cindy who i see in the back and pillar weiss, is she here? hi. there sheca is. they worked with us throughout 2013, helping us to distill our focus and to provide the overall structure for this reflective 2 democracy work. we couldn't have done a data project you will be hearing about momentarily had it not been for great folks at noi and rutgers university center for american women in politics. and of course our opinion research firms, lake research and david binder research and our communications consultant they have been with us and partnered to do a lot of work in a short period of time. and finally i would like to acknowledge jennifer ancona, who is the senior director of membership and communications and really managing this largeee initiative in-house for us at wdn. let's get to the meat of our conversation, i would like to bring up brenda carter who is our campaign director.

she joined us in january. she has a really rich of history of campaign work, working inor electoral politics and policyja and research and she was the perfect person to take over from pillar. i'm delighted to call you up. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, donna. i'm really lucky, i guess depending on your perspective maybe really unlucky who is the person to gets to present results of an effort which donna said was conceived of and carried out by a large team of people, many who are here today, many so of whom i think are up all night getting our website and other assets going. i really appreciate your work and second donna's thanks to all of you. today i would like to do three things. first i'm going to talk about

what our research revealed. second i offer preliminary thoughts about what it suggests. third, i will talk a little bit where we might go from here. but to start, let's look at a short video we put together, if i can operate this. >> have you ever wondered what does america look like? zoom out from the people in the media and we talk to every day, look at big picture. 24 million of us live in the united states. 51% are women, 49% of us are men. 63% of us are white. 37% of us are people of color. our country is changing fast. but are the people who represent us, from city council, to congress, keeping up with that change if do we live in a reflective democracy?

we did some research and here's what we found. we studied 42,000 electedel officials who represent us. from the county level all the way up to congress. if they reflected america's population, our elected officials should look like this. but it actually looks like this. 7% of elected officials are men -- 71%. 90% are white. and 65% are white men. that means men have twice as much power as women. white americans have three times as much power as people of color. and white men have eight types as much power as women of color. when 31% of the population controls 65% of elected offices is it a surprise most americans feel our democracy is broken? to learn more about the data we've collected, visit us at who leads us and share data with your friend.

then tell us at who leads us how you think we can become a more reflective democracy. [applause] >> so just to recap, we looked[a at the over 40,000 people who old e hold elected-offs from the county level to the national level and we matched race and gender to those officeholders using self-reported information and voter file record. we found that 90% of thoseol officeholders are white. although only 63% of the population is white.un 71% of them are men, compared to 49% of the population. so again, this is what it would look like if it were truly reflective. and this is actually what it looks like. white men, who are 31% of the population, hold 65% of these

elected offices. effectively constituting a veto-proof minority in our political system.nsti we've all heard plenty about the dem traffics of congress --l demographics of congress but we want to take a deeper look, diving into the demographics of local level elected office. when we started this research some ofgr us, including me, held out hope that we would discover a more diverse and genderis balance pool of elected officials at that level but for the most part that hope did not become a reality. women are more slightly more well-represented in state legislatures and in county offices, holding 25 and 30% of those seats respectively. but they hold only 21% of the statewide offices, and 19% of congressional seats. and for people of color, the level of representation at the local level can only be described as dismal.pe

people of color hold only 7% of statewide offices and 9% of county offices. their representation in state legislatures is slightly better at 15% but still less than half of their share of the population. still less than half of there share of the population. i spent a fair amount of time of gender and power and rarely choose to be optimistic person i spend a t ever shocked by these numbers. a balance of power so start if we saw in another country we would conclude something was very wrong. with the political system it should apply no less than two marcel's. what is going on?

what is part of the problem? the first is in the nature of political office itself opponent say there is something about running for an holding political office that it cannot be held to the same standard for other occupations it is very unusual thing to do to attract people with a set of skills and interest we cannot really expect politicians to look like america. but it is worth noting other professions are just a specialized in a unique data reflected for office with professional baseball players can really be the

case politics would be so different? in second place is to the voters in this line of thinking people of color just cannot succeed because the bias is so strong. the research does not bear this out we know candidates succeed at the same rate as men and their research to candidates of color although slightly more complicated usually focused on specific ethnic groups because the overall sample size is so small but it points in the same direction they're just enough to show that bias in the voting booth is significant enough. the third place is the under

represented people themselves is there something about women and people of color that explains that? with those variations they tend to fall into two categories the first attributes the ambition gap. in general this line of argument holds women who you can run for office are that we just don't like the world of politics. the second line of argument shows the engagement gab people of color were women tend not to participate in politics they don't vote or participate in local political structure in this cause is under representation in elected office.

bill size of the question has been raised for some time so i will just draw our attention to keep points. first women have voted at higher rates than men in every presidential election since 1986. second black women have turned out to vote at a higher rate than any other subgroup of the last national elections. there is work to to improve the registration of lack of participation of politics is certainly not the whole story. i would argue those of us who are greeted with skepticism with ambition gaps that women just don't like math or science where they would opt out of the top-level jobs should be similar a careful to read

like on the political power. it is worth noting that elected officeholders most resemble in terms of the racial and gender balance with that exclusion of people of color. not on the voters tive democracies campaign is focused on the political systemli itself. how might systems of candidate recruitment and advancement controlled by gatekeepers like political parties and donors contribute to lopsided numbers? how dot-com significance of electoral districts and voting rules advantage some demographics over others? what is the role of the civic institutions that when present, help to develop candidates?

