. as a result, countries all over the world that have been digging in the markets for oil have backed off from that, as a result of all this, there are adequate supplies right now in the united states. different prices in different parts of the country due to logistics of moving the refined

product to the coast, for example, as opposed to the heartland. i'm grateful that's the case on the market today, oil was close to $101, not 150. and has been in fact in decline in recent days. i agree, however, that over regulation by government creates a real problems in terms of both logistics as well as the entire energy business. and i agree heartily that we really have to have drilling in the united states, drilling off our coasts, and adequate supplies that come from friendly countries such as a long the xl pipeline, the pipeline of 700 miles creating 20,000 jobs and lots of new products in the united states, would make a huge difference in terms of our refinery and are supplied. >> mr. mourdock, if you have a rebuttal you have 30 seconds.

>> i would simply add that yes, the price of gasoline has gone up as the senate is in because of ethanol brought the price down. the price of ethanol is a $2.41 a gallon. source would mandate more ethanol going into gasoline, that's causing the refinery price, the ultimate price for gasoline to go up four to 5 cents a gallon. >> mr. lugar? >> i would repeat that ethanol makes the overall price go down, and furthermore, the hoosier product with hoosiers producing it on farms here that have meant higher value for corn and certainly higher land values in this state. >> i have the next question. national polls tell us that voters top concern this year is about the economy and job growth. many of the questions submitted for consideration in this reflect this concern. hoosier voters want to know what would you do as a center, what would you propose and what should congress do to boost the economy and increase the number of available jobs? senator lugar.

>> we get back immediately to over regulation by the federal government. the amount of burden placed upon businesses that want to raise money from new capital sources, that want to, in fact, under this new product, it's a very, very tough battle, something to get going, even as an old business, over regulation is everywhere. entering the obama administration, you almost have the feeling that folks in those bureaus feel it's now or never in terms of trying to control business. after all, is said and done, however, is this is are beginning to thrive. manufacturing is coming back. now the problem is the gap between the jobs that are available and the ability to the people who want to fill than. i applaud, to stay protected, bridging the gap between those who want that jobs and companies who want to employ them. i've seen this at work in

columbus, at the wonderful medical device plans near warsaw, caterpillar in lafayette. each of the situation, these are companies hiring people, and fortunately they have the foresight to be able to train people on the job as well as work with ivy tech back at the laboratories and in the classroom. this is absolutely critical in terms of actually getting people into the jobs and getting the job done. and fundamentally our entire educational system in indiana is the heart of the matter, getting students prepared now in math and english and science, so-called stem courses. these are the things that will make the big difference in our competitive abilities of hoosier business. >> mr. mourdock. >> without a doubt the most important thing we can do to start the economy rolling again is to roll back the size of government.

senator lugar has admitted that this regulatory environment is out of control and it absolutely is. we have to do several things as a nation. we have to do them in a record number one we have to reduce the immoral level of debt we are caring in this country because as we have to pay the interest we're pulling money out of the economy that otherwise could be going back into as new investment renew jobs and bring new products into line with 21st century demand. second, we have to get the jackboot of federal regulation off the necks of small businesses. as i've traveled this state, that's all i hear is how people will design a plan so get ready to go into manufacturing them they think that met all the rules and then the government changes the rules on the again. it is not fair to them and it's causing more and more of them to leave our shores. that is a bad sign for america. just a few weeks ago for the first time in american history it was reported a net inflow of investment capital to the united states went negative. that's a long sentence, something to say since the beginning of our country there's

been more money coming in to fund businesses than going out. now for the first time it's going up. we have to roll back the size of government. we have to be aggressive. we can't sit back if we are in congress and not maintain the oversight goal that was meant for the congress through our founding fathers. congress has not done nearly enough. they will complain about the epa but they will not roll it back. they will complain about the overreach of regulators individually, industry after industry from the banking community, to environmental to energy to health care industry and yet they are not going forward. they are not expressing the oversight to roll those regulations back so we can get our economy rolling. >> rebuttal, mr. lugar? >> i would just add that those of us who are now serving each day, tried to do the rollback, and with the obama administration we had limited success. but even that you can call for more hearings, additional comments by voters from our

state, and occasionally actually get some traction in the congress to roll back some of the regulations. >> mr. mourdock's papers i don't hear nearly enough of that except in campaign speeches. to say that we're trying to rollback the obama administration, i don't see enough republicans to do. and, frankly, i'm more frustrated with republicans today than in democrats because i expect to disagree with democrats, i want to see republicans out making the fight, going home, coming back to the district, to this day, making the argument why we need to roll back government. >> our next question is a vote here in the studio, a chemical industry engineer. what is your questions because good evening, gentlemen. to both stated you are for cutting spending and balancing the budget. in this regard please be as specific as you can about what you would do. particularly in the areas of taxation, defense spending and entitlement spending. >> the first answered goes to --

i lost my place, mr. mourdock. >> thank you for the question. we have to start rolling back the size of government, as i've said, annual question comes to the very heart of it. it is about the dollars. during this one our debate this government will spend $167 million more than it takes in good that much more goes to our dead just doing this hour. we have to begin rolling back those costs i believe throughout government. is there waste at the? certainly. every administration talks about it but they seem to do very little about it. back in november when the so-called supercommittee was arguing over whether or not they could find a way to cut 1.2 trillion, i put on a budget plan that i'm going to be the first to admit, it's pretty rudimentary. i do have all the budget tools the congressional budget office has but i found ways to reduce 7.6 trillion over the next 10 years. that's been called dracone. i don't think so.

because that 1.2% that government couldn't find what that represents less than 3% of the planned spending over the next 10 years. the areas i would begin with i would eliminate the department of energy, department of education, department of commerce, housing and urban development. there are some constitutionally mandated duties that could otherwise be assigned, serving some of the nuclear record what features could go back to the defense department from which it originally came. we have to take a broad stance, and let's not forget the biggest issue out there is entitlement. we have to get a handle on the way up to start telling people to have a different set of expectations. i believe those who are over the age of 55 as in the paul ryan budget plan, those folks have made a promise with the government, government has made a promise, we need to honor that promise. for those who are younger we need to start letting them know today there will be a different set of promises, different expectations. it is immoral for the united states government to make

promises they cannot keep and, unfortunately, today we are doing that. >> mr. lugar? >> during the entirety of the obama administration has been no budget of the federal government. fortunately, large republican majority came into the house of representatives in 2010 election, and this has brought about the possibility of paul ryan, who has become chairman of the budget committee and house. and furthermore to have the support of a majority of republicans in the house to pass the ryan plan. it was a remarkable plan, called for about $6.4 trillion of spending cuts over the course of time. but towards responsible government. the senate, senator harry reid, democratic leader, said we've really got you republicans now because ryan talks about medicare. is going to medicare the same

for 55 and older buddies going to change it for 55 and under, and as result of that will have a vote on that in the senate, which we did. i voted for the ryan plan, one of 40 republican to did so. all the democrats voted against it. whereupon our leader mitch mcconnell said let's vote on the obama budget. people looked at it, what in the world is that? but all republicans voted against it. all democrats voted against it. cleared the deck of any budget for a nutty. now thank goodness ryan had his back. i commend him because he really does set forth in a scholarly way how the cats can occur. e. offers once again an opportunity for the congress to act. and for the public to react favorably to that. and i would just say simply that it is very important that we get a budget this year, despite democratic -- and i will continue to fight to do so.

>> mr. mourdock's? >> i am glad to have the rebuttal for this question because it is so important, and certainly senator lugar and i agree that it is a travesty that the president of the united states cannot present a budget. we do have a chance to grow this economy, and that has to be our goal. we have to be growing our gdp at least 2% he. as horrible as our national debt is today at $15.4 trillion, we can pay that off but we've got to be acting to reduce the size of government now so that we can grow the economy to generate the revenue to get that job done. >> mr. lugar? >> i had another thought in response to the question that we need to make sure that these bush tax cuts remain. democrats are pushing that to the post election selection. and beyond that i believe beyond -- cut our taxes so they are aligned competitive with the rest of the were. that would be very important in getting new capital to this country and people in fact offer more jobs right now.

>> our next question mousses to the area of foreign affairs, and for that we turn to gregory smith, a physician who speaks to us from greenwood. >> please explain what steps you do need to be done to stop nuclear weapons proliferation by both recognize countries and terrorist groups in the world your. >> the answer to the comes first from senator lugar. >> essentially it's been my approach for the last 20 years to sponsor the threat reduction act to first of all first work with people in russia, take warheads off of missiles, get the missiles down, fill out the silence, then to work through the weapons of mass destruction come chemical and biological areas. right now in siberia we are -- tens of thousands, about halfway through the project, about 5000 warheads to go in russia. but beyond that we have gotten all nuclear out of belarus, out

of ukraine, out of kazakhstan, and very importantly, now i was on a mission to africa to work with kenya and uganda to fortify those places where dangerous pathogens were being used in laboratories to try to get some and occupations against potential plagues. al-shabaab or al qaeda could have scooped it up but we are working with those governments, officials that another to try to bring security there so it doesn't come to the united states. in addition to that we have a very strong foreign policy position with regard to sanctions on iran. we are working very hard right now to get negotiations again with north korea. we are trying to work with the pakistanis so there is security for their weapons, because india and pakistan both have weapons, and the difficulties there are obvious. in short, all over the world there are problems. i work with my former colleague

sam nunn with a nuclear threat initiative which represent many countries to make certain that all of us are alert to those possibilities, and they were doing the things properly in our department of defense, department of energy and elsewhere that are required to bring about maximum security for americans in the world. >> mr. mourdock. >> i mentioned at the beginning of my opening statement that when i was asked by republican counties and state committee members to run for this office, i was somewhat surprised. one reason why was because all of us have great respect for senator lugar's time with foreign relations committee, especially in this particular area. certainly a state treasure of india i don't have nearly the axis and in depth information the sender has but we do have to understand that what has been going on as result of nunn-lugar, it's also sending in money into russia and the nations of the old soviet union, and today that money, some of the, money being fungible is going to russia, to syria.

syria has been helping iran, and iran is developing nuclear weapons. there is a proliferation problem. there's a greater problem consistently tried to come back from where we work with the nations of the old soviet union. the first thing we have to do to be effective in this area is to be a nation that leads, not trying to lead from behind. the obama administration is doing today on so many issues. if you want to have a place at the world's table, when there are so many rogue states out there that are trying to get nuclear weapons, and when we see iran and when we see pakistan with those weapons, we have to understand we cannot withdraw from the world. we have to deal, as ronald reagan used to say, from a position of strength. and yes, we must be verifying what is out there and we need to do more to bring those weapons under control. it's been said i think that the sanctioned that senator kyl has tried to bring forward have zero lateral sanctions of the united states government against iran, syria and north korea come

something that senator lugar the last i knew was still opposed but he wanted to do that. i think there are times when he to act unilaterally, put the pressure on this nations to make sure they understand we care about world peace and we don't want to see those nations develop nuclear arms. >> rebuttal? >> i thoroughly work every day with jon kyl, and she's a good partner with regard to all those. the united states have sanctions but we're the ones that are guiding the iran problem with regard to the central bank, as was our european allies coming into it. the real problem is making sure that we get the russians aboard, get the chinese aboard, and get others aboard. the right now are undercutting this effort. that's going to require some very strong performances. >> mr. mourdock? >> that's right, the russians and the chinese are on the cutting. certainly we're hearing from even nations like vietnam and the philippines now looking for more support from us because

they seek china's influence growing. this is why we need to be moving forward in the world and not leaving from behind as the obama administration is doing. >> next question, america has been at work now for more than 10 years. because of our involvement in iraq and afghanistan. given that we have a plan for leaving afghanistan, easy a time to further decrease our overall military presence abroad, beyond that, or are there other areas in the world were our military presence is needed now or it might be needed in the near future? mr. mourdock. >> to the first part of the question regarding what's happening serving in iraq and afghanistan, there was i believe an inexcusable foreign policy failure in our withdrawal from iraq. you know, we put into iraq winning freedom for the country, hundreds of billions of dollars, over 4400 american lives, treasure and even more self-important than treasure, those american lives.

