country without a strong defense capability? >> absolutely no. with this constituency he speaks with great power about military issues. what i would say to him is if you look at the overall balance of what we're doing, 80,000 regular soldiers, 30,000 p as fully funded which means the army is a similar size after these reforms to what was before. ..

had some questions to answer. now, i, i'm not sure, i'm not sure if there's anyone in this house who doesn't think the shadow chancellor has some questions to answer. i think perhaps before we break for the summer we should remember what a few of those questions are. who designed the regulatory system that failed? who was city minister when norman was setting 1% mortgages. who advice essential in the prime minister that there was no more boom and bust? who helped create the biggest boom, the biggest bust them and his never apologized for the dreadful record he had an office? >> thank you, mr. speaker. it remains the only counting up in england without the direct route service to our capital

city. when the new rail franchises are a portion in august, will he use his good office to ensure this government does everything possible to ensure this is connected to our capital city? >> my honorable friend always speaks up. he's right that wendy's franchises are looked at there are opportunities to make the case before investment and for more services, and i'm sure the operation and others will listen to what he said today. >> thank you, mr. speaker. my constituents is recovering from cancer but she has had -- the government consultation on changing this rule, when are we going to suggest is for the 7000 cancer patients in this situation? >> i've looked carefully at this case and i know she has not had a response from the minister about this issue. as she knows there are two types

of eesa. one where there's permanent support, and is not means tested, and another weather is means testing after a year. what we're doing is making sure that more people with cancer are getting more help and more treatment and i think that is very important. and i think is absolute right to are the two forms of employment and support allowance of those people who can't work virginia we can't work or prepare for work is supported throughout their lives. >> order. point of order, after statements so that is a statement now. i'm grateful to the author jump and. statement, the secretary of state for health. speaking on c-span2 will be the british house of commons now as they move on to other legislative business. you have been watching prime minister's question time aired live wednesdays at 7 a.m. eastern while parliament is in session. you can see this weeks question time again sunday night at 9 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span. and for more information go to

c-span.org, click on c-span series for prime minister's questions, plus links to international news media and legislatures around the world. you can watch recent video including programs given with other international issues. >> this weekend on booktv, growing up in the shadows and secrets of the rocky flats nuclear weapon facility. >> she saw the dominoes start to fall during this time. by 1979 she was a full-fledged opposition to carter and what she saw a car tourism, that appeasement and particularly crucial in this respect in 1979

she saw the fall of the shaw and the fall of others in nicaragua from a couple of lacerating experiences for her and people like her. >> the political woman behind the reagan cold war doctrine sunday night at nine, and that 10, marine sniper and author of job had -- all part of booktv this weekend on c-span2. >> republican presidential candidate mitt romney held accountable meeting yesterday where he told the president the outsourcer in chief, and commented on the president's proposed tax extension for households earning less than $250,000 a year. the former governor also talked about his work at bain capital and what he's looking for in a running mink. this demand was held at central high school in grand junction, colorado. thank you so much. what a welcome. thank you.

grand junction, what a welcome. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, please. wow, that's a hello, i'll tell you. that's terrific. thank you so much. good to be here with your elected officials, and they see the attorney general is back at the please stand and be recognized. thank you, general. appreciate you being here. [applause] he has been leading my campaign in the state. i'm counting on him to get me a win here. are we going to win here in november? [cheers and applause] colorado could well be the place that decides our next president is going to be, and if it is the place that decides that i'm counting on you to get the job done. [applause] now let me offer a few words to begin with just about the fact that the whole nation has been watching colorado over the last,

well, days and weeks as the wildfires have changed the lives of so many people. there's been a loss of life, as you know, and the loss of hundreds of homes, lives have been changed, and our hearts go out to the people in colorado who have been affected by the tragedy of these wildfires. we've also seen some of the greatness of the human spirit demonstrated by the people of colorado as -- [applause] as you have come forward to not only fight the blazes but to fight the devastation and lives affected by the fires your and it's been interesting to read the stories and hear the experiences of people who made a difference in the lives of others. one of those that like to call out today is someone who you may have seen or heard about, j.d., i got 15 years of age was doing

some lawnmowing around the house as i understand and saw some smoke in the distance and realize to some people could be hurt by that fire. so he got on his four wheeler and drove off to go warn people. and the fire was pretty darn close, as he went around and warned people. he helped them take activity to get themselves out of harm's way. and then the fire closed in behind to he knew his dad was behind watching and would be worried about in the mike redman for the fire himself but he turned round and took his four wheeler through the fire, got himself pretty bird, first and second degree burns, blisters all over his arms and hospital, but he did it all because he was worried about people around him who might be suffering by virtue of this fire. he's a hero among us. j.d., would you stand and be recognized? [cheers and applause] thanks, buddy.

you know, jd, take it personal personally. we love what you did, and we love the spirit that drove you to do something like that. and we also, we celebrate the greatness of humanity, of people acting beyond themselves for something bigger than themselves. it's part of the american experience. it's part of what defines this great country. and so on here to talk to you about the course for the country and what lies ahead for america. i know that last week the middle class of america got a kick in the gut when the jobs numbers cannot. we found that we created only 80,000 jobs. our nation needs to create about double that if we're going to keep up with a population growth

of our nation, and so we are falling further behind under this presidency and that's one reason why we're going to change and get someone in there who will get this economy going. [cheers and applause] but, but this week the president added insult to injury with another kick in the gut by announcing that he has a plan he said to lower taxes. were all excited when we heard that but you've got to be careful. when people in washington say they are lowering taxes, hold onto your wallet. because, in fact, he didn't lower taxes for anybody. for some people he announced your taxes are going to stay the same. in washington that means you lower taxes. so your taxes are going to be the same. and then for others, for job creators and small businesses he announced a massive tax increase. [booing] so at the very time the american people are seeing fewer jobs created than winnie, the president announces he going to

make it harder for jobs to be created. i just don't think this president understands our economy works. liberals have an entirely different view of what makes america the economic powerhouse it is the i love what ronald reagan said. ronald reagan said effectively these words. he said it's not the liberals are ignorant. it's just that what they know is wrong. [applause] and the idea, the very idea of raising taxes on small business and job creators at the very time we need more jobs is the sort of thing only an extreme liberal can come up with. this is the sort of thing that used to be in the democratic party in times past. bill clinton called himself a new democrat. he put that behind them. he believed in smaller government, reform welfare as we know to try to get the economy going with trade and other