who has access to theha relationships, money and networks needed to leverage a political career? it should be no surprise our political system like so many other systems in our society, reproduces and reinforces centuries old hierarchies. it's a system built on relationships and networks, on organizational clout, money and gatekeepers. much of its operation creates out of public view and create as democracy we see that is far from reflective but there is some good news too. and in this case it comes from voters themselves. at the same time we're amassing this database of elected officials we undertook a comprehensive public opinion research project.ame we wanted to understand and to what extent americans perceivere this problem, how they think about it, and whether or not they care. as part of that multiphase research project, in august, we

surveyed 800 voters nationwide by phone. that survey revealed three key findings. first, americans understand that there is a problem, with the demographics of our political leaders. a majority of voters we polled are concerned about lack of women and people of color in office. a more to the point, the phrase that they said represents ourcu current representatives is old boys club of the many think the best and brightest is the phrase that should describe who our elected leaders should be. second, americans actually want to do something about this problem. a strong majority of voters regard he's are of party identification support policies that helpst elect women and peoe of color. support is especially strong among younger voters, women and people of color but is not limited to those groups, even

among white men, 66% support actions to help elect more women and people of color. the third finding from our public opinion research was perhaps most surprising. voters recognized the ways that the political system itself is a significant cause of the problem. when asked to identify significant obstacles to elected office that women and people of color face, a majority of voters cited three major systemic barriers. one, lack of access to relationships and political networks. two, the failure of political parties failure to recruit women and people of color, and three, lack of access to donors. so overand above whatever biases voters may or may not bring to the voting booth and whatever tendencies women and people of color may or make them not decide to pursue elected office,

americans cognize our system of recruitment, support and promotion of elected leaders is structured in a way that favors white men. we believe that this is where we need to he had did kate our efforts if we're to change these numbers and move toward a truly reflective democracy. that is the challenge in frontr of us and it is certainly not an easy one but we're very proud of the fact that we've brought a new level of transparency to this problem and that for the first time we now have a comprehensive baseline which means that we can measure whether and how fast we're making progress. we're making this data publicly available on our website, who leads.us. we'll be later this month releasing a national representation index which will rank states by the extent their elected leaders reflect their population. we look forward to researchers, advocates and people of all kind digging into this data, making discoveries, and we hope, using it to propel change.

[applause] >> thank you, brenda, for that great presentation. thank you all for being here today. it is exciting to see such a big and enthusiastic crowd. i know we've got great, great material to talk about, and a lot to go over. so i'm going to quickly introduce the panel and we will get on with it. brenda carter is the campaignto director for the reflective democracy campaign at the women donors network. in her many past lives she worked at eeoc. she led organizing drive amongdn her fellow teaching and research assistants when she was getting a doctorate at yale university.

she was communications direct or for unite here, the union of hospitality workers. she also in addition to everything else she does teaches courses on work culture and the economy at brown university. and gloria totten is the president of progress sievemy majority, a national multiissue organization dedicated to electing progressive champions at the state and local levels. she created progressive majority in 2001 and under her leadership the organization has grown to have eight state offices. she is also worked to establish the racial justice campaign, a program to prioritize the election of candidates of color. prior to this, she was the political director for naral from 1996 to 2001, where she developed naral first voter pro-choice file she worked on all levels of government especially in the home state of minnesota.

william jelani cobb, associate professor of history and director of the african studies institute at university of connecticut in stores, connecticut. wanted me to be very short onie his bio. it is too interesting to do that so i will keep going. his articles essays appeared in the new yorker, "daily beast," "washington post," essence, vibe and the root.com. she is the author of the substance of hope, barack obama and paradox of progress and to the break of dawn, a free tile on the hip-hop aesthetic, finalist for the national award for arts writing. he has a forthcoming book which is titled, antidote to revolution, african-american anticommunism and struggle for civil rights. and i have been asked to our twitter hashtag for this event. if you could use that. #who leads us. so i'm going to start actually, gloria, with you. brenda laid out a challenge for all of us which is basically,

moving from critique and observation to change. and, i hope that could talk first about, a little bit more observation and critique. why do numbers look this way? they are so dramatic and so stark? and then, you know, concretely, what are the steps that we have to take? >> so, centuries of oppression and disenfranchisement might be the obvious reason for why these numbers look the way they do. i think, no, in all seriousness, i mean, if you're a person of color and you can't even vote, are you going to run for office? i mean there is some reality in the fact that there is a ripple effect of regressive policy action in this country that plays into the status. so i think, in all seriousness that is a fact. i mean, you know, we have, there