and yet when we withdrew -- [inaudible] we did not maintain for ourselves -- [inaudible] i think again this is a matter of oversight. in afghanistan, i know people are tired of us being there but i to family members there tonight. we cannot, however, just turn tail and run. if we send that message in that part of the world, the haqqani network from pakistan is going to come in. it's going to become a more dangerous place as was said in our last question, pakistan already has nuclear weapons. we cannot, cannot lead from the hand. agencies must define its will but i appreciate what's been happening in syria. senator mccain and senator lieberman trying to again get the obama administration to move forward to bring some sense of peace in syria, again a vital

area of the world. >> mr. lugar? >> i think it's important to say that our strategy as a country is undergoing a turn which is an important one. first of all, we're going to maintain our troops in afghanistan to try to secure those areas with the help of afghans that are going to have to find secure their own territory. but we're not going to be able to maintain troops on the ground and all the logistic support of that indefinitely. and so as a result of his very likely, we're going to use covert means, going to use the ability to send rockets into particular areas, knock out the al qaeda or the taliban as the case may be. and in essence we will use intelligence, resources more skillfully, because the problem of al qaeda is not simply that

now in afghanistan or even in iraq in the past, but in african countries, throughout the middle east. we are, therefore, fortifying our asian allies, tried to take a look at the south china sea and the whole picture. it's a very vigorous effort and it's one that is going to require a very great deal of thoughtful consideration by the congress as well as the administration. but i would say simply that logistic support of our people in afghanistan is difficult given the pakistani opposition. it was impossible ultimately to get more into iraq in the amounts we used to, given other countries around. so we're going to have to devise other strategies. i look forward to working closely with the defense department, with our military services to try to support these in a sophisticated way, how they will be able to do this. with fewer american boots on the ground, and hopefully more success with intelligence and

drone strikes. >> mr. mourdock, 30 seconds. >> okay. will move onto next question to each of you has mentioned russia. let's stick with that country for a moment. where does russia fit these days, is it a friend or foe? we will direct the first to mr. lugar. >> well, russia is neither friend nor foe. it is an important country with whom we have to deal. i would say that we have come a long way since the cold war, and we have had some cooperation in the nuclear business. but largely the nunn lugar program arose because the russians were bankrupt, and because russians came to sam nunn and to me and said officers are not getting paid. they're deserting. they may be taking weapons out and proliferating elsewhere. it was a total counterintuitive situation historically, that a great power like russia would

ask the united states today's army. and that is frankly what we've been doing for 20 years. i would like to continue to work on that because i believe the job still needs a lot of supervision in needs to be done. but that continues on with the ins and outs of vladimir putin and various others, who still have an authoritarian government. one of the encouraging signs that many russians are now industries. they are demonstrating that they really want some liberalization of all of us. and i think they're going to obtaining. i would say that we ought to be working very closely with those groups in russia than with the communicate and system there, to inform people in russia what the possibilities are of working with us for democracy and for human rights. there are great possibilities, but in the meanwhile, will have a very tough negotiating situation with folks estella weapons of mass destruction and do not wish us well. i would simply say that this will call for very strong diplomacy but likewise, armed

forces that are adequate to be impressive to our russian friends. >> mr. mourdock. >> mr. lugar said at the end of that that most days they don't work with us. in the beginning they said there neither friend nor foe. i think there are more fothen for and paid dash of based on the letter stated. as i said a few moments ago, even in the south china sea they're having some influence working with the chinese and the enemies and the philippines are concerned about. but in iran and in syria they are particularly problematic. the monies that we put into russia as i said before are fungible and to go into parts of the world that we do not see or working at her best interest nor in the best interest of their own people. clearly right now syria is being propped up in large part with the help of russia. when the s.t.a.r.t. treaty was signed a couple, a year and a half ago, you know, there was this sense there was a new era with the russians. but again the ends and outs and back ends again of vladimir

putin i think make that a very questionable position. this is the same russia that not too many years ago, 2008, and the height of an energy crisis decided to turn off a pipeline into georgia. the country, the old soviet bloc. they went in, occupied and shorty thereafter signed the paper consider going to lead. they haven't left yet. when the s.t.a.r.t. treaty was being negotiated it was the russians were saying it had to be signed by december 31, 2010, or they're going to walk away from the table. in my 31 years in the business world i think you should a lot of contracts. anytime someone on the other side of the tips of its got to be done by that date, that's always a better deal for them than it is for us. i think we are ahead, looking ahead we'll see more troubling times with russia. again we have to be a strong nation. we cannot withdraw from the world. we've got to keep leading from behind. senate foreign relations committee has got to present more oversight to an administration should the obama administration continue past

2013. >> mr. lugar, do you have a rebuttal? >> i would manage the s.t.a.r.t. treaty on the floor of the senate. thank goodness it passed when it did. because we had no american boots on the ground. the last s.t.a.r.t. treaty had expired during the previous bush administration. very important time when our military as well as civilian personnel back there. i'd like to correct impression that somehow we're sending money to russia that is expunged will. we have full control of what we're doing in disarming the russians there and we need to maintain that. >> go ahead, 30 seconds. >> the very definition of fungible means money can go into account that can go other places. it offsets. all money is fungible. that's a fact of economics. to the broader point of what the s.t.a.r.t. treaty was about, one of the things the obama initially she did to help win republican votes was to say if they would vote for it they would be more money spent to upgrade our nuclear weapon system and affect the obama administration has reneged on

the. >> we're turning to other domestic issues now, and here in studio our next question comes from john, a retired accountant from indianapolis. what's your question? >> do you believe reform of medicare and medicaid is necessary for future deficit reduction? and if you do, how would you propose to do it? >> i believe that question goes to mr. mourdock? >> into for the question, great would it let me break it into the two-part. from the medicaid perspective shorting the medicaid program that is out there today is something that is problematic given its huge cost. i support something i'm proud as a fellow hoosier has presented the house of representatives, which is a new bill that would allow states to have flexibility basically giving block grants to states. it would freeze medicaid spending for 10 years, but gives the states greater flexibility in administering those fund. assessment that would save

$1.4 trillion over the next 10 years. to medicare, as i said before, i absolutely believe there is a fundamental social contract that government makes with its citizens. those citizens who have worked most of their working lives with the understanding of what medicare was going to be, it would be the, i believe that has to be honored for those over the age of 55. however, i do believe as with social security itself, we have to start setting a different set of expectations for those who today are between the age of 50-55, 45-50, and so, it is immoral to make promises you cannot key. with the escalating cost of health care, especially because government is taking a larger and larger role, we cannot keep those promises. what we have to do instead is provided way that americans have greater access to health care savings account. they need to have wider contribution limits and everything they put in those accounts should be deductible 1% including health care insurance cost. we also need to have a health care system that allows for

state crossing of lines the insurance company. we need a health care system that will have more pools for insurance purposes so there is greater economy of of scale. last but not least, we must repeal obamacare because it would be disasters for health care in this country. >> mr. lugar. >> i have agreement with my friend on the points he made. i would complement in addition to congressman, mitch daniels our governor, for sometime has felt that the state of indiana could better administer medicaid for a variety of reasons. what she has illustrated at least in his plans and any speeches. i certainly agree with regard to medicare, and the ryan plan brought this to the floor, that the 55 and over situation is probably a reasonable division line, and that the planning for those that are under 55 needs to begin immediately.

because we really cannot afford the escalation of the cost of medicare. when we talk about budgets, about deficits, but when you consider that social security, medicare, medicaid and the defense budget are roughly 70-75% of the whole budget picture, there has to be action taken in each of these areas. and this is a good time to consider the medicare situation. i agree completely obamacare should be repealed so that we do not have interlocking problems with the rest of that. and we moving toward these markets in states, toward insurance that can be offered across state lines in a much more competitive insurance market. i believe these are extremely important situations. perhaps depending upon the security of the supreme court action, we can move on this much more rapidly. >> mr. mourdock, do you have a

rebuttal? >> i would just like to add a couple other things but as i've talked to dozens of doctors around the state of indiana the thing i hear overwhelming is again have the regulatory environment is keeping them from seeing patients. if we had the federal government reducing its regulatory and farm in health care, instead of sing 40 patients a day, doctors might be able to see 80. we need to make sure the electronic database that is presented as part of obamacare that we let the most private health care records of every american go into a national database, that must never come into existence. such information should not be the property of the federal government. >> i'm very hopeful in addition to all of that that we will begin to think about the preventative medicine, about thoughtful and care of ourselves with regard to nutrition and exercise and quality of life that makes a very large difference in terms of our need for health care later on. >> our next question comes from donna, a semi-retired pharmacist from lafayette. she could not be a tonight so i will be for you.

social security she says is and will continue to be dependent upon by many middle and low-income citizens. some sensible adjustments suggested to ensure the solvency of the program are to raise the amount of wages subject to withholding and to increase the age at which full benefits can be received. do you support these changes? this goes first to mr. lugar. >> yes, i think those are changes that are going to be required very definitely. and the question is how rapidly to escalate the situation. various plans that i've seen it tried to work through this in actuarial tables would suggest that we ought to move to increase the amount beyond $110,000 in wages, the way social security is now figured. but to do so incrementally in various ways so that this is not a great shock to those who are above 110,000. at the same time, we really are going to have to think through

how we change the age of retirement situation for social security. many have suggested maybe a few days or weeks of each year over the course of time so that this does not move rapidly, and upsets plans to people abnormally. but any movement of either the coverage levels over the age of retirement or other aspects will have huge impacts with regard to a very, very large part of our federal budget. and the need to do this is a pin. it was apparent back in about 1983. i was among those debating that issue on that occasion, and we did i believe save social security. there were changes made in that were controversial because they always are. if you touch social security, in whatever way. but it does need to happen, and so while we are thinking about medicare reform we need to think about social security reform.

and as we have already expressed in the debate, medicaid reform. these are huge parts of the so-called entitlement picture would make a big difference to balancing the budget and moving from the trillions of debt that we now have. >> mr. mourdock. >> certainly there does need to be more protection offered to the social secure a system. today it is simply mathematically not something that can continue. i do believe the retirement age is going to be raised, as the senator said. i think it's a necessity and will have to have and are well thought out and step-by-step process. as i said before we need to start letting younger people know that they have a different set of promises, and i think we need to provide them with a different set of promises. they understand that they also have an obligation to save for themselves. when social security began it was not meant at all to be that system upon which a person would totally base their retirement. back when it started for everyone person getting a

benefit comic or 66 people paying in. now it's basically about two to one. we have to set up both tax systems and a social security system that allow people to more incentives to save on the own as an option if they choose to do that. traditionally the markets of investing have been far better than what social security has brought back, but again that should be something people get to decide on as their own choice. i again want to say that social security is something needs to be protected. not just in a sense of what we do with a mathematical function to make sure enough money is coming in, but we need also to make sure that the congress isn't constantly pulling money out of social security for other things. >> thirty seconds for rebuttal, mr. lugar. >> i certainly a great about pulling the money out for other things, and that does occur all of the time. it is really unconscionable. but at the same time it she seems to me important to rejoice in the fact that americans are by and large growing older. the actuarial tables have changed from americans dying at

an average of 65 in the new deal days to close at e85 presently. and that really requires some very thoughtful work with regard to medicare, medicaid and social security. >> and mr. mourdock, 30 seconds. >> as i mentioned we need to protect social security and there were at least two votes in the not-too-distant past when mr. lugar with the other would. they were called -- i would've voted the opposite way in those those but i would not have accepted that. that's exactly the kind of protection we need to provide for that fund for our older citizens. >> that's unfair. i did not have votes were illegal social security payments. >> all right. next question. each of you professes to be a political conservative yet you disagree on many specific issues. how do each of you define what it is to be a conservative, and how would that affect your role as a united states senator for

indian and the next six-year term? >> that is a great question, and to the former point we'll be glad to provide those roll call vote numbers. i see myself as a conservative meaning i believe in the founding fathers principle that the federal government needs to be restricted and limited. we have grown to the point with our government today that i don't think our founding fathers would even begin to recognize this country for what they designed it to be. they expected to have a federalist system would've been more power in the state and less power in the federal government. and yet it every day goes by we see more and more of a regulatory environ created that supports washington, d.c., that indeed becomes the real purpose of our federal government. and i think it's way overstated. during this incredible recession of the last several years there was only one area in the united states with a metropolitan service area which is to say the city, where the residential housing values went up. and that was in washington, d.c.