provisions, lower taxes. new democrats have done some good things to a lot of republicans have done some good things at this old style liberalism of bigger and bigger government and bigger and bigger taxes has got to him and we will end it in november. [cheers and applause] you know, the president said just give his policy sometime. now that's a change, a rhetoric because you see when he got inaugurated, he went on the today show shortly after and he said if i can turn the economy around in three years i will be looking at a one term proposition, and we are here to collect. [cheers and applause] we have now seen, we have now

seen him measure by some metric because he said that if we let him borrow $787 billion for his stimulus, so-called common that it would be able to keep unemployment below 8%, below 8%. it has been above 8% every month since, 41 straight months by their own measure. he has failed his policies. do not work. liberal direction for the contra are the wrong directions for the country. [cheers and applause] you look at what he did, and i know liberals like him think these things will help, but they didn't. and we know they didn't. and evidence that they didn't work is the numbers are obvious. these are not just statistics. these are real americans. these are people who need work and can't find it. people and part-time jobs that

need full-time work. it's kids coming out of high school are coming out of college they can't find work. half of america's graduates from college this year coming out of school couldn't find work, or work consistent with the skills. it's just a human tragedy. did you hear what, what dick armey said? he said by the way the american dream is no longer owning your own home. it's getting the kids out of the home you own. people are having to go back home. i'm applying a little humor to a very sad cynic were a lot of people are suffering to a lot of a lot of peoples are not getting the homes they expected, the families expected because the policies of this prison. he said give them some time. let's look at the policy that asked to these help create jobs, or do they make it harder for jobs to be created. look at his energy policy. his energy policy was to say let's slow down the develop an of goal.

he said by the way back during his campaign if someone once to build a new coal-fired plant they will go bankrupt. so we put that into place with regulations making it harder and harder to mine coal or use goal. in with oil he prevented us from drilling in the gulf, prevents us from going in and warned, prevents us from drilling in the continental shelf. then you have natural gas. natural gas reserves but the federal government trying to insert itself, and fracking regulations with always regulate fracking for decades at the state level. to these energy policies help create jobs? >> no. >> you right. and the more he pursues those policies the harder it would be for americans to go back to work. there are other policies. the artist trade policies. you see, fully productive nation like ours, ours is the most productive workforce in the world of any major nations. it's good to be able to trade with other nations. it creates more jobs. during the last three and half years, european nations and

china have created some 44 different agreements, trade agreements. this president has put together none. none. in addition, his trade policies are affected by his stance towards china. china has been stealing our designs, our patents, our knowhow, our brand name, brand names. it's been hacking into computers, old corporate computers as was government of computers. it's manipulated our currency. the president refuses to recognize the currency manipulation official. if i'm president of the nice its i have a very different view than his. my view is his trade policies don't work to create american jobs. do you think they're working to create american jobs? by the way, he likes to talk about outsourcing. he's run some interesting attack ads on the on that topic. you may have seen it, and interestingly an independent unbiased fact checking

organization looks at his ad and look at that attack inside its false and misleading. but it is interesting that when it comes to outsourcing, that this president has been outsourcing a good deal of american jobs himself by putting money into energy companies, solar and wind energy company that end up making their products outside the train it. if there's an outsourcer in chief them it's the president of the united states, not the guy who's running to replace him. [applause] there's another part of his policy that relates to the economy and that is every year trillion dollar deficits. do you believe permanent trillion dollar deficits will create american jobs? >> no. >> mention one more, and that is regulatory burden. look, you need to have regulations to make an economy work.

if you can't have people all running off and starting banks for instance, in the garage and taking money from their neighbors. you have to have regulations that make an economy effective, and lost do that as well. so you need regulation but you need them updated and modern. this president has increased the rate of new major regulations by about threefold over his predecessor. you believe adding regulation help small businesses grow and add jobs? >> no. >> okay, it's a unanimous. the president's policies are not creating jobs. it's making it harder for this economy to recover, to of this president pursuing liberal policies that didn't work back in the past and certainly won't work now and in modern america. i have a very different vision. [applause] let me tell you what i would do. let me mention five steps i would take to get this economy going. number one i would take

advantage of our energy resources, coal, gas got oil. our renewables. [applause] number two am going to take advantage of trade opportunities, particularly in latin america. we had opened up new markets for goods. number three, i'm going to cut back on the size of government. it's taking too much out of our paychecks. [applause] my test -- look, i'm going to look at all the programs we have in government and ask this question. is this program so critical to america that it's worth borrowing money from china to pay for it? and on that basis the first one on getting rid of is obamnicare. [cheers and applause]

-- obamacare. so one energy, to trade, three cutting back on the size of government. for is making sure that our workers and our kids have the skills for the jobs of today and tomorrow. we need schools that are best in the world, not at the bottom quartile or bottom third of the world. and the president -- [applause] the president talks that talk. he talks about investing in our kids in improving our schools. but look what happened when the president largest contributor to his campaign and the campaigns of his fellow democrats comes to the teachers unions. it means that the teachers union bosses have a big say, and too often the interest of those union bosses is placed ahead of the teachers and the kids and that's got to change.

[applause] and one more. and perhaps the most important in some respects, that is the fifth mission is restoring economic freedom. and this countries economy is propelled by free people pursuing their dreams, working hard and some cases starting small businesses, in some cases reaching for new job opportunities that they think will improve their lot or improve their families law. it is americans dreaming, building, creating, entrepreneurs, innovators the drive our economy. and that put us ahead of europe and the great populate nations of asia. this economic freedom was a vision by the found. they said that the constitution, excuse me.

they said that the creator endowed us with our rights, not the, not the -- [applause] >> and those rights of course are protected by the constitution. and among those rights that they described in the declaration of independence were life, and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. that, that phrase pursuit of happiness mean that in this country this people will be free to pursue happiness as they choose, not as government directs but not limited by the circumstance of birth. it's the nature of america free people pursuing their dreams. and dreams, and dreams are being crushed with taxes go up and up

and up on job creators and business creators, when regulations become overwhelming and burdensome. when the people in government sometimes treat you like your the enemy instead of the friend. if i'm the president of the united states, what i will do is do everything in my power to make should this is the best place in the world for entrepreneurs, innovators, small businesses, big businesses. i will make my job one creating good jobs for the american people. [applause] so let me come back to you. i have spoken lower than you might have expected, less than i sometimes do, and i'm going to turn to you and ask you for any questions you might have. and i do my best to respond to this guy is already up with a question there. so we will come to that -- will come to that and then i will end with a few thoughts. please go ahead.