is so many, i have a list of reasons. so let's start with pivoting off what brenda talked about, the lack of access to political networks right? politics is a business that you win by shutting other people out. that is the very nature is to get my people to the polls, to keep your people home, and if i'm lucky, i even get to keep you off the ballot in the first place until i clear a path for my victory right? that is the overall environment we're working in. and that is how we succeed. so we've got this system of democracy that is a winner-take-all system and it is ruthless in its exclusion. and how it excludes people. so there is, so changing that system, so you could look at, some structural reforms such as, you know, there research that shows that women do better in multimember districts because they tend to be more positive

campaign environments. it is easier to, you know, say we have one man, one woman, one, you know, to put people on the ticket to create kind of a balanced ticket. there is also evidence that shows that people of color don't do as well in multimember districts. that, you know, white people tend to crowd the ballot and push people of color out. so there conflict there, when you're looking at that, as an alternative. there is some evidence to show that proportional representation, so cumulative voting, rank voting, we've seen this in a lot of localities across the country. there are hundreds of localities use this to elect people and it has shown an increase in people of color getting elected. structurally i think those are some of the things we can do. we need to change who is, youece know, who is in these systems. so, where we have, you know, where you have more, you know,

who is in the state party leadership. caucuses are doing most of the recruitment. who is staffing those caucuses? donna's leadership in the dccc, perfect example you have to have the right person at the top in these systems that are, that arh making this a priority. >> you wrote so beautifully this summer what was going on in ferguson, missouri, after the shooting death of michael brown, and you talked about ferguson as a microcosm for what, we're talking about today, for all of these trend that we're talking about. you also said it was a precursor. but starting just with talking about ferguson as a microcosm, how do we see this problem of unreflective democracy having played out? >> well, first, thank you for inviting me. i'm happy to be here today. one of the things that became apparent when i spent nine days in ferguson in august.

and i'm going back on sunday, one of the things that became immediately apparent what was going on there was about so much more than what happened to michael brown and it was the context that made that circumstance almost predictable, that everyone continued to talk about. that would be remiss to say that the protests that took place at the playoff game last night, where there were people who were talking about michael brown and protesting about there not being the likelihood of justice. people shouting, go back to africa, from the baseball stadium, and so that is the context which this happened. it is easy, there is temptation to think of ferguson as an outlyer, to say this is particularly retrograde place that is a throwback to different era of american life. when we look at this and i think "the new york times" did a piece last week which was really important, i think richard fawcett wrote it, there is a number of counties, number of

towns and small cities which there are black majorities, both substantial communities in which there are, substantial communities of color, but a not reflected by the city councils. we see this happening in lots of other places, partly because of how the elections are stated, how they're organized. whether or not they're publicized. whether they are off year elections or not. issues of transients and people, not necessarily being, all these things were coming up, in conversations in ferguson and being reflected of these other dynamics as well. the other, i think that, we struggle to be optimistic. 66ness of people are saying things should be more reflective. 66% of the white men saying it should be more reflective. we're looking what happened with the moral mondays protest in

north carolina. push of shelby, alabama decision. shelby versus holder came from the supreme court last summer of the these are things not kind ot accidentally detrimental to the political participation of people of color. we still have these struggles ahead of us is something that may be depressing but also is just simply reality. >> isn't it then that you can, do we>> need to change attitudes first and structures will changt or do we have to go directly to change structures and have a attitudes change afterwards, i guess a question for all of you? >> i would go at the structures and change the structures. i think the polling, these things are always a little hardi to read because people do, say what they think you want hem them to hear, particularly when it comes to race, any polling on race matters but, but i would sayings you know, culturally we're there. you see this, you know, new

american majority, you know, the tolerance and the attitudes of the millenials. i mean we are so far behind. we have a say saying in our office, don't recruit people you will have to lobby later. this thing is moving and, we need structure to catch up. >> one of the things i learned>> as a union organizer that in general the law follows the organizing. it doesn't work the other way around. so, i think, it points to the necessity for mobilization and for public demand for change on this. as you said, this is not an accident. the people who controls the structures will change the structures when they feel that they have no other choice. >> what do we learn fromie examples of cities close to ferguson where in fact the powet structure is very different. you have a town, country clubt

hills, nearby, same demographicr completely different, st. louis. >> both of these municipalities are right on the cusp of st. louis and so close you can leave st. louis and enter one of them without even knowing that you necessarily left the city of st. louis but while i was there i did get into conversations elected leaders from a small town, small munition called country club hills. they had just a few years ago had police force that was entirely white. a black population that was about 70 or0% black. and, it was -- 80% black. the mayor, current mayor told me off the record that he had had the experience of being roughed up by police and, that was what led him to want to run for mayor and to political office. and so they, in a concerted way set out to change the demographics of the police department. and so, when i talked with the police chief there, he said that

he went to high school and encouraged young people to go tt the police academy. p he went to the graduations of the police academy and found people who were about to graduate and didn't have a police department yet. and, said, well, would you consider working for us? he also went to other municipalities and said we wouln be interested in having you as an officer who was standout, would be interested in having you perhaps think about working here. and, now, the police department is about half people of color and half white. and, you know, both the mayor and police chief talked about the way in which this had, at least facilitate ad better understanding of the community. now, that is the positive side of it. the other side of it is that i'm a new yorker and i know thereis was a black officer who was involved in the shooting of sean bell, who you don't remember in 2006, sean bell was african-american man on verge of is, the night before his