it's booming there because government is growing ever greater and it isn't the cost of what i believe to be conservative values. i want to see us just as i said roll back government, not simply as an academic exercise, but to provide greater freedom to individuals. our founding fathers had that great genius to understand that they weren't giving us freedom. it was something they recognize that god has given us that they want to find a mechanism to protect and they came out of a system where government far off across the shores was coming back and influencing everyone's day-to-day life. and that's what they said our government out to be with something other than that. clearly, i want to move us back in the constitutional direction and look forward to having that opportunity. >> mr. lugar, two minutes. >> fortunately i already have that opportunity, and my voting record, the federation of independent business, national association of manufacturers, other business groups, over the

lifetime situation as well past 90%, for a conservative voting record during 35 years. and not respectively. i would say it's not by chance. i come from a situation, which i volunteered to serve in the united states navy because i believe in the strength of america came from that kind of service. i came back and worked with my brother, tom, to manage a food machinery manufacturing business my grandfather had founded a small business in which we learned how to create new jobs, create new product, create new markets abroad and hire more people. we are forested i've been managing my family farm for over 50 years. thinking about going to corn and soybean prices. getting better yield on that land as farmers all over indiana have been doing. these are conservative elements of my life, and they are

expressed in my votes. and the work we've been doing, both in the economy as was in the foreign policy, to bring security for americans. so i appreciate the question, because it's very important. we understand conservative values. edmund burke, a great english philosopher, and limited government constitutional government, but finally some of us actually have the vote for these principles. and i look forward to those opportunities each day spent gentlemen, in your 30 seconds rebuttal, i wanted him a clear by some degree. what i've been hearing from you is exclusively small government and low taxation conservatism. i haven't heard you mention social conservatism. mr. mourdock's picture. i be glad for the uncertain a social conservative. i believe that life begins at conception but i've been endorsed by the indiana right to life pac and him are to have that. i believe a person individual faith is very important to them and not on how they work, but especially for those of us who are in government.

lastly i'll just like to go back to the purpose of government. we hear a lot about this is interacting with the government and that's okay. but business shouldn't be dependent on government. this thing that is developed in the last few years, crony capitalism, what business are getting more and more on government is a very dangerous trend but it is the opposite of conservatism. >> mr. lugar. >> i'm a social conservative. i believe strongly in marriage come in children and family values. i have 100% record right to life group. i would just sent me say this is a part of being a conservative. and i appreciate your question raising that issue. >> we are at the point where we need to shorten your response is just a little bit so we can get everything in. so one minute 30 for the next question which comes from joe wind, and she is a retired purdue university employee of west lafayette. i guess we don't have that tape so i will be up for you. how best do you see the nation state and local communities,

providing reproductive health care services for men and women of all ages. that goes first to mr. mourdock. sorry, senator lugar. >> shall i read that again? >> yes. >> how best do you see the nation and state and local communities are fighting reproductive health care services for men and women of all ages? >> i'm not certain i understand that definition of reproductive health care services. that's quite a controversial subject to say the least. we have been debating in the senate the fact we don't need the federal government ought to be involved in reproductive health. as a matter-of-fact. i take that position, so that would be my answer i suspect. >> a minute 30 for mr. mourdock spent i will do a did a. that's not an area with a federal government should be involved. i think those things need to be a part, number one, of individuals responsible and number two, individual initiative indian with personal physician and doctor. >> let me go back to florida for

a second review both were in such agreement on this matter that we have a little more time than they banked on. there are a couple of issues here and this will be a minute each from each of you, israel is threatening to strike iran which is perceived by the world of developing nuclear weapons capability, north korea which already has nuclear weapons capability is on the verge of firing at long range rocket, perhaps as early as tomorrow. what do you do about those folks? this question goes to mr. mourdock first. >> well, to the first part of a question regarding israel, i think we have a fundamental pact with the state of israel that we must honor. they are one of if not one of our great allies of the with their certainly most important ally in the middle east. the fact that they are talking of attacking iran and tried to put it into that nuclear development is a matter of self-defense for them. i certainly want to see a standard issue. i want to see more and more sanctions going against iran and those nations they would thereby support iran.

and believe that the best way of rolling back the threat. the only thing we can hope for as a band continues on this course is easy that government change. the obama administration sat on its hands when the so-called green revolution started about a year and a half ago and didn't get involved. we had a chance to see i think a more friendly nation, of ntc ahmadinejad replace but they sat on the hands. again, we lead from behind and that is the wrong policy. >> mr. lugar spent i had the privilege of seeing benjamin netanyahu three weeks ago when he came to washington, and discuss very frankly israel's situation and ours. the israeli aircraft to go to iran will depend upon refueling midway as they get there, and refueling on the way back. by whom? us a century. so this has to be a joint effort which we understand the issue. he understands very thoroughly the sanctions being place on the central bank on the economy of iran, prepared to work with us on that. but i agree with my friend that

we really have to respect the fact that our alliance with israel, that will be critical in terms of final judgments on this issue. on the korean business, we really are at a point which we are trying once again to get the chinese involved. it's critical that we have some success there, but there is no stopping for the moment of a korean -- missile control which we hope we can exercise in japan on the way out. >> and finally we are down to one minute no rebuttals at this point, our last question comes from a guest here in the studio, terry shoemaker, a clergyman and educator from indianapolis. >> how do you plan to represent the interest of the citizens of indiana, and the ache achieving political leader on domestic issues, and a voice for the state and national interest in

global politics? >> that goes first to mr. lugar. >> well, for many years i have attempted to do all of the above in response to your very good question. by the way, i should've told you your two minutes for the. we're back to two minutes but no rebuttals. >> we have opportunities each day, as a matter-of-fact, very carefully with our colleagues, domestic politics, domestic politics in a sense of national politics, hoosier politics, local politics. but likewise the application that comes from the fact that we are leaders in the world. the only country that has a fleet of is able to keep the high seas open for everybody to have triggered the only country that can send troops anywhere in the world. we have to pick of our allies and transport them to help us in afghanistan, for example. and yet we want to seas open. we want allies because we are a country that trades back and forth with other countries, much of the dynamics of our genius

comes in being able to export our ideas. and likewise, to bring people to the united states that have new ideas to reinforce all of the vigor we have here. so these are exciting opportunities every day visit with people in this country in indiana and around the country, leading with people around the world, and trying to fashion ways in which our country can be more effective and in which hoosiers can be better serve. i think and it's an exciting opportunity each day, which i cherish. >> i would like to clear by this is the final question? >> is this the final question? it is indeed. >> thank you all for joining us this evening. to the immediate question, the first thing i'm going to do to represent hoosiers is to be in touch with them. i am proud to call the state home. i moved here back in 1973 and a been a hoosier ever since. i look forward to traveling the

state. it is a great place and it is a place that if i had the privilege of serving as your u.s. senator, i'm not moving from. i will always call indiana home. to the point bill of where we are and where we're going, it was exactly 100 just ago, 100 years ago this very moment that a great ship was heading across the atlantic. had a very experienced true. they had been across the atlantic hundreds of times. they were prepared, they thought, but they didn't see the danger coming because quite frankly, the crew was not paying attention. they thought that crossing would be just like the dozens of others they had made, but a few days later when it sank, the titanic ended that dream forever. i bring you that story because in the last 30 as i think the united states has gone on a bit of a dangerous course, a dangerous journey. that are icebergs ahead. they are are labeled our national debt. they are labeled in time as a they are labeled greater government regulation. they are all those things that take away our freedom and limit

the ability of hoosiers and americans to respond to freedom in a way that they prosper and grow and keep this nation strong. you know, i got in this race not because i ever had a lifelong ambition to be nice its sender, this is not the start of a career. this is my final time to hopefully providing some important public service to i'm richard mourdock and ask all your vote on may 8 in the republican primary. because while we all have great respect for mr. lugar, as you've heard tonight, we have differences. i believe competition is a good thing. and my friends, i do believe it's time. thank you. >> thank you, thank you both. mr. mourdock and mr. lugar, for sharing your thoughts with us this evening on the u.s. senate race and the primary coming up. this has been sponsored by the indiana debate commission to our thanks also to the candidates staffs, your broadcast partners around the state and to our host for this broadcast, wfyi tv in indianapolis particularly, lloyd

wright and alan. special thanks to the voters who asked the question. don't forget, the primary election is coming up tuesday may 8. this fall the indian debate commission is planning for another u.s. senate debate for the general election. the commission plans to hold three debates in the race for governor this fall, one each in northern, central and southern indiana. for more information on the indiana debate commission just log on to www.indianadebatecommission.com. thanks to all of you for tuning in. thanks your studio audience for being beautiful and quiet. and just a moment you'll have a chance to make some noise if you want. from indianapolis, good night. [applause] ♪. ..

>> once the lookout bells were sounded, once the lookout sighted an iceberg ahead, they struck the bells up in the you's nest three times, ding, ding, ding, which is a warning saying there's some object ahead. doesn't mean dead ahead, and it doesn't mean what kind of object. they went to a phone and called down to an officer on the bridge to tell them what it is that they saw.

and when the phone was finally answered, the entire conversation was what do you see? and the response was, iceberg right ahead. and the response from the officer was, thank you. >> samuel hallpern on the truths and myths of that night. part of american history tv this weekend on c-span3. >> our specific issue is to work to see that human rights remain an essential component of american foreign policy and that when we are evaluating our foreign policy moves globally, human rights can never with the only consideration, but it has to be part of the dialogue. >> katrina lantos swe, t is president and ceo of the lantos foundation for justice. >> when we abandon those values, and we're talking about torture

as it relates to the war on terror or the recent policy with russia, you know, and the upcoming issue of whether or not the u.s. congress should pass the accountability act which we don't need to go into the details of that policy issue, but whether or not we're going to stay on record as saying human rights matter, they matter in russia, they matter in china. >> more sunday night at 8 on c-span's "q&a." >> i walked out after the iowa caucus victory and said, game on. i know a lot of folks are going to write, maybe those at the white house, game over. but this game is long, long, long way from over. we are going to continue to go out there and fight to make sure we defeat president barack obama, that we win the house back and that we take the united states senate, and we stand for the values that make us americans, that make us the greatest country in the history of the world, that shining city

on the hill. to be a beacon for everybody for freedom around the world. >> and with that announcement, rick santorum ended his 2012 presidential bid, a process the former pennsylvania senator began in 2009. follow the steps he took a online at the c-span video library with every c-span program since 1987. >> and we have live pictures this morning from the washington convention center here in the nation's capital where the national action network is holding their annual convention. shortly, we plan to bring you a panel with union leaders who will discuss jobs and labor issues. representatives from the afl-cio and the american federation of teachers will take part. it'll start this just a few minutes. we will have it live when it gets under way here on c-span2. [inaudible conversations]

>> while we wait for the start of the national action network's annual convention and the start of a panel on labor issues, we'll listen to your phone calls from this morning's "washington journal." took your calls on the trayvon martin case in florida.ge >> host: here's the florida i times union out of jacksonville, the charge is murder. corey went on to say we do not prosecute by public pressure or petition. she went on to say we prosecute based on the facts in any given case as well as the laws of the state of florida. here is "the miami herald" this morning.