[inaudible] >> obama said he created 80,000 jobs and they let it of that. they didn't say that he lost 150,000 jobs. i've been listening to alan west talk. he would make a great vice president. he's a fighter and that's what we want. >> thank you. all suggestions are welcome. and i can say this. you know, we are fortunate that the american people get their information from a larger and larger array of outlets. and so people get their news from cable, from talk shows on the radio, from the internet. and the people find sources that defined to be the most reliable. and so we are able to communicate broadly to the american people, not just for one or two networks or more but

instead through a whole post of vehicles. and that's what i think, for instance, when the president came up with obamacare, and when the mainstream media by and large thought it was okay, and encouraged people to accept it, the american people instead gather information from a wide array of sources and recognize that it's bad medicine. it's bad economics. it's bad policy that's got to go. so i'm hopeful despite the fact that i realize that now and then i'm fighting an uphill battle and some organs of the national media that nonetheless there some people who are open and unbiased that are willing to get our message across. and by the way, i can't wait for the debates to have a chance to go face-to-face with the president. [applause] and so people will watch for an hour or an hour and half, three times, and get to see our different perspective. look, the president the other day was kind enough to give me a

call on the day that a cinch the nomination and he said, he said i congratulate you. and then he said, i think the country would benefit from an important and honest debate on the issues. and on the course for america, the future for america. and i think that's absolutely right. so far his campaign hasn't started a. all they're doing is attacking on every diversion they can come up with it but i do hope at some point the president gets serious about talking about the direction for the country and the fact the direction he has taken us in so far has not what america to work, has not fulfilled his promises and it's time in the view of the megan people to take this country in a different direction and make us strong again. [applause] thank you. [inaudible] >> can't quite hear you. you work for a military

contractor and have for many years. spent what bothers me is a lot of the equipment he was military uses is foreign-made. pci bus made by mercedes-benz. our troops are forced to use a little italian pistol that should salute nine-millimeter -- [inaudible] you know, that's nice if they want to support all of the economies of the world, but what about our workers here? you have every piece of manufactured equipment for the was military made here in the united states, you have found another couple million jobs to we already have. [applause] >> yeah, i, i actually believe that america can make the best products in the world, and that if we make the best products in

the world we will be able to make sure that not only in a military but in our homes as well we are buying american products. i believe the competition and a president to put in place policies that helps american manufacturers of all kinds to compete will create american jobs and will put those jobs back into this country that have left in many cases. i read an article the other day by a columnist at the "washington post." his name is david ignatius. he said a study has shown that if we were to be served by taking advantage of our goal, our oil, our gas and renewables, that america could be the largest energy producing nation in the world within 10 years. and that if we did that, if we did that and had low cost available energy to manufacture would come back to this country. if we want american goods to be the best in the world, we want to make sure that the input costs, our energy cost are competitive, they can be, there will be.

you will see that happen. let me mention something else about our military commitments while you raise the topic. and that is this. i'm concerned that after the conflict with into a lot of our military equipment has been shot up and as damage and will need to be replaced. and i know there are some who think we should become eyes on the military and we should cut back on our military capacity. it seems to be the one place the president is comfortable cutting, which is our military spending. he is cutting the number of ships we will make him the number of aircraft we purchase. he wants to cut the number of active during personnel in the military. our military must be second to none. it must be so superior known in the world would ever think of challenging it. [applause] and so, and so i would, i would take shipbuilding from nine for your to 15 per year.

i would buy more aircraft. i would add 100,000 anti-personal tour military ranks, and i would make sure our veterans get the care they so richly deserve. [applause] go ahead. he has a notepad here, okay. go ahead. not fair. i need a notepad spent so this show be the first time i will have the privilege of voting. >> excellent. >> i've paid a lot more attention to politics than i have. and i have to is a senior in person is give me a lot more respect for you in person. i've enjoyed the sincere passion you for this country. i totally understand your position on small government. i think it's an honorable stance that doesn't, it doesn't necessarily give the credit it deserves for what it is trying to do. and i see that you project yourself as somebody that is a champion of liberty. i was really moved when he said

the country is propelled by three people and that one of the cornerstones that we are allowed to pursue our own happiness, if we so choose to do. i mean, it's kind of personal and maybe strangeness economic discussion here, but i mean, i guess as an example considering, for instance, your affiliation and it being a minority. just my question is, in terms of, like, in terms of social, in terms of social equality and in terms of like women's rights or gay rights and liberty in that area, what is so wrong about exploring liberty and giving liberty to everyone in every field, not just in the economy? >> i do believe in providing personal liberty, economic liberty, political liberty to the american people and believe that everyone in this country should have an opportunity to pursue the course of life as they choose. i believe that's what makes america america, and so i --

[applause] i don't -- i, i support the statement that you make and there maybe some places we have some different, different viewpoints. i mean, i for instance, believe that when it comes to a very tender issue, which is the issue of abortion, i know americans while many americans come to different conclusions on that topic. and some like myself attach importance to the unborn child as a life just as we do -- [applause] just, just, just as we do to the mom him and to the carrying the unborn child. because there are two lives and called we have two-way what is the right course and protecting liberty and life in that setting, and my view is that we

should protect the sanctity of life, unborn and living. unborn and born your so there's some of these issues that are very difficult for some and i believe that people come to different conclusions out of their well-meaning content. so not all these issues are easy. i think we should show respect to people who come to other conclusions, acknowledge the rights our reach the conclusion that ultimately let the american people make the decision as to what they think is right. i don't think, i don't think that on an up or issue like that he should be decided a one vote majority the supreme court. i think these decisions should ultimately be decided by the american people. now thank you. i'm over here. yes, sir. i will give you this one. >> you won't get this back. will you be announcing your vice president selection before or