wedding, he was shot 50 something bullets were shot, yoi know, killed him, injured one of his friend gravely, and they were unarmed. there was an african-americanaf officer present, you know, during this. there have been other high-profile incidents with african-american officers, officers of color. i don't think simply eppy dermal change connotes everything falls into place. you also have to have structura. changes that say we actually believe there is a limit on police authority. the police are nota the law. they have power to enforce the law. distinctions that we don't, we somehow lost track of. last thing that will say, in ferguson, last thing i say on that, in ferguson, i did see people began first night, before

they began teargassing protesters. some scattering of black irv officers, some covered their faces with bandannas andc, scarves. they live in the community andr would face criticism for what they were doing,th the other siw was much more ominous. these are people who covered their faces and about to do something knew exceeded bounds of what proper police i behavior was to be and these were black men. . . am also struck in listening to you that we're talking about structural change but at the same time that happens on a personal level. happens through people changing institutions from within, sometimes in a very 1-1-1 way. you said coming into this

that you were willing to tell tale and really get up close and personal in describing some of what you have seen in practice within institutions. ostensibly well moving people, practices that end up keeping them women and people of color. >> you know, in order to be perceived as a viable candidate you have to, you know, have your own personal network, you have tac have or be part of or be accepted into a broader political network. you have to have access to donors. there's all this work the i am a progressive. when an organization called progress of minority. we recruit people to run for office. our biggest fights have been over candid it's a color and women and women of color obviously. and we started the racial justice campaign to

prioritize, not marginalized , the recruitment of people of color and making it a priority within our organization from the beginning. and, you know, progressives are often our first problem. i would say to a candid it, if you are relatively new you're going to have to get through our advisory council, then the, you know, then progressive community, then the democratic party commanded we can start talking about republicans. but you have to get through these hurdles first. you know, we have often -- and our advisory councils and our states are comprised of some of the most talented and romney political people across the nation. so these are really well-meaning folks. but themovement just like the broader political movement is led my white people, too. and mostly white men, it probably looks a lot like that.

so, you know, we will bring someone in and the first thing will be is never heard of them and that is like i am not surprising. that is why i am introducing him to you. and we keep going from there. if they are not, you know, within this orbit and we have done a lot to get people in and across. it has gone so far -- i have a favorite story because the staff person, we had a fight person that escalated highly in one of the states and one of the staff people called and he said i cannot do this i am a white guy and i am not used to fighting over race. we recruited a native american

women to run. she was a very talented woman who had served in her state network and we recruited her to run for the state senate and it was no, no, it will not work. the party decide the profile of the district -- and that is another thing you don't know about. we create a profile for the ideal candidate in that district and what they should look like. people like me get to decide that which can be a problem. we recruited this woman and the party decided no, they needed a white man and a tough on crime white man and found a white cop and got him to run. we kept going and our candidate was performing 4-1 on doors and 5-1 on fundraising. and our job is to try to assert

our candidate as the more viable candidate. this escalated to the point where i had to fly out to the states because party folks cherry picked the donor list and were going to our major donors and telling them gloria is prioritizing race over viability and i had to fly out and our state director was doing all of the work he could do on the political front and i had to meet with the donors and say you have to know know me for two and a half seconds to know that is not true. i have fired my mother and best friend over my life time. i don't prioritize anything over viability. so that is my story.

>> within your progressive institutions what radical steps should we take? >> one step, that wasn't so radical, was we changed the staff of the organization. the political director had to represent an entity and we changed that to say individual leaders could be on as long as they had something like community leader, clergy leader, people that opened up access to a more diverse pool of influential people on the committee. yeah, i think that we need call it out.

i mean people were shocked that i would fly across the country and knock on their door and say here is what i am hearing, are you believing this and as a donor to our organization and you have shown a commitment to our mission, don't let them bully you this way. that is what it was in that case. you have to stand up to it. it can not just be left for people of color or women to stand up to it. it is going to take all of us. >> the feeling of i am a white guy and i cannot do this. politicians who are in office and white have to get beyond their comfort zone, you said. and i wonder if you can comment on how we make this a topic of conversation for everyone when there is not that level of

distancing on the comfort level of white people. >> the circumstances make to it where these things have a way of presenting themselves and forcing us to grapple with them. if we had not had the thomas/hill situation we would not have the grapple with the realities of sexual harassment in the works workplace like we did. going back to ferguson, what woo we are looking at there is a broader set of trends and historically for a minute i will talk about that. in 1967, we saw a report saying there were large scale urbern disturbances that were a product of the system exclusion of african-americans from opportunities. out of that we had reforms that

people consider liberal and the supreme court effectively said the voting rights act was discrimination against white southerners. so we have debates affirmitive action and whether black people belong in positions of power. i see in acedemia all of the time. but do you have the same kinds of problems that resulted in the cycle? i can because we have a historical amnesia we keep doing