>> host: we want to get your reaction to george zimmerman being charged with second-degree murder be. 202 is the area code, 337-0002

for republicans, 737-0001 for democrats. 628-0205 for all others. you can also contact us electronically, or you can make a comment on our twitter page, twitter.com/c-span, no hyphen in c-span in that case and at ouryo facebook page as well.itte if you would like to continue the conversation there. new york times this morning, severe charge with a minimum term of 25 years. by choosing to charge george zimmerman with second-degree murder in the killing of trayvon martin, the special prosecutor appointed to the case in florida selected the toughest possible charge involving the killing, short of first-degree murder, which requires a final

premeditation and carries the death penalty as a possible punishment.

your reaction to >> caller: good morning. i have been following the case, and i'm glad that george zimmerman was arrested and, hopefully, the political system, the the justice system will play out and that he will be convicted of second-degree murder. i also am glad that this is bringing to light about the stand your ground law x it is a law in louisiana, and i'm hoping that this will cause the politicians to repeal this law because it is a law that should have never been passed. >> host: that was janker in newe orleans, and our next call comeu

from phoenix. sara, you are on the "washington journal." >> caller: hi. from phoenix. sarah, you are on. caller: hi. i am grateful for c-span because it is not political. i want to say how grateful i am that this is something we are talking about. my concern is george zimmerman's he says he killed the 17-year-old because he thought he was suspicious. for people to kill a young boy in cold blood and you don't really see compassion, you don't really see remorse. that is the scary part.

i am ready for justice to be served and for people to love each other. host: from the new york daily news --

and here's the front page of the washington times -- stephen in new jersey, you are on. what are your thoughts? caller: i think they went with the more severe charge because of all the publicity. he should be charged with manslaughter because i don't think it was intentional. it is cause and effect. i think they were pushed to do this because of all the publicity to go with the. most severe the guest: on our facebook page a lot of people are starting to comment. let's read some of those. sheila says second degree, not

first, sounds about right, but i have no idea how it will. will -- how it will result. and some of our facebook comments there.

frank in phoenix, you are on. caller: good morning, c-span. my opinion is, considering the hundreds of millions of guns we have in this country, i don't think the standard ground law makes a lot of sense. another thing, we have seen the same thing with rodney king, o.j. simpson. as citizens, i plead with our citizens to stand up and let due process take its course, let the facts come out in court, because we are compromising our ability to exercise due process efficiently. we have to let the courts decide and let the lawyers and judge and jury do their job. host: john is a republican in chantilly, virginia, in the

suburbs. what are your thoughts about the zimmerman case? caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. it is not a lot. it is the people of using a lot. that is the problem we have in this country. i think that what happens is very sad, but the reality is now that the man is in custody, we should wait and let the courts do their job. it's a sad day when we are killing our own children, but the reality is we have to wait and see what the courts will do about this law. thanks for taking my call. host: al sharpton righwrites --

trayvon's killing is not a murder case. on the line now -- caller: thanks for taking my call. this is a very good show. i don't necessarily think that the trayvon martin shooting was racially. i do think it was more cultural- motivated as far as him seeing somebody wearing a hoodie. i do believe if trayvon martin had on a shirt and tie that he would not have been shot. i disagree with the guy that said it was just like a car accident. the only way you can liken this to a car accident it's if this was a person drinking that gets behind the wheel. he knew exactly what he was

doing. the dispatcher told him to get back and he never should have followed him. it was a cultural disadvantage on trayvon's part when he saw trayvon wearing the hoodie. he was ethnically motivated by the clothing. it was murdered. pure murder. host: and from the new york times, an editorial --

our next call comes from james, a republican in mississippi. you are on. your reaction? caller: good morning. fulton, mississippi. i don't think it is the law that caused this boy to get killed and i don't think it is the gun.

whatever way it turns out, the gun and the law to protect yourself did not cause this. if the man was not protecting himself, he is guilty. if he was, he is not guilty. now, everything you all do on c- span, you are running for the democrats and obama's people. i am an american citizen, too. who pays for your tv? that's what i want to know. your boss has advertisements paying for theirs. host: are you asking rhetorically? caller: i am looking for an answer.

i think the democrat or the government pays for you. host: probably the democrats that have cable help to pay for us. we have no government funding. we never have taken a nickel of government funding. if you have cable, we get about a nickel of it that of your monthly bill. that is how we are funded. we are funded and founded by the cable companies, satellite providers. that is how we are paid for. we are private organization. we are nonprofit. thanks for the call. if now we move on to a democrat in florida, callie. caller: i think it was correct, the trayvon martin case was a tragedy, but this happens in florida all the time. in flagwood beach, a man was

shot to death by his neighbor, five times shot in the chest. the unarmed man was complaining to the shooter about his barking dog. the man went out and shot him, killed him, if the police did not arrest the shooter until two days later if because this man paul miller was threatened and frightened. this happens all the time. let's face it, this case in sanford would have been swept under the rug if it were not for the media getting involved. there would have been no special investigator. governor scott was forced to do the right thing. a judge could still decide that zimmerman should be let free because of this stupid law. let's not forget, zimmermann's father is a judge and is very influential. host: here's the front page or the cover of the new york post new this morning. jaleel tweets --

and mike -- and here's a comment from jody -- next call from inverness, florida, ralph is on our independent line. caller: good morning, steve. this is one of the dumbest laws ever enacted. if i wanted to kill you, all i would have to do is shoot you dead, punch myself real hard in the nose and that's it. they cannot arrest me and i get away with murder.

it is that simple. this law is utterly stupid. thank you. host: back to the new york times >> see "washington journal" every morning at 7 eastern on c-span. we go live to the washington convention center for the panel of union leaders who will discuss jobs and labor issues this morning. the labor department reported more people sought unemployment benefits last week suggesting that the job market's recovery is still sluggish. >> a couple minutes to explain who their union is, who they represent, what their workers do and where they are. so with that, um, first, i'm going to introduce lee saunders. lee is the secretary or-treasurer of the american federation of state, county and municipal employees. the union represents 1.6 million workers. lee grew up in a union home in cleveland, the sun of bus driver -- the son of a bus

driver, and he started with his union in 1978 as a labor economist. lee, why don't you tell us a little bit about what your workers do. >> sure. first of all, who in the audience is a union member or staffer? okay. so a lot of you know about some of this information we'll be presenting. let me just to this very, very quickly then. i am with afsme, we represent public workers all over the country, state, government, local government, hospital, university, independent providers meaning child care and home care workers. very, very active union, very active politically, very active legislatively, and we are also very active in organizing new members within the afsme family. many of you may know this, but we have a rich and proud

history. this is our 75th year anniversary. we were born in madison, wisconsin. isn't it ironic that we were born in madison, wisconsin, and where members, state workers got together to talk about the importance of joining a union, having their voices heard, having the right to collective bargaining. yet in 2012 in the state of wisconsin we're battling a governor named scott walker who took collective bargaining away from us. and i'm sure we're going to be talking about that more as this program continues. we also have a proud history in working in coalition with our partners all over this country whether it's the students or whether it's retirees, the civil rights community, the faith-based community. we must, again, we believe, rebuild a main street movement to deal with the challenges, to deal with the issues that confront the 99% of americans who are suffering right now. and we are committed to doing so. many of you know that in memphis, tennessee, in 1968 -- and we just recognized the

deaths of dr. king last week on april 4th -- dr. king was in memphis supporting 1300 sanitation workers who were afsme members. they were fighting for dignity and respect and the right to be heard, the right to have their voices heard on the job. and again, once again, isn't it ironic that we were fighting that fight in the mid 1930s when afsme was born? in 1968 when dr. king gave his life to support sanitation workers in the city of memphis? he understood the importance of linking rights, but we're still fighting that battle. we've come a long way, but we've got a long way to go. and we've got folks that are trying to take our freedoms, take our democracy, take our rights away from us. and, sisters and brothers, i would suggest to all of you and to all of us that we've got to join together like never before. we've got to close ranks like never before. we've got to develop those necessary coalitions in the communities all over this

country, and we've got the make our voices heard, and we've got to fight back. that's exactly what the labor movement is doing, that's exactly what the civil rights movement must do in coordination with us, helping us, supporting us. and we in turn support you and help you. we've got to take our country back. thank you. police departments. [applause] >> thank you, lee. next up is thomas buffenbarter. tom is the president of the international association of machinists and aerospace workers. he became a shop steward at age 20 at a ge plant in ohio. iam represents more than half a million members, and if you were following the news last year, you may have seen his union turned up in the news over a little dispute with a company called boeing. tom, why don't you tell us a little bit about iam. >> thank you very much. first of all, i'd like to say it's an honor to be here and to be a participant in this great

event taking place at the convention center. like to thank all of the organizers and reverend sharpton for bringing people together. and i'm glad to be here joining my partners here on this panel, several of whom are fellow buckeyes. >> all right, all right. [laughter] >> and we grew up together in the great state of ohio. the i marx is about 700,000 members across the u.s. and canada and several other small foreign countries where we service workers in the aerospace industry, the transportation industry, certainly manufacturing. the largest union in defense industries, in forestry. we have a large contingent of federal employees, and you see, when you see a space shuttle of a rocket launch at any nasa facility, it's an iam member whose finger is on the button that launches that vehicle. the power that takes in the electric generation for a large

part of america from, tva. the iam was one of the original unions there designated, not elected there, designated by president franklin roosevelt to be the union, one of the unions that services that industry. we're an old union, founded in atlanta, georgia, in a hole in the ground in 1888 in a railroad pit. by 19 men. today it's a large union that's very diverse, a large female population. the diversity, the colors, the ethnicity of all our members span every, every background found on the planet. we're very proud of that. one of the original unions to support the foundation of the naacp. we're very proud of. so we bring, hopefully, to the conversation today as we talk about the issues, i've been informed about on employment and

the struggles that we face today where it's civil rights, whether it's human rights, whether it's just our right to exist and speak our mind. those are the fights we engage in and do so willingly. we run to those fights, we don't run away from them. so we're glad to be here and participating with all the great panelists here. thank you. >> thanks, tom. [applause] next up is annie hill. annie is the secretary-treasurer of the communication workers of america. at cwa she's bargained for contracts with qwest and other companies. she worked as a technician for pacific bell northwest. annie, why don't you tell us a little bit about the cwa. >> thank you. first, it's a great pleasure and honor to be here and thank everyone, the staff and reverend sharpton for putting on this great conference. communication workers of america

is, um, also a very diverse union, was founded in 1947, um, and the -- as a woman i'm very proud that the backbone of the first organizing effort was actually telephone operators. so, of course, -- who, of cours, were all women at that time. it's become much more diverse since then. we have, our union clearly came out of the telephone industry, but over the years it's very much diversified, and while we still have a large contingency of people working in the telecommunications industry, we also represent people in the media sector, journalists, broadcast engineers and printers. we also have flight attendants and people that work in passenger service in the airline industry. we have a manufacturing group, and we also represent a large contingency of public workers. primarily at the state and local level t -- level.

so we're a very diverse union. we are primarily in the states, but we do have newspaper guild people in the eastern canadian provinces, so that makes us -- and in puerto rico, so that makes us an international union. um, like our partners in afscme, we're also very involved legislative and politically and also on the organizing front. in fact, just most recently we had a great organizing victory in cable television which is predominantly nonunion, unfortunately, at this time. and reverend sharpton played a key role in that. he actually came and visited our workers, so we're very proud of our relationship with nan. we, too, are very, very involved in building a movement across this country. we know that labor unions in and of themselves, and i know that we're going to talk more about the state of the labor movement can't do it by themselves, and so we're partnering with other

progressive allies like nan and others and students, faith-based groups. in fact, i'm sure many of you have heard about it, the 99% training that's going on across this country and trying to create a larger group of people that are more educated about the economics and about what's going on in this country. especially about the huge inequality of wealth that we are facing. we have fewer and fewer people that have more and more and more people that have less. and as a member of the labor movement, that's a lot of what we're about, is trying to equalize that. we need to do a better job, all of us. so, again, i'm very proud to be here and looking forward to participating in the discussion. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, annie. next up is eliseo medina. you came to the u.s. from mexico when he was 10 years old, father

was an immigrant farm worker, and he came with his mother and siblings. he worked for -- as a grape picker as a teen. came to the seiu in 1986, and he's known as an outspoken slow candidate for immigration reform. >> thank you very much, dave. and thank you, all of you, for inviting me to be here with you to share some information and experiences. and let me just say that it's important to talk about labor. i think what i'm more interested in us discussing today is what's happening to america. because what we have is a huge attack that's going on right now not just in labor, it's an attack on women's rights, attack on voters' rights, attacks on immigrants. and what is happening in this country is that the american dream is disappearing for most of us.

that we are going to be the first generation that is going to see the next generation inherit a country with less opportunity than the one our parents left us. and that's what i think from my point of view we're interested in participating in a discussion with you. seiu is 2.1 million members in the united states, canada and puerto rico. we represent workers, also, in the public sector, federal, state and local. everything from police officers to social workers to highway workers and everything in between. health care workers that work in hospitals and nursing homes and doing home care, taking care of the elderly and the disabled in their own homes. we also represent property service workers, janitors security officers. we are blue collar, white collar, pink collar, no collar.