after orlando? >> camp of questioning the republican convention? >> now. >> yes. [laughter] i can't give you, i can give you a timeline for the. that's the decision will make down the road. nor can i give you the individual. i can tell you that the person i choose you will look at and say well, as a person who could be president if that were necessary, and that for me as the most important single criteria. thank you. [applause] spent yeah, representative? >> as a state legislature will you stop sending us on funded mandates? >> yeah. you see, you see state legislators and former governors

have that piece and one of them is when the federal government tells you you've got to do some and then doesn't send the money for you to do it. and that happens too often. i actually have a different plan altogether, which you're going to find creates an awful lot of work for you and your colleagues. it happens to be a mighty good for america. and that is we have some big -- the federal government has become so large and unwieldy in that in many cases it is being covered our programs are managed by people who are so out of touch from let's act of happening in people's lives that they are just not doing the job that programs out to do. so i would take a program like medicaid, which my wife is a program for poor, for poor individuals that need health care, provides health care, health care services to the poor. i would take that hundreds of billions of dollars and i would cut it up state by state based on the shares they're getting this year and send it to colorado to say you care for your own pores health care in what you think best. and likewise --

[applause] and that might about all sorts to housing vouchers and food stamps, other programs to help the very poor in your community because my experience is that what it means to be poor in massachusetts is different than montana or mississippi. and i would rather let the legislators and the governors of the respective states decide what's the best way to provide care for those that need to care. we are a generous people. we are a compassionate and generous people. we want to have a strong and able safety net for the people who need our care, but i believe that these major programs to the extent they did a managed effectively at the state level should be managed there. it will make a better job, and by the way, it will save a lot of money. because instead of all these bureaucrats and all these programs that in many cases just don't apply to a state like colorado as effectively as a my

summer else, we could save. do you know, job training programs that are by the way, federal job training programs? 47. 47 different federal job training programs. they report to eight different agencies of the federal government to think of the overlap, the bureaucrats. it's just, i would take that money and say here colorado, you use your money as you feel best to train your own people. so that means work as you transition to that kind of a statement program. of my view is i like competition. i like states competing with each other, learning from each other, and i, i -- [applause] i have to tell you. i have to tell you my favorite story about states competing. i learned it when i just was a new governor, because i wanted my state to grow and add jobs, and my fellow governor, governor schwarzenegger also want the same thing for his state.

so he came to massachusetts, put billboards up with him on the billboard, wearing a t-shirt with big muscles and has had come to california. here he was poaching jobs from a fellow republican state, and so i put billboards up in his state with me in a t-shirt flexing my muscles. [laughter] and it says smaller muscles but much more lower taxes, come to massachusetts, all right? [applause] >> governor, i'm the local bni the crime question for you. about 16 years ago we had a horrible double murder less than a mile from where you're standing what a 17 year old young man was raping an 11 year old girl and killed her and her 42 year-old mother. i prosecuted it. the mesa county jury convicted him of first degree murder. and mesa county judge sent him to prison for the rest of his

life. the colorado supreme court said that's right. last week the u.s. supreme court said that was cruel and unusual punishment. what do you think about that and what do we do about things like that to keep our streets safe? >> well, i -- [applause] you know, this is another issue that a number of people feel, come out on different sides on, people of good faith. i, for instance, you, i realized this was not a death penalty case. yours was a life imprisonment? but i happen to believe that the death penalty tends to prevent some of the most heinous crimes and that's where -- [applause] and, and i also believe obviously that the prison terms that are the nature you describe can also prevent some of the

most heinous crimes from occurring. this is a decision which is known and made state-by-state i would in this case the supreme court was looking at the age of the offender. i'll take him a 17 year-old, a setting like that is one that breaks my heart but i will look at that particular case but i can't tell you, i'm someone who comes down on the side of swift and severe punishment for those who commit these serious crimes. [applause] >> tell us about your plan for education your. >> thank you. let me give you about my own expense in education and that is i came into a state where my predecessors had taken some action to reform our education system, and they did a good job. this was back in 1993, a long time ago. they said for kids that are

going to be in high school, to graduate with a degree they need to pass an exam. in math and in english. and i had a -- i added science to the. and we're also going to the state takeover schools that are chronically failing, fix them. and we're going to equalize some of the funding for students and we're going to open up more charter schools and open the door to charter schools in our state the people of greater choice. and, and interestingly these measures and others had a big impact. massachusetts for students are ranked now number one in the nation. there are four measures. we rank number one in all four measures out of all 50 states. and i added something else to what they do. i said those who pass this exam, the graduation exam, if you pass in the top quarter of your high school class, you aren't in titled to a scholarship which were established which is four years tuition free at a massachusetts institution of

higher learning, public institution. and so -- [applause] so we created a big incentive for kids to do well, for schools to do well, for schools that trouble to be managed by folks that into the back on track. by the way, the provision, the original legislation said, there was a provision in the union contract which was anything with the education of a child. of the school got in trouble we could get rid of that provision. and by the way, we added charter schools. when i was governor the teachers union wasn't happy with all those charter schools. they passed a law putting a moratorium on new charter schools and i vetoed it. you might think that stopped it, but in my state, the democrats had 87% of the legislature. so you might think it's going to be hard for my veto to be of help in this case the black caucus came to my aid, along with a number of other leading democrats and you know what, particularly an urban area our kids get school choice to get out of some of the worst schools.

so i'm convinced that school choice and academicians i described make a big difference. so what i have said is this. if i'm president the federal dollars in education, those are dollars that go to the poor, disabled, the federal dollars are going to be unattached to the child, not to the school or the state or the district, and so the child can go to whatever school they want and take those dollars with him so we empower school choice across the nation. [applause] back year. yes, sir. [inaudible] >> here comes the microphone. you've got a big voice but this will help. >> something that is very important to people in this area, former law enforcement personnel would like to speak on -- [inaudible] [applause] >> do you know why i love the

constitution? unalike all of the amendments. i'm happy with all of them, and the second amendment is one which i respected i believe that people should have the right to bear arms for whatever legal purpose they have in mind. simple answer. [applause] >> in the debates unsure you're going to be hammered about what the other team likes to call romneycare. but why don't you make the point that that was what the people of massachusetts put you in their to do and you did with the people of massachusetts want you to do and didn't force it down somebody's throat? [applause] >> yeah, thank you. i sure hope the president brings it up, because, because i'll point out the differences between what we've did and what he did. what we did was work in a bipartisan basis. my legislature look at our bill, and of the 200 legislators, only two voted against it of 200.