things that result in negative outcomes and say if we move our hand away from the fire because they are burning but put them back in in five minutes saying it would be interesting to see what happens when we put our hand on the fire. >> one thing people have trouble with talking about in america is structural change. your result had good results in looking at that but you said sometimes it is difficult to get there and you saw that in the course of doing the research. i wonder what you have seen about people's comfort level with the topics and what ways of approaching the topic of underrepresentation they are comfortable or not comfortable with and you touched on this in your remarks, too. >> the conventional wisdom is the ordinary american can't grasp structures because it is

too complicated. it is true most people don't want a two-hour briefing but i think there is far or opportunity to move them in their thinking on this. if you just looked at the numbers and you are not somebody familiar with the way the politics work, which why would most people, you look at those numbers and you leave it to your imagination why they are that way and you will come up with easy answers like maybe women just don't like politics or maybe people of color don't really participate. and of course, we don't need to get into a fight about whether there is some truth around the

edges of that but our experience and our research that we briefly described here is people get it. it doesn't take a two hour briefing. when you name barriers people say that makes sense to me. the difference is in the level of understanding. are there some people that get it more than others between party affilation and men and women? if you are someone who hasn't experienced structural barriers to hold you back are you less likely to see them? >> it is true women of color see the barriers more strong but not limited to those groups. this isn't as complicated as we would like to think in terms of making people think of it in a different way and there is a lot of room to change how people

think about it. >> you were sharing interesting thoughts in the green room about what the parties are or aren't doing and interesting observations about let's say what the republican party is doing on the state level and i think that is worth sharing and what you are observing right now. >> the party apparatus on both sides of the aisle is the primary recruiting operation. you are the recruiter and you have your database in front of you and you are looking at who in the party is the next one down and they tend to not go to the outside groups. so that is something we need to change. our groups need to be more pro-active about bringing people in for consideration and the parties need to be more mind

full of eareaching out. the second thing i think is important is investment of money. on the republican side, the republican leadership committee which is like the state level committee for state legislative seats and we have the equivalent on the democrat side call the dlc. so the rslc has sent, since 2010 and you know the $40 million spent then with the red tape strategy and the massive investment in state races to pick up 700 seats and flip 21 chambers in 2010. that was a big deal.

since then they have spent in the 2012 cycle they spent $3 million on candidate recruitment of women and people of color and in this 2014 cycle they have spent $6 million. so $9 million just since 2010 exclusively on the recruitment of republican women and people of color. we know, whatever your party affilation, this isn't the grand ole party of yesterday. these are going to be very conservative folks and they have recruited as a result of the investment more than 150 people of color and more than 300 women and they have increased the largest by 27% in just the

last -- since 2010 or including 2010. there is major activity happening on that side and major investment. there is nothing equivalent to that on the democratic side. we don't have money for specific recruitment and their program is called ironically they have a name for the female program which is right women, right now and they don't have a name for the color one. there is one at the congressional level called project growth so there is a similar investment happening at the congressional level. and there is nothing on our side. donna doesn't get $3 million to recruit women or people of color. it just doesn't happen. so we have to try to figure out that inbalance -- imbalance --

democrats have 1100 state legislatures seats held by women and republicans have 636. so democratic women have always done better but they will catch up. we recruit 200 candidates a year and we don't have a $6 million budget so it will not be hard to catch up with the investments they are making. >> i think we will have lot of questions from the audience because you have brought up new and interesting things today. i wanted to end with you because in your writing, looking at it all together, you present an interesting vision, looking back historically which you can read as glass half empty or full, we have the signs of progress in terms of having a black

president, black mayors in gary indiana, cleveland, detroit, atlanta and you write the number of black officials since 1970 the number has increased nearly ten folds. so we have the signs of progress but the glass half empty side is terrible and really bad in terms of the numbers and things like the shooting of michael brown and everything that wasn't an isolated event and everything that comes up. how do you balance it in your mind? where do you land? >> optimism which is realistic optimisic that a person who looked at the current state of affairs could there is all of this organizing and candidates and there are far more black

political elected officials and the landscape doesn't look anything like it did in 1965 and it is culminating in the election of this individual who is now our president and how did that work out for you. and that would be a significant question when we look at things like, you know, repression of voters, the staggering incarceration -- i don't people thought the election of a black president would fix everything. but i think people presumed it was the point that a black person could be elected it would show the other things have been resolved and that makes us all go back to the drawing board saying what else is there. there is another additional

ingredient we failed to recognize. this is as good as the particular system is capable of getting. people that recognize the minority or the demographics change and possibly the political majority we have seen in other places. with that said, i simply believe that my perspective of the historian and people that have been of conscious and sincere effort have won more often than not but a good enough record to make it to the playoffs >> i think that is a great note to end on and pivot it to questions. i wanted to ask about voter suppression but maybe someone in the audience will have that question. [inaudible question] >> i want to make sure i get on the mike because i am from

ferguson, missouri and i know you said it is the outskirts but it would be likened to the difference between tinly town and friendship heights. for us as hometown residents there is no difference from st. louis and ferguson. i want to thank you for bringing the information to the forefront as this is the only way it is e legitmi legitmized. i don't know what to tell my children but all i can say is they are better than white people. i don't believe that. i am not saying as far as how to combat the barriers and institutions that keep us at odds, i welcome a conversation