[laughter] we are men and women, we are african-american, latino, asian pacific islanders, we are gay and straight, we are young and not quite so young. [laughter] we, in fact, look like america. and we share because of that a lot of the same problems that are facing everyone in this country. so part of it, as dave said, we are also the largest union of immigrant workers. we have members that come from all parts of the world to this country because this was the land of opportunity, and they came for their little piece of the american dream. we have members from africa, members from asia, from europe, from latin america. in our union we speak over 100 languages. and let me just say that for us the issue of immigration reform is a key issue because it impacts both on our members who are undocumented workers, but it

effects every worker because you cannot have 11 million workers in the shadows without any rights and not have that impact every single worker in this country. and be because of that i also want to say and thank reverend sharpton and nan for having led the match from selma to montgomery. i was very proud to join in that march and to march in the footsteps -- [applause] i was very proud to join in that march and march in the footsteps of giants, of dr. martin luther king and those brave men and women who fought for equal rights, who fought for making sure that everyone in this country had the same rights and the same opportunities. and so, reverend sharpton, thank you so much for your leadership, and i look forward to the discussion. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, eliseo. next we have francine lawrence. francine's the executive vice

president of the american federation of teachers. she serves on her union's policy council and its no child left behind task force. she's also a licensed speech pathologist, and her union represents 1.5 million members. francine, tell us about the aft. >> thank you, dave. you'll notice in your program that loretta johnson was to be here, and many of you know loretta johnson, our secretary-treasurer, and you know i am not loretta that. but loretta is not here because her brother-in-law passed away. so i'm very sad about that but glad that i have an opportunity to be here, participate in the breakfast and be on this panel. um, i come from toledo, you heard that there's three buckeyes or at least roots in the buckeye state. and the last 15 years or last june was president of the toledo federation of teachers and worked for many, many years in the toledo public schools.

and now as an officer with the american federation of teachers, it's a wonderful opportunity to engage nationally on many of our issues of mutual concern. the american federation of teachers, one and a half million members strong, we have five divisions. our largest is kindergarten through 12th grade teachers. we also represent, um, professors and graduate employees and adjuncts at the higher education university level. we represent public employees, paraprofessionals and other school support personnel and health care workers. about a year ago reverend sharpton, ann lee and randi weingarten, our president, came to toledo, and they were touring the country talking about the connection between civil rights and the labor movement. and they came through ohio at a very, very important time because we were fighting and successfully did defeat senate

bill 5 that would have taken away collective bargaining rights and the rights and voice of workers and suppressed the middle class. so they came in toledo, met with civil rights leaders, the faith community leaders and also we went out to a high school, and they had a great discussion with high school students. so when you look at the jobs act that we have today and compare it to what the aft and other unions were fighting so hard to push around the country, it's really clear there are two very different visions for our country right now. and those of you that were at the breakfast heard that articulated in other ways. you know, on the one hand you have the president's job act, um, which is meant to provide much-needed resources that would create construction jobs, put teachers back in classrooms throughout our country, improve infrastructure in our communities and fix thousands of children's school buildings. and on the other hand you have the so-called jobs act signed

into law last week that doesn't do these things. in fact, it will probably hurt the economy by deregulating wall street and taking away investor protections that keep workers from becoming the victims of fraud. you know, the kind of fraud that cost enron workers their retirement savings. this legislation is the kind of pro-corporate, anti-worker thinking we've been seeing over the last couple years from attacks on collective bargaining in states like wisconsin and ohio to the voter id laws that disenfranchise elderly, students, minorities from voting. and we're seeing an attack on our most vulnerable citizens. and this should not be happening in our united states, the land of opportunity and the land of equality that i was raised as a daughter of a steel worker to believe in. you know, i understand we want to encourage and need to

encourage companies to start hiring, but we don't want to discourage growth and innovation, and we can't deregulate our way to a better economy. if we want a better future for our kids, we have to invest in that future. and our kids' schools are the foundation of that future. that's why aft affiliates around the country work so hard to promote the real jobs act last year that would provide funds to prevent layoffs of 280 educators, repair and modernize school buildings, pay for summer jobs for our youth and, also, support the infrastructure jobs that would put hundreds of thousands of construction workers to work. it amazes me that as we climb out of this bad economy there are so many forces who are determined to keep working people down. you know, these politicians will say it's limited government, but what we're really talking about is limited voice.

there's no economic reason to take away collective bargaining rights, to pass the right to work for less laws or to push hard for voter suppression. as union leaders, we know we can't fight these political battles on our own, and be we can't do it -- and we can't do it with money. it supports it, but that's not the answer. our and our success has always -- our strength and our success has always been the passion and the voice of our members and allies like you and our ability to mobilize. and the other side knows that too. so today let's talk about and focus on how we can continue to work together as unions and communities to expose those groups and people who are working so hard to protect the 1% by taking power and resources away from the rest of us. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, francine.

um, collective bargaining has clearly been a very contentious issue over the last year or two. in wisconsin we saw a law passed that effectively stripped public workers of many of their collective bargaining rights. we saw a similar law in ohio that was later voted down by voters. we've seen right to work passed in indiana and popping up in states, several other states around the country. so with this, with this environment i'd like to ask our panelists how you make the case for collective bargaining right now when it seems to be under such large-scale attack. and, lee, i'll start with you. tell us what, why collective bargaining is important and what happens in states like wisconsin where groups of workers lose it. >> with well, collective bargaining gives us all the ability to sit down at the table and to be treated fairly and equally by negotiating over wages and conditions and benefits. for the members that we represent.

now, if you look at those who are trying to take collective bargaining away from us -- the scott walkers of the world, the governor of wisconsin, john kasich in ohio -- they are friends and allies of the same people who are trying to take our voting rights away from us, who are attacking immigrant rights, who are attacking women's rights. the same people. this is a coordinated effort not only in those two states, but it's a coordinated effort all over the country. and that's why it's so important for us to come together and kind of move away, move aside our differences. we may have some differences in this room, but we all know one thing: we play by the rules every single day. our members play by the rules every single day, and they are being used and sacrificed and scapegoated. and we can't let that happen. now, in the state of wisconsin the governor did take away collective bargaining. but we didn't run away and hide, we didn't bury our heads in the sand. we fought back, and we fought back not only with the trade

union movement in the public and private sectors, but we worked in coalition with our community partners and our civil rights partners in that state. and we fought back, and we made our voices heard. last november we targeted four senators for recall, four senators who supported the governor's attempt to steal collective bargaining away from us, and he did. we recalled two senators out of the four in very conservative districts in ohio. this year we still haven't stopped. because right now we're recalling the governor, and in june we're going to recall him, and he will be out of office. [applause] along with the lieutenant governor and two other senators in that state. so we've got to keep this momentum up. we've got to continue to build upon our foundation. in ohio we attacked it in a different kind of way. under the constitution you cannot recall in the ohio constitution. but what you can do is you can have a referendum. so when kasich attempted to steal collective bargaining away from us, we went to the

citizens, to the buckeyes in ohio, and we collected over 1.3 million signatures. all we needed was 250,000. we collected 1.3 million signatures, put it on the ballot in november. again, worked in coalition with our allies and friends and, guess what? we beat back his attempt by a 2 to 1 margin. that's what this is all about. [applause] so, you know, sometimes it takes a bat to kind of beat us over the head to wake us up, right? all of us. i mean, we've got to understand what's going on in this country right now. we've got to understand that this is -- and people don't like this term, but it is -- it's economic and class warfare. when you've got the 1% attempting to gain more power and gain more wealth at the expense of the 99%, something is wrong with that picture. when you've got folks trying to take pensions away from public sector workers, from private sector workers, our average pension is $18,000, $19,000 a

year. they think that's extravagant? come on, give me a break. but we cannot be a country that rushes to the bottom. we've got to be a country that moves forward. when i was growing up in cleveland, and tom said this earlier, my parents taught me that your life should be better than the life that we have. right now that is not happening. the middle class is suffering, working families are suffering, and, sisters and brothers, we can't take it anymore. we've got to come together. [applause] >> while we're talking about public sector workers, i'd like to throw this francine's way. um, we see public sector workers of all kinds, especially teachers in if a lot of ways, often demonized by the right. people like to blame public sector unions for budget problems. how do you make the case to regular folks out will that unions like teachers' unions are important to the working class and the middle class?

>> well, it's a concerted pattern, as lee is implying, that those who are protecting the narrow interests of the wealthy and the privileged in the country are out to divide us. and part of that strategy is to separate in the minds of many in the public, the public sector workers from others, the public sector workers from the ordinary citizen. and, you know, that's an old tactic, to split allied forces in order to, um, gain their viewpoint. you know, public sector workers, um, i don't think there's a person in this room who either hasn't been one, whose mom or dad was one, whose daughter is, whose neighbor. i mean they -- we are the heart of delivering services to every community in this country whether it's health care, sanitation workers, um, bus drivers and teachers. and, you know, as i opened up my comments, i thought be of you -- i thought many of you know a teacher. again, you have teachers in your

family, or you can think about in name quickly no matter how many years ago the teacher that made a difference in your life. and, um, it's all about taking away resources from people who through their collective action, public employees teachers over the years have been able to establish through collective bargaining sitting across the table with management a stable income and a decent, dignified retirement. and we are the heart of communities. as that erodes, the middle class erodes, the buying power in communities erodes, and the stability of communities. and it's especially true in large cities and medium-sized cities throughout the country. you know, i'm proud to be a teacher, and we have used collective bargaining not just for the traditional kinds of gains -- wages, that's important, health care, pension -- but we sit every table at the day including me when i was a 15-year union

president taking to the table to improve schools, all about school improvement to bring better curriculum resources to our teachers and children, to create better conditions so teaching and learning can occur. you are right, dave, the spotlight goes on teachers because there are those who don't want the spotlight to go on those who aren't providing the financial resources, who aren't distributing in an equitable way resources so that all children in this country have equity in education, who don't want to shine the spotlight on oftentimes poorly-managed schools. it's easier to shine it on teachers. but together teachers along with our allies in the labor movement, our allies in the civil rights movement and the larger community, we must work together to defeat those who want to suppress us. thank you. [applause] >> eliseo, please. >> if i can weigh in on a couple

of things. obviously, i agree with everything that's been said. but let me just say on the question of collective bargaining, people think that when we negotiate, we're just negotiating for ourselves, and we're only benefiting our members to the detriment of the rest of the community. well, the truth of the matter is that collective bargaining is the only way that we have in this country for workers to be able to negotiate for a fair share of the wealth that they help to produce. if you leave it to the employers on their own to have the complete authority to decide whether workers are going to get a pay raise, whether they're going to get health care, whether they're going to get a pension, whether they're going to have any other benefits, history shows us that that never happens. and, in fact, before there was a strong lay wore movement -- labor movement, there was a very

small middle class. when the labor movement began to organize, then workers were finally able to make a living wage and negotiate, and that in effect created the middle class. but it wasn't just the workers that benefit. when a worker, for example, in our union we go out and negotiate, we get a 10% pay increase, 8%, whatever increase we get, that money recirculates through the community. they go out, and be they go to our restaurants, they may go to a movie, they may go buy a car, they may go buy a home, they buy clothes. all that money recirculates through the community and benefits everybody. when workers are poor, that community's poor. and it doesn't do us any good to have a whole bunch of billionaires, because they're not the ones that are going out and supporting our community stores, and they're not the ones that are supporting that

community. so we have seen a lot of places, take youngstown, ohio, buckeyes. when the auto mills went out of business, see what happened to those towns. when the rubber industry, when the auto industry -- a lot of those jobs were exported seas -- those communities sr.ed. collective bargaining benefits everybody. the other thing i would just say that i think is important, we don't have a problem of wealth in this country, we have a problem of wealth distribution because what we've got is -- [applause] the wealth in this country being concentrated more and more on the top, and the middle class is shrinking again. so we have a situation that is that along with a tax system that allows for corporations like ge and wells fargo and hundreds of others to pay no

taxes. each and every one of us in this room pays more taxes than ge. how is that fair? what we need is a tax system where even pays their fair share, then we won't have a problem with the schools' budget, we won't have a problem with the cities' budget or the states' budget because we will have enough resources to provide the public services we need. [applause] >> annie? >> yeah. i just wanted to piggyback, um, on what you said. and i think that for some people who don't have a lot of labor history, we think that what happened in wisconsin and ohio just sort of fell from the sky. and the reality is that it didn't. this change has been happening for a long period of time. and so especially on the private sector, the private sector union density has been dropping for years. it actually peaked in the late '70s, and it has been on a decline ever since. so many of the industries you