the business community, the labor community, the advocates for the poor all came together and said this is a good step forward. not perfect why a longish but and by the way, i vetoed a number of measures in the bill and those were upheld. but nontheless, it was something we worked out for our own state. i love the idea that the founders, founding fathers had of federalism, kind of a strange term to describe the fact that states are the places where we made key decisions that affect the lives of people. and i like that idea. and -- [applause] and i, and i don't like the idea of the federal government coming in and saying we're going to take away the rights of states. we will impose the will of one party, one party exclusively on the entire nation. our nation is divided about half-and-half between republicans and democrats but they said we will impose our will on the entire nation and raise taxes by $500 billion, cut medicare by $500 billion. by the way, when you're more

liberal friends say gosh, you republicans are going to cut my medicare, my social security, say no, no, no. no, no. and one president that is cut medicare by $500 billion this is president obama. i want to save and reform medicare and means test is a higher income people will get as big as benefits as low income people so i will reserve those and despite has not. thank you, good point. i will keep it in mind. back here, all right. >> qaeda comment and a question. so why is the obama team and a liberal media want us to think that we should be more angry with what you do with your money than what obama has done with mine? [applause] >> yeah, thank you.

i'm not going to apologize for success at home are not going to apologize for america abroad. and you know i went out and began the business and the business turned out to be far more successful than i ever would've imagined. and by the way, the profits of the business overwhelmingly went to the people who invested with us. pension funds and even a church pension fund. not my church, someone else but if you want to know who's, let me know and i will let you know. in the process were able to create jobs in our own little business and some of the places that we invested were able to great jobs as well. i saw a report by my former company, bain capital, the one i helped start, that said that they are invest in 350 companies over the years, that 80% of them grew which is good news, and 5%

went bankrupt. and you can imagine the only one children about from the other side are the 5%. you won't hear about the 80% where jobs were created, but i find that very different. as you point out, between investing my money and money of people who provided me with the resources for the purpose of my investing it, that when the president take your tax dollars and invests it in the businesses of companies of his campaign contributor. like solyndra anne castle and into one and so forth are some of the tomb and we don't like the government picking winners and losers. in fact, they're just picking losers. if, i, i want, i believe the government can play a very important role in encouraging science and technology and research but i believe in encouraging those things. i do not believe in investing hundreds of millions, billions and billions of dollars in companies that have political connection. it's wrong. it smacks of corruption.

it is not the right course for this nation to take and i will get us out of that practice in a big hurry. thank you so much. look, i'm told, i'm told i get one more question. >> our tax code, bad. and it's full of corruption because a lobbyist go in there and dictate what's going on. to support a fair tax or a flat tax that would get rid of the nonsense of this -- [applause] >> yeah, thank you. look, i want to see us simplify the tax code. i want to see it simpler, flatter, fire. what i proposed at this stage is this. i want to lower the marginal tax rate. that's the tax rate you pay across the board by some 20%. so top rate goes from 35 to 28 and so forth. bring the rates down. i will limit the deductions and exemptions, all right, so we can

pay for that deduction. and you think, well, then what have we accomplished? what we've accomplished is this. small business and entrepreneurs will be able to get more of the money to build their business which is what i want to have done because for me it's all about jobs. it's creating good jobs for the american people. so i want to bring those tax rates down. and you know i'll be happy to look at other measures, the flat tax, the fair tax. i want to make sure that we don't reduce the burden on the highest income taxpayers, we don't raise the taxes on middle income taxpayers. for me by the way this campaign is about the middle class and about the poor. it's not about the rich. the rich are going to define whoever is elected. it's the people, it's the great majority of americans who are hurting under this president who need help and i'm running to help, don't those people and will do it. and let me say this. [applause] let me just note this. this is, this is a critical juncture for america. and you know that. the president says that. i say that. the question is are we going to

be headed in the direction of the liberal policies of the past or are we instead going to take the kind of approach that has proven time and again to build the strongest economy in the world? with using our energy resources, opening up trade, even bill clinton recognize the wisdom of fair trade and free trade around the world. of making sure we restrain the size of government, of investing our time and talents and providing jobs, education for kids, and also in preserving economic freedom. are we going to do is think? if we do those things this economy will come roaring back. we will surprise a world without strong america is, how many jobs we create. i'm convinced that's what's going to happen if i get elected and were able to take that new course. but i can do this. a consequence of getting it right is so marvelous and so terrific. we will be able to have good jobs for the people today who need it. we will be able to be confident that kids can find jobs they need when they come out of

school. and we'll be able to preserve liberty for ourselves and our friends at and i say that coming from a conversation, a number of months ago with leaders in great britain, with tony blair and david cameron, and a number of the leaders there. one of them said this to me. he said and five, if you're lucky enough to be elected president of the united states and you travel around from a foreign capital from foreign capital am a you'll undoubtedly have rehearsed for you all the mistakes they think america is making. but please don't ever forget this fact. the one thing, he said, we all fear the most is a weak america. [applause] american strength, american strength is the best ally peace has ever known. strong values, strong homes, conviction and our constitution

and and our principles but a strong economy that is creating jobs. a strong military, second to none. the world depends upon it. our children depend upon. that's what this election is going to come down to, keeping america strong creating the jobs and a comic that will allow us to do what i will get the job done. i will keep america the hope of the earth with your help. thank you so very much. thank you. [cheers and applause] ♪ ♪ at this housing immigration and customs enforcement director john morton testified about illegal immigration and deportation under the obama administration. the house border and maritime sector and held a hearing in light of the supreme court ruling on arizona's immigration law.

south carolina and alabama have passed similar laws recently about law and local law-enforcement that checks immigration status. in june, president obama announced a new immigration policy of stopping the deportation of some illegal immigrants who came to the u.s. as children. this is just over an hour. >> the committee on homeland security, subcommittee on board and will come to order.