that is open, on the table and honest so i can have working tools to create good working citizens. i want to thank you for having the conversation and i look forward to being a part of it. >> i think that is an important part. in march, portland sponsored an event that was designed for elected officials and government workers and it was about creating a government that was e ee -- equitable. we don't need congress having this conversation. this can happen wherever you live if you have a good mayor or anything who wants to sponsor

this. i would encourage the proliferation of those kinds of gatherings >> all the way in the back? >> how are you doing? i am from national public radio. in 201, they were 13, 635 registered voters in ferguson out of an eligible base of 15,000. today voter registration numbers according to the st. louis county board said there were 128 new voters and that is an increase of 1% while an 11% increase was possibility. what do you think is the biggest difference -- why do you think it was only 1 percent as opposed

to 11? what is making the biggest difference? >> we should be mindful of anything coming out about the number of registered voters. those numbers have been scrutinized. the initial report was 3,000 voters and then revised to 128 and then the office of elections there says they just made a clerical mistake and i am not prepared to accept that number is valid, that is first. the second is when we talk about the turnouts for the previous election, there was a municipal election, a very racially contentious race about two weeks prior to michael brown's death

and the numbers don't reflect the entire picture because in the 2012 election the black turnout was 71% of eligible voters and the white was 72%. so this has a lot to do with the word getting out there is an election coming up. i would not go anywhere near giving creditability to that 128 number until it has been scrutinized and happens now. >> on the ballot in ferguson it doz dozen -- doesn't -- even

indicate what party you are with. so there is a great big deal of confusion one way or the other. >> sorry, i am making you run all over. >> i am betsy mckinney from the women's donor network. and gloria, this issue about getting women and people of color elected and some ask is this a matter of add women and people of color, stir and we solve the problem or to your problem on the left and right recruiting and running candidates that are women and people of color, what is the set of values we want to address and speak about so it isn't just about race or gender but a bigger conversation we need to have. >> great question. absolutely, as brenda said and someone noted it earlier, women

and people of color win at the same rate as men, as white men. when we run we have a fair shot and as long as we have competitive districts and that is another structural issue is creating actual districts that are competitive. but we know where there are more women and people of color elected, it is in states that are generally more progressive and i don't mean liberal, i mean just more forward thinking and progressive. they are in places where there is a broader conversation and they generally have some kind of role of government issue here that is addressed and where there is a more positive role and government has a more positive fluence in people's lives and make change that help people. women and people of color will

do better in that environment whether it is by the way of the people coming from the legislature or the governor or whatever or the dialogue happening in the context. there are absolutely -- i mean it is a plethora of issues that are essential to deal with right now, right? that typical candidates try to keep their head down and avoid but as donna was saying it is about the role of women, family-friendly work policies, it isn't just pro-choice and anti choice it is about anything that benefits women. if you want to get women voters talk about leave because the one they need to is time, but immigration and incarceration are issues that matter to the communities. and generally older white male candidates will not talk about

these issues. >> i grew up in st. louis county. i would agree with her that ferguson to me is not a good example. when i grew up there, there were no blacks in ferguson. and it progressed over the last 20 years to be majority black. so it a little different dynamic than the rest of st. louis county. but i wanted to ask none of you talked about the behavior of the majority. where i live, there is the majority of black people, and i don't think there were any non-african-americans on the ballot where i live except at the state level. so part of this is generalization of people of color.

we have to realize minorities, the expectation that we are going to be able to overcome so many barriers when we are such a small percentage of the population, you know, this whole generalization of people of color is problematic. and one other question is when you talk about recruitment one of the things that troubles me is that the money issue, which you didn't talk a lot about, and a lot of time you want young people to volunteer and a lot of the african-american kids are not in a position to volunteer and work unpaid internships or do any of that kind of thing. some of it is the policy of organizations that don't consider the community they are working it. >> the idea of sort of what is

asked of people to get involved politically and if there is any effort to change that but i am wondering what you are describing in prince george county are you aware of changes happening that can cast a positive and negative light in other places? ... negative? >> i am not sure of the latter but with a formal public financing of elections arizona has the highest number percentage of women in office boss of the high as conservative and i think that might be another thing to address the issue of money and politics if people have resources from

the question from majorities act african-americans to have a higher -- a part-time but latinos and asians in america is to not. in treating people as color but there are differences. >> quickly on the issue of majority and is counterintuitive to make perfect sense that specifically they tend to fare better in the majority white context so people were shocked when barack obama one i web because it has so few black people it was not

mississippi it was not like within the current field. [laughter] cotton field. we forget 1988 jackson won vermont that has an even smaller black populations of people do not believe you are part of the group with the marginal number if you don't feel threatened you could stand a chance on face value >> brenda, did you have something you want to say to add what they were saying? >> i think many of us already aware of this but this is not simply a moral question although it is a moral question. it's really a strategic one. to my mind, which is if candidates and parties and

political actors want to succeed, i think we're going have to reckon with this in a serious way. it's not simply those who control our political systems sm should change it because it's the right thing to do, although that's also true. it's if you want to engage the electorate that needs to vote for you i think we need to start turning out a different kind of crop of candidates, and if you want, gloria -- if you want to policy outcomes many of us want, more progressive policies on a range of topics, this is one very clear path to getting it. >> thank you all so much. your wonderful. thank you all for coming today. [applause]

>> [inaudible conversations] >> our campaign 2014 coverage continues with a week full of debate. tonight at 7:30 p.m. eastern on c-span, live coverage of the illinois u.s. house debate. >> c-span campaign 2014, more than 100 debates for the control of congress.