mentioned, the rubber industry, the auto industry, the manufacturing industry. is so it's not that those jobs have disappeared. where did they go? they went overseas. and so, and many of those communities have been decimated. within the telecommunications industry, um, how many of you have called to connect phone service or connect a lot of things, and do you think that you're talking to someone in this country? no. you're talking to someone overseas. so, again, that's jobs. and so when you take jobs out of this country, that also takes tax revenue and spending power within the communities. and that's what has created a lot of the issues, is the loss of tax revenue which then it puts government in the position in cases where they wanted to make that argument. what they did is they turn the argument around, and they blamed it on -- in this case -- public sector employees that their wages were too high, that their

benefits were too high instead of really addressing the real problem which is that we don't have enough jobs in this country. and there's companies that actually get tax incentive bees to move jobs -- incentives to move jobs out of this country. how about if we got tax incentives to have jobs in this country and rebuild those communities? so -- [applause] i think this really speaks to us all working together and, again, and i think everyone at this table would agree, again, labor can't do it by itself. it is working with groups like nan and other groups. and we really have to rise up sort of out of the ashes and fight for that distribution of wealth and maintain the middle class and build a stronger economy. and workers and people in this country that have rights and the right to have a good lifestyle. [applause] >> okay. tom? i was hoping you could talk a little bit about right to work. and, also, if you could tell us

a bit about, say, a unionized worker for a company like boeing, what they would make in a place where they're unionized versus a place where they're not. and also tell us a bit about, you know, why you think these right-to-work measures are popping up and what you think they could do to workers in those states. >> well, having had the fortune -- i don't know if it was good or not -- to be the president of a large union that took on the largest expor jter in the world for punishing their employees for exercising a right to strike in seattle and portland and wichita in 2008, they said we're going to build a new plant in south carolina where they have right-to-work laws, you can't compel unions. we can pay them less. we don't have to provide health care benefits.

and to take that on as a violation of law and wonder up until the last minute whether our government would stand behind the workers of america who chose a union and to exercise their rights to collectively bargain was a real stretch. fortunately, we found a person, i believe, who should be given a presidential medal of freedom in leif solomon who took on the leadership of both political parties in america and went ahead and issued that charge and made that case and forced the boeing company to deal with the machinist union on how they're going to treat people in the sites that have a union and where we could get job security, where we could get the commitment that for 20-30 years down the road automatic new projects -- all the new projects would be done this those plants. and at no time did we ever propose closing down that new

site in south carolina despite what the press may have said. that issue on collective bargaining and right to work sums it all up as to what that experience was about. right now across america we see governors and we see politicians and we see presidential candidates attacking public sector unions as the cancer upon society that is going to drive america down. nothing could be further from the truth. they fear the power of people who might belong to a union, especially in the public sector where they're connected closely with the economy of their states and their existence. on the private sector which is the largest part of the union i represent, we know that if they beat down the workers in the public sector, we're next in line. and, in fact, that fight began, has begun with these right-to-work fights.

you saw indiana succumbing to right to work and in other places where it's cropping up. it's the second wave of attacks upon working people. .. >> and what a great experience america has lived through by the deregulation of this nation. and the us, we were blind then, the reason we've got to deregulate is to make it easier to send our jobs have been

overseas. we got blamed for being the competition. deregulation now has found its way into right to work. they are making us feel like we are guilty of something that we are not. we are part the protectors of the society. and so when we come into play, the attack on right to work, the attack on people's rights as a citizen, their voting rights, it's all one big, one big attack. on america. and both parties have some culpability in the state we're in today. and i would hope as we move conferences just like this one, we find ways to unite people once again, like the civil rights community and the labor community. you know, in the 1960s, i lived through that. i was a kid. i watched people in labor unions march hand-in-hand with the people seeking civil rights. and we stayed hand-in-hand until

we passed laws and the president signed it. 1965 in the civil rights are, in the voting rights act. and billy let go of each other's hands and went our separate ways and declared victory. and that killed us. we've got to get our hands back together again, so never again do the 1% for the politicians figure they can divide a nation that is united. and we've got to get back to that spirit a plot that. [applause] >> will take some questions from the audience but first we will hear from labor secretary hilda solis who is here with us. [applause] >> i'm not secretary solis. [laughter] first let's thank the panel. give them a hand. [applause]

let me say that it is probably no more important to us than the state of where labor in this country is, and clearly it's alliance with civil rights movement in general, and with us with national action network in particular. lee saunders is on our board, can tell you that we have a real commitment to reuniting labor and civil rights your because as labor ago, so goes workers, and so grow our community. everyone talks about the '60s, but very few people deal with and realize that the '60s would not have happened had we not had this alliance of labor and civil rights.

and this is why it is very important that we reestablish that realignment. also, i think the present administration under president obama has been very committed to that. and i think that one of the first things we saw as a result of the 2010 election is that the right wing went after labor rights, went after it immediately in wisconsin, in ohio, in indiana, and went after public workers, went after the right to unionize. and this is a civil right. one of those that fought this battle to protect workers and to protect us in the job market was the secretary of labor. ever since she's been in office we have had nothing but complete access to her. she and i were just laughing. she's been attacked for even marching with us. now, you would think she was

marching on somebody. [laughter] we had a reenactment of dr. king's march for voting rights that god is the right to vote, that we all participated in. and we said had we not had this march in 65, that many of us would not have had the right to vote. so eliseo and myself and others formed a coalition, afscme, and we reenacted the march and we marched 11 miles a day in selma to montgomery. we also raised it in the issues of today, immigration, right to work. and the secretary at the invitation came down, because she said that it was that margin 65 i gave her the right to vote, and women the right to vote, to reinforce the. you would think we were outside

summer agitating on something else, but it shows you how desperate they are. so i'm sure they'll have a picture of her here today and to look like she was holding up this mic at the barricade rather than being at the convention center. so it gives you some testimony as to her commitment and character that even with being distorted she is here, because she knows what she believes, and she knows how she wants to serve the american people, all the american people. it's my honor to present to you now the honorable hilda solis. [applause] >> thank you. thank you reverend. thank you. and good morning. especially to my brothers and sisters here in the labor movement, as all of you for joining us here at the national action network convention. and i want to thank the reverend

for that great introduction and want to thank them especially for keeping it real. because that is right, keeping it real, reverend, keeping it real. [applause] i want to thank you for getting the network in the spirit of the civil rights movement, but before i began i also want to recognize every single person in the room that is here in attendance at this convention. that includes business leaders, community leaders, allies, advocates, and yes, my union brothers and sisters. and i want to know is labor in the house? is labor in the house? [applause] and i want to thank you all so deeply for working alongside president barack obama, and his administration. and i want to thank you -- [applause] yes, thank you. thank you for being the change agents that you are helping our communities day in and day out. i can't tell you what a pleasure

and honor it is to be with you here this morning. last time as you know i saw the reverend al, we were out marching and i was proud to march on that warm sunny day out there in alabama. and i felt right at home. i can tell you how good i felt. we marched as we say in spanish, mano a mano. that means hand-in-hand, i'm in a. and i have my brothers they're holding me up, and we walked proudly. and i'm glad we put together a nice poster that will share with her labor brothers and sisters here to show that we honored the civil rights movement. because all of us in all of america have gained from the. i stood there with lee saunders, with arlene holt baker from the afl-cio, and with the reverend jesse jackson. and i can tell you how proud i was to be there, in addition to one of my friends out from california who came out, and at the tender age of 80, 82 i

believe, lawrence was there to represent those people who work in the fields, the still work with their hands, and a hard backaches picking our fruit, taking care of the american fruit and vegetable baskets for all the people in this country, and around the world. so i want you to give them a round of applause. [applause] each of us came together on that occasion to walk for different reasons, but most importantly it was to honor those who face violence and injustice that marched on the same trail that we were on 47 years ago. we marched for respect, for minorities, for senior citizens, and four, yes, the right to vote and to be heard. and we marched for health care and for safer workplaces and for fair wages and for dignity and respect in the workplace. and we didn't forget about marching for our young people who right now are experiencing

high rates of unemployment that is ridiculous in a country that is so bountiful. we fought and we marched for education, because we know that with good education will come good jobs. and i know that many of us here marched for our immigrant brothers and sister. i as a daughter first generation of immigrants who came to this country years ago with their sweat, with their tears, to try to have the best for their children, experienced the american dream, to have a taste of that apple pie that welcomes people here to this country. because people don't come here always with a silver spoon in the mouth. they come here because they know they have to come with hard work and to sacrifice. and that's exactly what my parents did and taught me. and i'm so proud of them. as i was proud that i could be marching there with other brothers and sisters in alabama for the same reasons that we are all here today.

you know, there's so many things that happen in our country over the last decade. and one that hit something for a lot of us is that we know that there's some people are doing very well in this country, and gc those that are not doing very well. it's the haves and have-nots. but we marched in selma in montgomery and folks there in alabama, because we know that we have strength when we worked together. solidarity helps to create that basket that is weaved together that brings everybody together. because we know that when we rise, and we fall as one community, we know that we have a lot that we can do if we come together as one nation. these are fundamental issues that all of you know about comment and i can't, i can't underscore how hard it is right now, the fact that we're going to some very hard economic times, especially in our communities of color. especially where there is high unemployment and where jobs have

left. and i know that this is unforgivable what we're going through. this is worse perhaps in some ways or some other young people and for some of us because we didn't experience the great depression like my father did. but he shared so many stories when he went to the great depression in our united states come in los angeles. i know that there still are families that are hurting still today. i see those dems when i go out on the road and i talk to people. and i know how our economy can come back. and i realize that all of us have our own way of making a difference in this country. and i know that the president believes that. that's why he's putting forward an agenda that says he wants to see an america, an america that helped every single one of us. not those that are privilege, not those that can afford fancy lawyers and lobbyists, but people, everyday people.

and america as he said, that is built to last for every single one of us, and our children and our grandchildren. president obama has said that in the face of our challenges we are going to have to answer a simple question as a country. can we succeed as a country where shrinking number of people to increasingly well? while a growing number of struggle to get by? and that number is small. or are we better off when everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules. that's what is at the heart of this national debate that the president has brought us into. and the other side of the aisle, because this is where we know we have to go. we have to have this discussion. and we still got a lot more to do to make sure that every single person that every single individual in every community, and i mean every community is thriving.

that's why the president has invested millions of dollars into job training programs and especially an opponent communities like ours, african-american, latino, asian, low income, white as well. he has called on employers, community organizations and community colleges to all come together and to provide a direct and meaningful pathway that leads to good paying jobs. in my department of the department of labor, finished to invest in job training programs directed particularly at low income and underserved community. i'm proud of the fact that we've made investments with veterans. i'm not talking of those young men that are coming back that up higher rates of unemployment, that come from our neighborhood, that we may know by name of a comeback right now thinking, was my next job going to be? am i going have a roof over my head? is my family going to be able to bring the in? i've met with some of these

folks that come back already, and i'm disheartened because i find them in shelters. their own families can't take them in because their families are struggling. what has happened to his? what has happened to us? and i know we've got to do more. we've got to help women, women, particularly women of color who still don't make the same rate of pay as a comparable man does. she make 70 cents on the dollar for african-americans, it's about 60, and for latinas it's about 50 cents. come on, we've got to change that paradigm. we've got to make it equal so that everyone gets a fair shake here. and we can't forget about the long-term unemployed. and i'm not just talking about the 99 is, on to the people that are been out of work for more than three years. that have been looking, because let me tell you, some of us know this recession didn't just start when the bureau of labor statistics and other folks, economists were saying there was a recession. some of us knew it long before

then but at the congress never i recall in my own city where i'd go up in that area, this was before the recession was called, the unemployment rate was anywhere from nine-12%. and our jobs were leaving. they were dating a long time ago because of bad policies that didn't take care of people here. i also know that what we've got to remember is that right now is not the time to give up on protecting other vulnerable communities that are also sacrificing a lot and not having their voices are. and i'm talking about those vulnerable individuals who represent our immigrant workers. they happen to be from countries, the caribbean, south america, latin america, africa, ethiopia, india. there's a lot of brothers and sisters that are faced with discrimination and oppression in the job, in the workplace. but we are also predict one suffers, we all suffer. both in terms of safety in the workplace.