examine how the department homeland security can better leverage state and local partnerships to programs like secure communities and our witness today is john morton was the drug of immigration and customs enforcement, and i would just begin by opening statements by welcoming the director. we are sincerely appreciative of his participation today and will also want to of course extend our condolences on the recent shooting of a i.c.e. age and calvin harrison which certainly demonstrates the risks that are agents, brave men and women on the frontlines are facing each and every day and was urban pray for a speedy recovery. as well. and again i want to thank the director and the men and women of immigration and customs enforcement to do a magnificent job. and i think all of us here on this subcommittee want to do everything in our power to make sure that we give i.c.e. the tools and resources and the support they need to get the job done. tangible border security requires that we take a layered approach and not just solely

focus on the line in the senate separates the u.s. from mexico. we have the long liquid poured we share with can do, or of course the thousands of miles of coastline. because the truth is despite our best efforts and the money was done on personal, technology, drugs and gym smugglers and those will inevitably try to find a way through. not only to hard-working people come across the border in search of a better life, but human smugglers and drug cartels, drug mules also come into this country with less motivation often prey on innocent. i think it's important to note when we discuss border security, these are security cannot be overlooked. estimates vary but the core truth is many who enter the country illegally walk through the front door. they never leave following expiration of their visas. we saw that with some of the 9/11 terrorists, even the recent case of attempted capital bomber it were all here on extended overstays, tracking down overseas and removing dangerous

criminals and recent border crossers espresso squiggle enforcement letter. we think about what a secure border and civic amenities actually look like. i would remind my colleagues as well that every single person who crosses the border illegally of course has committed a crime and we can't ignore the fact or sweep it under the rug. sending a message that let you commit a series come that will not bother with the efforts to deport you is i think a dangerous signal to be sending, threatens the safety of our country. prioritization of limited resources for the most dangerous criminals certainly makes sense, but i.c.e. as well can't ignore low-level comes because of the very real potential that will go on to commit more serious crimes. aside from entering the country illegally, which is a violation of the law. when we think about what is the best use of our limited resources, we should be fully cognizant of the fact that although i.c.e. is a large organization with more than 20,000 agents, the scope of the immigration border security problem is very large for them

to tackle alone. we can certainly debate the merits and wisdom of tough immigration laws by i.c.e. also needs to be cultivating and leveraging partnerships with state and local governments who are more often than not willing to share the burden and ensure the director will be talking about that today. we've seen some delays in the rollout of the secured communities in alabama, because of a disagreement with a tough state law. and we've also seen a go slow approach to the rollout in illinois in cook county particular which refuses to honor i.c.e. detainees or even the most dangerous criminals putting citizens and the nation at risk. i'm sure we'll have some questions for the director about those two incidents as well. immigration enforcement is certainly a federal responsibility. congress is authorized state and local law-enforcement to provide support in certain circumstances. to secure communities in the 287 she program and others are critical component in the last line of defense. congress created secure communities in fiscal year 20

'08 as a pilot program to establish the capability to identify all criminal aliens or potential criminal aliens at a time of arrest. and then activated jurisdictions which is not about 90 some% of entire country for all those rest of their finger prints run against databases determine if there in the country elderly or not. program, a permanent program is in operation as i said in all these jurisdictions nationwide with ago of having the program online nationwide by the end of issue. and since the program was activate it has helped lead to removal of more than 141,000 convicted criminals who are unlawfully present in this country. so i find it amazing really that with so much opposition to this program, fully 94% of the aliens deported by this very valuable program either convicted criminals or recent border crosses on the crossers or visa overstays. this begs a very simple question

of how can you post a program with those result in lesser not really tested in this nation securing our borders are however this is precisely the position several open for groups have advocated and formalized as well in the security mary's task force report. ultimately, resulting in i.c.e. adoption of a policy to halt deportation until actual convictions for lower level traffic violations. ..

that is the purpose of this hearing. the chair recognizes ranking minority member, mr. cuellar. >> i would like to thank director morton for joining us today. i look forward to his testimony. before we begin of the like to express my condolences to the family of the border patrol agent who died in the line of duty on july 6th after an accident near fort hancock in west texas and to wish a quick recovery to special agent harrison who was shot in the line of duty. you are heading over to visit the family and him also. he was shot last week.

thank you for -- one of the county's i represent, this terrible incident is a reminder that the men and women of dhs law enforcement put their lives on the line every day to make our country more secure. we appreciate their service and sacrifice. the purpose of today's hearing is to examine the status of ice, secure communities program with the agency's plan for the future of the program. removing criminal aliens from the u.s. is a congressional priority since 1986 with the passage of the immigration reform act. the department of homeland security and its predecessor agency have programs targeting removal since 1988. under the secure community program, law enforcement agencies miss the fingerprints for criminal background check,

fingerprints are automatically extended to ice against them. when i was traveling by congressional district on want to have my congressional districts, we told the folks it was a very simple thing. when they put a finger print check the criminal background but once in jail they give the fingerprints now they send off the immigration status and it is common sense approach. you are all 254 counties in texas and all across the couple states we want to talk about in a few minutes. the ice report shows through march 31st, 2012, more than 130,000 immigrants convicted of crimes including 49,000 convicted of felony offense like murder and rape were removed from the u.s. for identification to secure community. my brother was a border sheriff

and an example of somebody in jail and turned out he was there for murder in another state. the community does work and helps the local border law-enforcement. given ice relative limits compared to the number of individuals unlawfully presented in the u.s. prioritizing criminals particularly serious criminals for removal keeps our communities safer and the best use of taxpayer dollars. the community program has not been without controversy. i understand that and pleased to say under the director's leadership taken steps to create enhancements to the program. i was in houston with the sheriff telling me about the task force put together to make sure ice was working to improve communication with state and local jurisdictions and secure communities in houston and harris county and other parts

and we want to thank you to make sure we minimize concerns with the possibility of racial profiling in the program. i hope to hear from director morton about ice progress in this particular effort. i also hope to hear how he intends to assure the program meets its stated mission of focusing or removing serious criminal aliens from this country. as a member of congress we want to make sure the agencies understand what is your core mission to make sure you accomplish those objectives. representative border community i know how important these are in addressing the issue of illegal immigration given its importance. i hope we have a thoughtful focused discussion on secure communities today and i look forward to having a productive dialogue with you and i want to thank the chairwoman and ranking member of the committee, mr. thompson for all the work they're doing.