>> the candidates for minnesota's u.s. senate seat recently held their first debate last night. democratic senator al franken faced mike mcfadden. senator franken and currently leads in the poll. this is about one hour. >> the 2014 election-year is in full swing and as part of our commitment come we are pleased to carry several debates. >> up next as the u.s. senate debate between democratic incumbent al franken and republican challenger mike mcfadden. >> we will begin with opening remarks kind of a chance to set the tone, talk about yourself, whatever you want to talk about i guess each candidate will get two minutes. senator franken we will begin with you. franken: thank you. good morning. like to thank the didn't duluth news tribune of the chamber for hosting this debate. northeast minnesota took it on the chin in the great recession but your fighters and duluth is coming back strong. i've done everything i can to be

a partner with you in that process because we've got to make sure that recovery reaches everyone. because mining is so important to this region, i worked across party lines to pass a bill to make sure that american steel is used in federal water projects. and which secured the funny for the dredging needed in lake superior. and because duluth harbor is is so important to our state economy, i successfully fought to get millions for harbor improvements. i thought to make sure that they would one in 148th fighter wing became an active associate unit. so if you continue to be at the center of than once burgeoning aviation sector. some of the 148th work with aar, and i've seen aar partner with lake superior college to train up a new mechanics to service the jetliners at the airport.

see, we have a skills gap in this country. 3 million plus jobs that business can't go because they can't find workers with the right skills. so i took this model of community and technical colleges working with the different business sectors to train up skilled workers, and made that the focus of congress is first successful reform of our federal work force training system. now more americans and more minnesotans will have the opportunity to train for these high skilled, good paying middle-class jobs that will make our economy stronger. it's been an honor working with and for the great people of minnesota in the united states senator gregg a lot of work to do to make sure our state and country work for all minnesotans. i look forward to this debate, to discuss how we can build on what we've achieved so far. think you. >> moderator: mr. mcfadden. mcfadden: thank you for the

invitation this morning that i want to thank the audience but i appreciate you being here at an early time in the morning and i want to thank senator franken for your service over the last six years. i appreciate it, and i wanted to recognize frannie, the two of you are so bring your 39th wedding anniversary understand more so a day early i would like to congratulate you . franken: i was going to use that. [laughter] mcfadden: i mike mcfadden and i'm running for the u.s. senate because we can do better. we have to do better. i'd like to describe myself as just a debt. my wife and i've been married for 23 years and we've been so blessed. with six children, five boys, and my daughter who i like to describe as a rose among thorns. mary kate and i are so concerned about what we are handing off to our children, 17 f. trillion dollars of debt. now we are asking them to pay for health care system as we get older with a system that does not work and needs to be fixed

and i will do that. we also have been overzealous regulatory agency that is absolutely been an enemy of mine in form and i will fix that. i am running against someone, al franken come is that it was president obama 97% of the time but as i've traveled across our great state what are you consistently as people don't believe the president is leading us in the right direction. is economy has gotten sideways since al franken took office. wages have not increased but every expense is going up, food, gasoline, energy and no health care. it doesn't need to be that way. this is america. we're the greatest country in the world. i know how to get us back on the road of growth and prosperity. i have a plan. i am an independent thinker. my plan is called the three east. energy and money, i will get these mines open come i promise you. education and effective government. i look forward to speaking to you about those throughout this morning. web -- tripled imagine questions

but want to ask each of you so the more mean things, nasty things, negative things said by your opponents, set in the commercials but if you deplete commercials, mr. mcfadden your nothing more than a million investment banker, out of touch with the most minnesotans live and you side with corporations and profits over people and judge them on offshore. how do you respond to critics say you are wrong for minnesota? senator, we will get to you. mr. mcfadden, you first. mcfadden: i'm proud of my business career. i'm very proud, i've worked very hard. my dad grew up on a dare for my grandfather, his dad died when his six. and i've been able to participate in the american thing. i've worked hard. i'm proud of that. i will not apologize for it. i am very disappointed in al franken's to run negative ads. they are patently false, every news organization has come forward and said they are false. itema rward and said they are f.