we know that people have to get paid better wages. wages have not kept up over the last decade. and i continue to stand up for those who want to continue to be a part and associate with a labor union, and have the right to collective bargaining. because that's how we get people into the middle class. that has been our american history. that is been out of american tradition. and i stand proudly by my brothers and sisters who are fighting to get into a union and to remain represented by a union. i know that my own father who worked hard coming into this country did many jobs. he was a farm worker, a rail worker, even at one point a janitor. but one of the proudest moments i had was when he became the shop steward for his teamster union, and organize immigrant workers that couldn't speak english. my father could speak english so he knew how to talk to the boss. he knew how to negotiate and he knew basically what was right and wrong.

and he stood up. he had no shame. he said i'm going to stand up for these workers. and thank god, because of that so many families in the community were affected. their families got better wages. they had a roof over their head. they have health care benefits. they had every time it. some of us could even go to college for the first time in our lives. i was one of those beneficiaries. i was the first one and my family of seven, and i'm not even the oldest. on in the middle child, but i was able to go to college. after that, all my younger sisters went to college, and some of them even benefited from scholarships from the union. and i'm proud of that. that's what put our foot in the door to be in the middle class. we had find schools that all of us pay taxes into. my father and us, we stood toe. we won the first and her neighbors to own our own home. gave us so much pride, having a piece of the american dream,

property, a house, defeated is somehow you belong. but as i got older i saw things changing. and i heard so many negative things about unions. people talking bad about what unions were doing the wrong way. well, my life did not show me that. i saw good things happen. i saw that i could compete. i saw that i could go to good stores and good neighborhoods and be safe, because that's what the union provided us. when my father went out on the picket line we didn't have to go out baking for food. because my father got supplemental help from the union. and yes, we were fed and we were able to stay in the house, thank god. we didn't have to put that up. but i have learned a lot but i've learned a lot growing up in a household that is very close and knows that nothing is going to be given to you, but much is always expected of you. and that's something that lives within not even at the department of labor.

and i'll tell you one of the things that we need to remember is that we can't forget our young people. our young people need us more than ever. they need role models. they need to see that all of us are working together, and that we can stand up tall and say that they can also have a piece of that american dream that so many people out there would like us to forget. and say that you know what? tough luck. if you can't pick yourself up from your own bootstraps, that's too bad. i don't believe that it i don't believe that's the vision that this president wants, that i want, that the reverend wants, and that what you want. our dream is a dream for everyone to be able to stand up tall, to be self empowered, to have dignity and respect, no matter where you come from, what zip code, what school you graduated from, or what college you attended. it's not about that. it is about the character of the individual.

it really is. and we must never lose sight of that. [applause] >> i don't think i have to tell you but there's some folks in town right now who want to do away with the safety net for a lot of the folks that i'm talking to, that i'm speaking about. they want to get rid of assistance for veterans. and want to cut the heart out of our job training programs when we've got 12 million people still working -- looking for work to want to move up the ladder. they want to cut financial aid for our students, belgrade programs that are particularly set aside for low income families. if i was not able to get the pell grants, i know i wouldn't be standing in front of you as the first latina labor secretary. because my parents didn't have money to set aside, to bank and say, healthy, here's $1000, here's a hundred dollars for you

to go to college. my father couldn't afford it. he had other things to contend with, like a roof over his head for seven children, to pay for our meals, to make sure that we had a decent place to live, that we have adequate space and that we could share in this comment in this american dream that he so inspired for all of his children to have. there are people proposing cuts to medicaid, and they want to voucher our schools, and our health care programs. they want to get rid of the health care reform program, which the president has put every effort in to help provide assistance for well over 32 million people. why? why now? why now when we have fought so hard? i want to tell you that we need to stand up, and we must not forget that at this critical moment in time we have to understand what the president is fighting for. and the president is fighting right there with you and i.

and it's about fairness. it's about fairness in the workplace. it's about fairness in education, and it's about fairness in terms of what services are provided by government. and if we can't have a say-so in that, then this isn't a dream that all of us have aspired to be a part of. because if people are not paying their taxes, those that can afford it, the billionaires and millionaires, even the folks as you heard yesterday that were in the white house had agreed to pay more, they want to pay more because they know it's their obligation. because that's what we stand by, those principles. that's very, very important for us to understand what the president is fighting for, for fairness. so that we are not overtaxed, so the person that has to go to the small little grocery store in east l.a. or in the bronx doesn't have to pay more than the person that lives in beverly hills. that's what this is about. it's about fairness, and that's what the president is striving for. so let us not forget that.

let us make sure that we continue the fight, the struggle and the movement. and i want to ask you to help us, because the president is going around the country right now talking about the buffett rule. i don't need to go into the details because you should know what that is. before you in this convention, this conference, you will know what it is because it's about fairness. so i want to ask you, brothers and sisters, one final thing. i want to ask you if you're ready to help this president and this administration, and the american people? [applause] and i want to ask you in the spirit of cesar chavez who also fought very hard for workers, for dignity and respect, just as martin luther king fought for the dignity and respect, and put his hand out in support of cesar chavez when his fasting when he was all alone, feeling i nobody

could care about the poorest of the poor. but these two men came together spiritually and became one power. one on different sides of the united states, but bringing us together because in unity there is strength. and diversity there is strength. the president knows that and we know it. so i want to ask if you're going to help us march again. i want to ask you if you're going to help us organize. [applause] and i want to make sure that we are accountable and that we are out there and that we not just fire ourselves up, you know, get excited, but i mean we give it all that we've got. so all i will ask you, are you fired up? [applause] and i want to make sure that when we talk about the budget that is being proposed by the other side of the aisle, that you don't forget that your voices are very, very important. send those e-mails, get on

flickr, get on the websites of those members, and let them know on facebook, let them know where you stand, and the communities that you represent. because if they don't hear you, nobody else is going to step up to the plate. so the onus again is on us. and i'm not going to take no for an answer, and i know my president is going to take no for an answer either. [applause] so i want to ask you to keep on with us, to keep us living that dream that martin luther king shared with all of us, the hope and inspiration that people like cesar chavez and people in this room have dedicated their lives to, like the raven, like so many of you that have sacrificed. it was sacrifice we give so much more. and it makes it so much stronger. i'm so delighted to be here with you, and i think you and i thank the reverend sharpton and i'm proud to march with them on any occasion. thank you.

[applause] >> secretary solis. [applause] >> [inaudible conversations] we are going to have the panel combat the. i don't know, i guess the secretary and i are controversial. they didn't want to be seated appear while we were on stage. [laughter] and were going to finish, to a brief q&a, and then at 11:45 a.m. we will switch to our health care, sector of health and human services, secretary sebelius will go to our health panel before we break for lunch. let me recognize the incoming of

my labour leader at home, george gresham of 1199. give george a hand. [applause] and who was -- okay. you're going to moderate the q&a, right? [inaudible] >> all right, thank you. labor secretary so lease, thank you. [applause] >> i think we have time confidence one more question to drive and the we can go to q&a with the audience. one thing i did want to cover before we wrapped, we do have an election coming up, citizens united really changed the field

as we all know. corporations can now spend unlimited money on political issues, and unions can also do the same now. and citizens united changed activities for unions as well. they can now go knock on doors at nonunion households. side like to ask our panel, generally labor does not like citizens united, but how are you trying to make lemonade out of lemons? and this fall how are you making sure the democrats, including the president, are taking labor, the labor vote for granted? so lee, why don't i take that over to you? >> i think the first thing we've got its it is we will never able to compete as far as resources with the corporations and the ultraconservatives are pouring money into these super pacs. if you look at the amount of money that is gone and since

2012 alone, it's been about $104 million. and that money has been going toward the republicans who are running for president. so we will never be able to compete moneywise with them. but one thing that we do have that they don't, and that's people power. and that's grassroots organization across the country where we are now able to not only knock on union doors, we were we scripted at one time where we could knock on nonunion doors. we'll have to knock on union doors. by now we can knock on union stores and none members alike. so we can blanket those communities and blanket those streets making phone calls, knocking on doors, handing out samples, edge can folks and mobilizing people, organize people to make sure they understand the importance of these elections in 2012. we cannot make the same mistake that we made in 2010. let's face it, i think i've got to be honest with one another a lot of us sat on our hands.

we didn't believe that these elections were that important. and look what happened in 2010 when we lost a lot of governors races. what happened here in washington, d.c. where a lot of tea partiers and ultraconservatives were elected. we cannot let that happen again. we've got to wake up, and i believe we have. we have awaken. but we've got to work our communities. we got to take advantage, even though we disagree with all this money being poured into politics. but we've got to take advantage of the law so we can educate and mobilize our own members. but also educate and mobilize our communities and that's exactly what we are doing. >> let me just say i agree with lee, but i think we know, and we have all been saying it, that we cannot do it by ourselves. we need to create alliances with everybody in this room. so let me just say how i think we could win. they've got lots of money, but

there's lots of people in this country. african-americans and latinos and api are 100 million people in this country. well over one-third of the population. then labor, then women, then conservationists, we are the majority. the problem is we have never worked together. we have always fought our fights on isolation of each other, and there's that old rule of divide and conquer. so what we need to do for this election, and for the future, because we need to win in november, when you to reelect the president. but we also need to win a lot of issues. like we've got to make sure everybody has a living wage, everybody has affordable housing, everybody has access to health care. there's so many things, we need quality schools, they're so many issues that we need to win. so if we get together i think we can not only reelect the president, we can make sure that

we get a progressive agenda. [applause] >> american federation of teachers, our work is all about educational opportunity, economic dignity, democracy, full participation of all of us at the ballot box, civic affairs. and that's what this election is about. and as union leaders, and it is about educating our members and mobilizing so that they go out and influence as teachers, for instance, parents of teachers a 10 -- teachers. that is what will happen this fall to reelect the president. [applause] >> since we have about 10 minutes left, why don't we go to questions from the audience. >> i am from new jersey. first of all, i'd like to thank each and everyone of you for

personalizing this, you know, i just got to say, i've never heard it personalized it in the manner you just described, that how union workers, when they're stripped of the rides as workers, that how that would impact the local community as it relates to not only the government operations, but in terms of her own person community and homes and so forth and so when. so i'd like to just encourage you to drive that message him a little bit more, because as much as i'm offended advocate for lead, you've got me fired up now. my next question is, what are the specific strategies and what is it that you like to see done as it relates to folks in the community that not a member of the libyan art doesn't have a labor job which is everyday people? that's the second question. the third question is that just

looking at the 2004 election, we've had about 45% of the hispanics that turned out that were eligible to vote, 45% voted, and for average americans or blacks, only 65%. now, with the voter id law in place that is trying to strip about 5 million minority votes, what is the strategy? how can we work with you to make sure that we get out the vote and we reelect this president? >> getting out the vote, who would like to take that? tom? >> well, i'm going to use this question, it's a great segue to talk about the machinist union created called u. q. it's a play on words. your union of unemployed. and it's easy to communicate with our members. we have all the infrastructure in place to do that, but what about 23 million americans who don't have a job?

how do we communicate with them and educate them on why it's important to participate in this election? 860,000 disabled americans unemployed. 1.9 million college graduates today don't have a job. 976,000 teenagers. 1.2 million black men. 984,000 latinas. 3.3 million high school graduates don't have a job. 4.8 million white guys don't have a job. 1.1 million black women are unemployed. and associate degree or a college at d&d, 2.9 million can't find a job. asian-americans, 506,000 can't find a job. 1.3 million -- i'm sorry,

3.5 million white women can't find a job. high school dropouts, 1.6 million can't get a job. these people all have something in common from a wide array of life. they don't have a job. and when people have jobs, they have hope and they have skin in the game. and these are the folks we have to reach out to in this election, and help them understand why, going and casting a ballot, and define all the obstacles, the barriers to doing that, these important for them. then i think we make a difference. we unite those people from all walks of life into a common cause. and as one were at the end of the day we win. and it would be nice if the people 11 for a change.