i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair recognizes the ranking member from mississippi, mr. thompson, for his statement. >> thank you. welcome, director morton. good to see you again. i strongly support the administration's decision to identify and remove aliens who may pose a threat to national security or public safety. it is imperative that programs be focused first and foremost on removing serious criminal offenders given ice's limited enforcement resources. the program must be a benefit to racial profiling the and protect community police relations. in september of 2011 report the homeland security advisory council task force on secure communities made important

recommendations to improve the program. i agree with the recommendation that ice developed a good working relationships with participating states, cities and communities, implement mechanisms to insure the program, prioritize those that pose a risk to public safety on national security and most importantly strengthen mechanisms to prevent civil rights and civil liberties violations. in response to the report ice plans to implement several changes to the secure communities program to address the task force's recommendation. i look forward to hearing from director morton today about the status of these efforts and what changes we should expect. some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continued to describe ice's risk-based support to the removal of undocumented aliens with her they be brought to ice

through secure communities or another program as administrative and nasty and i have said before unless and until congress appropriates sufficient funds for ice to apprehend and remove every undocumented alien in the country we should support the agency's efforts to focus its limited resources on removing those undocumented aliens who pose the greatest threat to our nation. and under current administration ice has removed more than under the bush should ministration or any administration, democrat or republican. i would like to recommend -- recognize director morton for the job he is doing and look forward to hearing from him and certainly he will provide the

subcommittee with valuable insight in the complex issue of immigration enforcement and i yield back. >> other members of the committee are reminded opening statements might be submitted for the record and our witness is mr. john morton, director of the immigration and customs enforcement. the principal investigative arm of the department of homeland security and second-largest investigative agency in the federal government. the agency's primary mission is to promote a less security and public safety for criminal and civil enforcement of federal law governing border patrol, and immigration. during his tenure ice director morton strengthened ice's emphasis on border crimes, control and intellectual property and child exploitation. the chair now recognizess director morton for his testimony and we thank you for coming. >> thank you, mr. cuellar, mr. thompson, thank you for inviting me. is my honor and pleasure to

appear before you today to talk about secure communities and other related initiatives. let me start by saying i think secure communities is an excellent program that represents one of the most important efforts by congress to focus i.c.e.'s enforcement on criminal offenders. secure communities got its start in 2008 in the appropriations act when congress directed i.c.e. to improve efforts to identify convicted criminal aliens and held the nation's jails for removal from the united states. congress instructed i.c.e. to prioritize criminal identification and removal based on the severity of the alien's crime. congress reiterated that direction in every single one of our subsequent appropriations and consistently focused our attention resources accordingly. in october of 2008 and we have come along way since that time. secure communities is deployed

in every state of the union and fully deployed in every state save alabama and illinois. put another way secure communities has been deployed to 3,074 of the 3181 jurisdictions in the united states. remarkable achievement in four years. i am confident we will complete full deployment in the near future starting with the remaining jurisdictions in alabama when the eleventh circuit rules and pending litigation of the immigration law. for the first time in our nation's history we can identify individuals who are here unlawfully and subsequently arrested for crimes provided fingerprints are on file with the fbi and dhs. this fingerprint sharing by congress in 2002 now permits i.c.e. to identify large numbers of criminal offenders subject to removal as well as individuals who were previously removed or have outstanding final word of

removal. the results have been significant in terms of immigration enforcement and public safety. i.c.e. has removed 58,097 individuals through secure communities this year alone and 140,000 criminals since the inception of the program as the chairman notes. this year 75% of the individuals removed had a criminal conviction and of the remaining quarters the overwhelming majority were either at squanders, emigration fugitives, or re-enter the country after previously being deported one or more times. contrary what critics allege the single largest category of individuals removed through secure communities are aggravated felons. 17,000 to date this year alone. that is just good law enforcement. as the program -- we address concerns in certain jurisdictions as mr. cuellar and

mr. thompson noted. we have improvements including considering minor traffic offen offenses only upon conviction, creating a 24 hour hotline for anyone who believes there are a u.s. citizen or been improperly serve immigration >> reporter:. insuring victim that witnesses of crimes are not inadvertently placed in removal proceedings and the trainers are valid for no more than 48 hours and developing strong oversight program in coordination with the department of homeland security office of civil rights and civil liberties. with regard to the 287 gee program we have 68 active agreements. that has not changed much over the years. 40 are in a jail setting and involved task forces and eight involve both. the 287 removals this year. the task force model has proved less productive with 361 removals to 8 nationwide.

we are phasing out most such agreement as a result. 7 taskforce agreement that ended in arizona six of the seven resulted in the removal of any kind for the last two years. with regard to overall enforcement we will end the fiscal year with similar results of 4,000 like last year these removals focus heavily on enforcement priorities. over half will have criminal conviction that the vast majority of the arrest will be illegal entrants and those who ignored the final order. with in our criminal removals you will see further emphasis on level 1 offenders. i am cautiously optimistic that this year we will remove the highest number of aggregated felons in our history. one final note. i want to thank the committee for its thoughtful bipartisan approach. i have always found the committee's oversight of i.c.e. to have been firm but fair and the same was true when mr. cuellar was chairman himself and i am happy to answer any questions the committee may

have. >> thank you for your testimony. i would start off talking about secure communities. it has been a successful program. that was the reason we wanted to call this hearing today and congressional oversight on -- evaluate the program, how it rolled out. what were the hiccups' we encountered along the way and highlight the successful part of the program. everything we're doing in regards to border security is not a successful and secure community so it is good to amplify this message about what a successful program it has been. a critical component in the makeup of why it has been successful is the engagement of the multiplier you find by utilizing state and where local law-enforcement as well and one thing we talk about on this

committee is a very critical element of the 9/11 commission's report. we have to go from need to know to the need to share. the need to know information to the need to share information among all the various agencies. that is a critical component of our layered approach to border security and law-enforcement. as was mentioned you have a pretty good bye in across the nation. in my district the ranking member and i were talking about his district. our local sheriffs are very enthusiastic about this program. allows them to utilize technology. and sharing fingerprints in the database to know that it is bringing somebody over for routine traffic stop and they are in the database and a -- in the country that they are able

to contact agents and look for deportation. we have a situation in alabama which sounds like it will resolve itself hopefully in the fall and the big hold out that we see although there are some municipalities in california. the holdout is one of the largest counties in the nation, county, illinocounty, illinoio sanctuary city. the community is looking for federal dollars in grants to pay for detainee's they have in their jail. but they don't want to participate. whether they are releasing these criminal aliens or what have you i am looking for response both to clarify if the alabama situation but particularly with