thank you. [applause] >> i just want to circle back to the voter suppression issue. i think one of the greatest things about the labor movement is yes, we care a lot about the people that we directly represent, but we also care about the greater community that we are part of. and it's why do all of us are involved in legislative and promoting things that don't just direct impact our people but we were all involved in the health care debate that took on. if you go back many years, we were right there at the forefront to get the eight hour day. which then brought about the weekend. against child labor laws. so once again, labor will be there again on voter suppression. we know that it is a huge issue in 38 states, and that there are states that are trying to institute laws and statutes that will make it harder for people to vote. and we know in our hearts that that is not right. and so we will be there fighting

for the. the reality is we know that those votes are likely going to make a difference in many, many races, and so we want to make sure that the greater community that we are all about has the right to vote. so i know our unions are involved and i know i'm sure all the unions at this table are very involved, aside from to our regular election were, and for us actually connecting with our members at the workplace because we believe that we have the greatest amount of influence with the people that we know the best. but it's also looking outside and working on issues like voter suppression. >> so thank you for the question. let me just say, our union has been working on creating a national table, and we have about 30 national and local community organizations and unions working together in the latino community particularly. now, there are about 20 million latinos that are eligible to vote. in 2008, about 10 million voted.

which doesn't sound like a lot but that was two and a half million more than voted the previous presidential election. it is expected that in 2012, that our goal is about 12 million people vote. now, if we in fact accomplish that, all of us working together, and we maintain the same ratio of voting for president obama, he will get 1.3 million more votes than he got in 2008. we also happened to be concentrated in many of the battleground states, colorado, nevada, florida, new mexico, arizona. so we can make a big difference. now, in many of these other states, like ohio, pennsylvania, there's a huge latino community and the huge african-american committee. if we can figure out how we work together and both of our committees turned out in greater

numbers than '08 and we maintain a racial support for the president, he will win. but we've got to make sure we do it. [applause] >> very quickly. as reverend sharpton mention, i'm a board member of the national action network. one of the things that reverend sharpton and i have been doing is we have been traveling across the country and going to urban areas and local committees and bringing together labor, bringing together the faith-based communities, other progressive organizations and sitting down with them and talking to them about developing the necessary coalitions that will be effective in achieving our goals in 2012 and beyond. this doesn't happen magically. it really doesn't. this is our work. what we've got to do when we are committed to doing, is not speaking from washington, d.c. and expecting that it's going to magically happen in detroit or cleveland or los angeles. but going into the communities, sitting down with our leadership, of all the community partners and saying, you've got

to put your differences aside and work on the issues that confront all of us. because those issues are to import. and establish a link in those local communities because that's where the action is going to be. it's going to be a grassroots effort. it's good that grassroots effort to do with issues that confront all of us and we got to lead a structure in place of individuals and organizations who are comfortable with one another, for me with one another on a regular basis so they can move a positive agenda forward. [applause] >> and thank you all for hosting this panel today. democrats with the party of jim crow, kkk, the civil rights act of 1960, filibustered the 19 safety for civil rights act that republicans introduced. 94% of senate republicans voted for civil rights act of 64 while 27% democrats oppose it. opposed it. isn't it disingenuous to suggest

that republicans want to disenfranchise the black and hispanic vote? all of y'all playing the race card for political advantage? secondly if voter id laws is suppressing or discriminating a minority though, are you implying entirely that minorities aren't smart enough or too lazy to go to the dmv and get an id card? >> who would like that was because i would love to answer that one. [laughter] >> first of all, if the republicans were that good in the old days we wish to become back to their roots. [applause] >> that would really help. but here's the problem. republicans right now endorsed, supported and passed hb 56 in alabama which is a racial profiling law, a hate law that takes us back to the old days. they supported and passed the same law in south carolina. they supported and passed hb

1070 in arizona. they also, some of their political candidates like candidate romney, says that his agenda makes immigrants live measurable so they self deport. the bottom line is, we are not leaving the republican party to republican party doesn't want us. and if they had an agenda that would actually speak, if they were for workers rights, if they were for living wages, if they were for health care, if they were for immigrant rights, and if they supported us on voters rights, i think that they might get a fair hearing. the problem is that as long as they continue with that kind of agenda, it's going to be real hard for them to beat us up and then expect us to vote for them but it ain't going to happen a. [applause] >> next question. [inaudible] >> we are a little pressed for time. >> i thought it was pretty well. don't think i can say is what you mention, that wasn't then

and this is now a. [applause] so we've got to deal with what is happening to us right now. and again, i mentioned this earlier. there is a coordinated attack, a coordinated attack by the ultraconservatives in this country to take our rights and steal our democracy away from us, make no mistake about it. let me say this. whether you look at collective bargaining writes, when you look at voter rights come with you look at women choice, by the look at civil rights for americans in this country there is a coordinated attack by those in the republican party to support the 1% who have wealth and power in this country, and ignore the other 99%. as far as the voter id, you know, this is really an attack on the battle and the struggle and the five people died for, that people died for to get the right to vote. okay? when they talk about problems with the voting system, when they talk about problems, and

they are so disingenuous. because if you look at it, you will see that fraud within the voting system is less than 1%. yet they want to take away, everyone to institute these voter id laws. that's going back to the jim crow laws of yesterday. we want to go forward, not backwards. [applause] >> we don't have much time left, so moving along. >> i want to ask a question relationship to the voter id. if we wanted to make sure that this law will be i guess nullified by as getting ids, i wonder if we can create some plan so that, first of all, the general public understand that there are some new rules but anything a lot of people are not aware that they will need to have to bring an id to vote. so i'm wondering if there's a way in which we can systematically get this information out into the public

and then mobilize maybe in churches, community centers, where ever we need to do to mobilize people to bring forth a way to enabling us to get ids for the people that can't afford and not aware of it. >> i actually believe that there's lots of efforts going on to do exactly that. so the naacp is involved, very involved. many labor groups involved and we're partnering up unsure nan is working together to not only work the polls but also, as you said, to get information out ahead of time and educate people. so there's lots of efforts going on because of these new laws that have popped up. so i think you're going to see an effort greater than ever before on education with people to make sure that they take the right information to the polls, and they will be able to vote. >> is the panel familiar with

the new world order, that's the dumbing down of america? and china is going to be the next superpower. and things we are going through now is preparing us for the new world order. >> i don't know if there was a question in there. okay, we just had time for one more. spent yet, my name is anthony and i've been a long-standing member with a national network, with the reverend sharpton. the question i want to ask is that, how is it that we can strategize, to keep the jobs in this country? because annie hill said something very important. it doesn't happen overnight. by the time we get there, it's devastating. start like to know is how can we keep the jobs in this country and what can our communities do,

to keep the jobs in this country? and the second job would be, when unemployment falls, does it fall because of the region of a person is maxing out or they just couldn't find a job? i want to know which one is it. thank you. >> i will start with keeping jobs. i can relate with what annie said to i get angry when i dial 800 order something, or go to rent a car in a city i'm going to and it's obvious the person is not in this country. and ask, what are you located? and i will pay more to rent a car to get somebody is located in this country who has a job in our country. [applause] >> so we also have to look at where do we buy. do we buy an american-made goods? because that's how we keep jobs in the country. so check out the label, check out where the product is made in support and buy goods that are made in our country. [applause]

>> this jobless rate that we were told last week that fell by one-tenth of a point actually now is back up this week because unemployment claims have just gone back up again. and the fact of the matter is, people have quit looking because they have become so discouraged. they quit looking for jobs and are no longer counted if we don't talk about the real on climate rate in america, which is twice the number that is reported by the department of labor department of labor. you know, if you use actual payroll statistics from every week, that would tell you the real number. and very simply, but we play games with this notion of unemployment. we have 23 million americans without a job today. that number alone, unemployed people, make all the difference in the next election. that's why we focus on

organizing unemployed workers. not under the banner of any union. we used you cuba as a ploy to get people to look and see what it's about. and then we help them create their own structure and leadership model. in their own communities, and they have the common issue. they are not -- they are now talking to one another. 92000 people signed on as you cubed leaders. they reach every day 23 million unemployed workers. we have although computer technology allows us to follow who they talk to. they are talking to one another. we have to get that focus clearly established in their mind that they've got a job to do. they are unemployed but they've got a job. that job occurs on election day of this year.

and it's going to cast about in this election and help us who do have jobs turn this country back in the right direction. we need everybody's help on that, and that's why -- i cannot go back to my own experiences. we win when everybody works together. and i want to get back into the winning column again, and where people have hope and something to look forward to. [applause] >> i just had a quick question but it's good to see several buckeyes on stage. i had one question regarding card check and secret ballot but everybody here knows, some states, you have to sign a card and once the majority of the car to collect with the employee, the uniform. and other states, you collect the cards and then you do a secret ballot for union information. i know some on the right argue that some union leaders opposition to secret ballot indicates that really you fear

actual employees deciding not to unionize. so i'm wondering and i guess the spirit of openness, if all of you as union leaders would ask a come on the record today and support a secret ballot so that you can make it clear that you do indeed support individual employees rights to choose whether or not to be in the union? thank you. >> i would go on record on the condition that it is against the law, and it is in force that employers can't terrorize employees that have expressed an opinion to organize a union. [applause] that becomes the real issue quite frankly. i'm sure we can all sit up here and tell stories, it probably happens all of us in the public sector because they would have to explode where the funds come from. but there's employers that literally spend millions and millions of dollars to keep unions out of the workforce. why? how many ceos do we know out

there that would go to work without a contract? so that's the real issue, it's what happens between the time that employees expressed a wish to have a union through signing cards, and win the election occurs. that's the real issue. >> the concern is if you're signing your name to a car, then he knows whether or not you voted to unionize. and if they do indeed unionized than those who did not sign the card, they -- >> that's a blatant lie right there. >> you can see that line of reasoning i'm sure. >> no, i can't. that's a blatant lie what you just described to signing a union card doesn't indicate how that person votes in a secret ballot. >> okay. so let me just say i agree with annie on everything she said, but let me just say this on card check. i got married by signing a piece of paper to i bought a house by signing a piece of paper. i bought a car by signing a

piece of paper. i enrolled my kids in school by signing a piece of paper. why can't i join a union by signing a piece of paper? [applause] >> in one brief follow-up. would all of you be willing to enter into a polling station on a voting booth and i should ask for all of your neighbors to see exactly photographs would any of you be willing to do that? >> card check. [inaudible] spent because your name is affixed a piece of paper. >> that's not particular. let's be clear. card check is providing an opportunity for individuals to sign a card at their discretion. nobody is forcing them to do so, to join a union. that's what our position has been. or a secret ballot election, okay. what is happening, and the sister talk about what's happening is the playing field and so on level, okay? and that's one of the reasons why we try to change the law to

select a better field, a stronger link you where your employer intimidation when ever and when wants to join the union, bush of people being fired if they want to be unionize to talk about joining a union, where you have employers once a union is formed delay the contract negotiation until folks are gone so they can have another election. that's what this is about. so don't just concentrate on card check where the individual has a right to the signed card or not sign the card. let's look at the complete universe and talk about labor relations in this country and the unfairness that exists with the employer and employee. [applause] >> sir, we are running out of time. vision but has been very impatient and 10 very patient. spent one more comment to my country and my government except a piece of paper i signed to take up a battle rifle and go defend the interests of this country in place in the globe they would send me.

and i did that by signing a piece of paper. and yet somehow it's wrong for me to be able to sign a piece of paper and say i am proud to be also a member of the union. there's something fundamentally wrong with the mindset out there that says people, workers, don't have value and worth. and that's what this is all about. lee was right earlier about class warfare. this, some people in our society saying there is another class of people that happens to be the majority, that art as worth as much as a select few. i reject that, and any other apostle or disciple they may send to try to convince me otherwise. >> okay. [applause] >> we have just two minutes for this last question. >> mine is really pretty specific to some of the details of the voter suppression, and maybe i'm asking you can share this with people, and when

you're asking to work at the grassroots level that i have an 18 year old, and he went to get a job, and then they allowed him to use his student id but then they said you need a state issued id in order to get the job. so he couldn't get a job until he got his state issued id. so he left there and try to go to the bank. he couldn't, he tried to gouge a bank account, but he could not do that until he got his state issued id. so he went to the dmv. he could not just use his birth certificate and a social security card until he got, he needed something that only my husbands never be on, a utility bill -- >> you want to answer that you wrap it up? >> a government issued id. so he went to its college. he couldn't use a student id. so they're turning all this back over so you need a state issued id. i think we had to get a lease agreement from