the cook county situation. >> with regard to alabama, i think that will be resolved and we will see full deployment in mr. rogers's's home state. excellent timing. i expect the eleventh circuit to rule fairly shortly. i think the supreme court's decision will lead us to a place where the eleventh circuit will rule and we will be able to deploy the remaining counties of alabama over the autumn. with regard to, it is a more difficult situation, cook county has one of the largest detention systems in the country. has adopted an ordinance that prohibits all cooperation with i.c.e. even with regard to the serious and violent offenders. written a number of public

letters to the county and very much opposed to their approach. i think it is the wrong way to approach public safety in cook county. i am confident their approach is ultimately going to lead to additional crimes in polk county that -- cocounocountk county -- you a sense of it, in very large jurisdictions in the united states the rate of recidivism for criminal offenders can be as high as 50% or more. when i.c.e. can come in and remove offenders from a given community, we can't take the recidivism rate to zero. if you have 100 criminal offenders that is 50 crimes that will not happen over the next three years as a result of our enforcement efforts. that is the power of secure

community. it is a direct way to support public safety in a very thoughtful manner. what are we trying to do to resolve the situation in the illinois? we have been working with the county to see if there isn't some solution. i don't think that approach is going to work. we are going to need the help of others. we have been exploring the secretary has said our options under federal law with the department of justice and we will see how that goes and with regard to the annual request by cook county to be reimbursed for the cost of detaining individuals who are here unlawfully and committed crimes, i find that position to be completely inconsistent with not allowing access to removing those same individuals and taking a hard look at their

request as part of the law that allows the government to reimburse those costs this year in my own position, that if we do not have access to those individuals we will not be able to verify their requests for the year. >> i can't tell you how delighted i am to hear you make that candid assessment of what is happening in cook county and exploring your options with regard to the financial assistance from the federal government we want to work with county but there's reciprocity in relationships and they need to work with us as well and they are not immune from federal law and they are not going to assist us in removing not only criminal aliens but those who might go on to commit a terrorist attack or what have you because they want the city to be a sanctuary. the federal government cannot stand by and allow that to happen. i am appreciative of what you are saying, exporting your

options. is there anything further the congress can assist you with in that particular instance? we are certainly all years because we need to resolve that in the correct way and cook county has to recognize the federal government is serious about communities, we can't have just one holdout in the country for such a thing or they will become a magnet for all kinds of situations. >> i would say we are going to give it a very good effort to try to resolve the situation directly with cook county and illinois and the department of justice and if we can't do that we will be happy to come back and explore further options with the committee and federal law is very clear on the question of

cooperation with federal authorities in immigration. we do think the ordnance is consistent with the terms of federal law and ultimately we share the same aims with the authorities in cook county and that is public safety. it does not make sense to release to the streets serious criminal offenders who shouldn't be in the country in the first place given the rate of recidivism. >> i appreciate that. one other question. you were mentioning the percentage of those community programs that have been previously removed and picked up again. i am looking at my notes trying to take notes when you were talking. 16% or something you are picking up had been previously removed which begs the question about some of the effectiveness of border security. do you have any comment? were you surprised by that number? what are your thoughts on that?

>> it highlights--some of the criticism of secure communities is it identifies and removes certain individuals prior to conviction. the answer is it does do that but it does that in circumstances that make a lot of sense from an enforcement perspective and when you look at who are these people you are identifying removing prior to conviction? they are in the overwhelming majority of cases people who have been removed from the country and come back again unlawfully or people who have been through the immigration system, have a finally the -- order and ignored the final order. the only way to get identified by secure communities is to have been arrested in the first place for a crime. we are talking about people who have come into the criminal justice system and either have a final order of removal or been previously removed. congress has been very clear with regard to both categories of people that their removal is

a priority and so of course we focus on those two categories of people even if they don't have a criminal conviction. otherwise we would be releasing to the street someone we deported before and came back unlawfully. it is a felony under federal law after a prior deportation -- i don't think it is the right policy not to focus resources on those individuals. >> the chair now recognizes mr. cuellar. >> i want to congratulate you on the great work that you have been doing. if you look at the activated jurisdiction document here there is a map of it. you can see everything that is green that shows the -- is 97% which means out of 3,181 activated jurisdictions you have 3,074 which is pretty amazing.

the ones that we have been focusing on. i want to congratulate you and also i ask you to look at the testimony of the director because he does talk about the e efficiency and the transparency part of it on it and the safeguards that the sheriff of harris county talked about when we talked about -- a congressman is familiar with -- to make sure they do the work but at the same time provide -- make sure there's no profiling involved so the input is important on that. i want to thank you want that. besides alabama and illinois there were a couple of jurisdictions that have ordnances. in california and san francisco. to follow up on this it makes

common sense because i remember when i did before -- the counties are represent i was traveling role areas, urban areas and if you are a small community it is important to get this help. it was seen as a tax saver and if you are able to remove those folks that need to be removed for small and local community ruled that means a lot. the other thing is common sense. if you have somebody there wanted for something else, is only common sense that we coordinate the federal and state and local partnership. the communication part you are working to make sure there's more communication to the state and one local level. i appreciate that. you hit something important.

sometimes local, state politicians attacked the federal government and at the same time -- don't want to point out my state of texas but they point this out and don't do this but make way for the money. on the scat program you are right. with all due respect to those communities, i don't represent those but they cannot say we don't want you to do secure communities but at the same time they are requesting federal dollars for holding those prisoners or those persons and asking for federal dollars for reimbursement. i ask with all due respect to look at those communities carefully because they cannot say we don't want you here. they cannot be selective in what money is committed. federal law should prohibit what they are doing under article 10. we understand that but we ask

you to look at those carefully because it would be unfair to be with -- saying we don't want you to hand that out. give us money for reimbursement. i don't have any questions to ask you. i wanted to say you are doing a great job. very balanced approach that you and your men are doing and i appreciate it. it is not your job to be political but you are doing this in a transparent, focused way to make sure the people not supposed to be in the united states and get them out. criminals are not supposed to be here. no questions or comments. appreciate your good work and the men and women who worked for you all. >> yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair recognizes mr. thompson. >> thank you, madam chairma