item in a company that is headquartered here, incorporated here, that pays income taxes in the united states. we can do so much better. i am so tired of politics as usual. that's why i'm running. i've entered the private sector. i believe the biggest single issue in this country is we've created this professional class of politicians and it's killing us. i believe in six years senator franken has become part of the professional class. he has voted with the president 97% of the time. that's a fa that's not my opinion. is the most partisan senator in the democratic party. he has voted 159 out of 161 votes with the democratic party. that makes him the most partisan senator in washington. that's a fact. that's not my opinion. i left my job and i put my family at risk because i fundamentally believe we can do better in this country, in this day. we have the opportunity to see

our best days ahead of us by getting onto the pathway of growth and prosperity. it begins with energy and education and effective government. we are sitting on the doorstep of an energy renaissance if we allow to happen and get the epa out of the way. i will get pipeline spill. i will get the mines opened. and that will allow us to allow me to put more money into your pocket and allow us to grow it for the 5% he is a poster .5% to 1% we've seen under president obama and al franken. >> senator franken come in the same way if you believe some of the commercials out there, you are just nothing more than a comedian, don't spend any time in minnesota. u-boat robotlike with obama and the democratic party as your opponent has pointed several times and even proposed abortion on demand. how do you respond to critics who say you're wrong for minnesota? franken: well, i don't subscribe to those websites. [laughter] you know, i always vote in what

i believe is in the interest of the people of minnesota. in an era where there's been a lot of gridlock i've worked across party lines to find common sense solutions to things. i've worked with sony of my republican colleagues, with dick lugar on the national diabetes prevention program, which is saving lives which is 75% of the cost of her health care is on chronic disease and diabetes is one of the biggest. on workforce training, with lamar alexander, republican of tennessee. on pharmaceutical safety i did go with pat roberts, republican of kansas. the farm bill one of those bipartisan bills that we did, i wrote, cowrote the energy title on that bill. and worked for minnesota's renewable energy. my first bill with a veterans bill with johnny isakson of georgia. that was a veterans bill.

we had this propane crisis this past year. i have a bill that is cosponsored by rob portman, republican of ohio. i have worked across party lines and gotten things done. part of the reason we had this meltdown six years ago, five years ago, was because the credit rating agencies, standard & poor's, gave aaa ratings to all this junk. i get a bipartisan bill to regulate those credit rating agencies so they can't give aaa to the structured financial products. i did that with senator roger wicker, a republican of mississippi. look, you can sliced and diced these numbers any way you want and come up with things that say pretty ridiculous things. but i've worked for minnesota every day, and i am there and i've been proud to do that. >> let's get to the issues. >> excuse me.

i was told we get a rebuttal. >> will give each 30-second. mcfadden: i would love a rebuttal. one of the things i'm going to ask everyone to do is watch senator franken's actions, not his words. political magazine ranked senator franken 100 out of 100 centers in their ability to cosponsor legislation. that's a fact, not my opinion. is the most partisan center in the democratic party. that's a fact, not my opinion. he has done nothing to accelerate the poly met mine. is not a prude the keystone pipeline which has been under review for six years. polymath has been under review for a just to look at his actions, not what he says. franken: we can take these issues one by one. look, that study that said i was most partisan said that ted cruz was one of the most nonpartisan

senators in the united states senate. [laughter] he's they guy who led the shutdown of the government. so if you're citing that kind of thing, i think that shows kind of a weak position. mcfadden: al franken is that ted cruz of the democratic party. [laughter] franken: except ted cruz is right there more bipartisan than a majority of the senate. mcfadden: opposite ends of the spectrum. >> let's move on with the issues. which a position on safe. >> moderator: of oil, the backloaded commodities to market and also ultimately where you stand on the expansion of pipelines. mr. mcfadden? mcfadden: i'm a huge, huge fan of energy. i'm a huge fan of pipelines and i will work hard to get pipelines built and approve. were sitting on the doorstep of an energy renaissance in this country that will allow us to see our best days ahead of us as

opposed to behind us. we have the opportunity to be energy independent, which is historical and a game changer. we have not been energy independent since the early 1960s. what energy independence allows me to do for you is to put more money in your pocket. heating bills go down. gasoline prices go down. we've had over 1000 days in minnesota of gas being above $3 a gallon. in december 2008 gas was $1.60. most important as a businessman what i know is that with low-cost energy we become a manufacturing superpower again. we are able to compete again globally, able to insource good paying, high paying jobs, not outsource vendor i am a huge supporter of u.s. steel. i'm going to tell you the facts. the number one way to make our steel industry as competitive as it can be globally is to lower the cost of energy. al franken wants to get rid of

the coal industry which will ruin the lives. half of the -- shipped out of the port is goal. i was up in the mine. they spend $1.3 million every month on electricity which is driven by cold. i will drive down energy costs. i will make our industries more competitive. i will get us back on the road of growth and prosperity. and that's why i want your vote. franken: we need a diverse portfolio of energy, that includes fossil fuels, but as transit has acknowledged, global warming is real and eventually were going to have to move to renewables. we're just going to to do that and i would be good for minnesota and good for our economy. we don't have any fossil fuels here in minnesota. now, you can grow a crop, a big crop. if you can't get it transported someplace, that's a problem, to market. that's why israel issued a so big.

so much of rail use is now for the block and crude. and now i've been -- block and crude. i've been going to the -- captopril is something of interest in. i worked with senator david vitter, republican of louisiana, to get the cost of filing a complaint with the surface transportation board which regulates the radios, the railroads, from $20,000, to $350 so people can file a complaint. i got the surface transportation board to comedy. i testified before them, got hae them to come out to minnesota and give orders to bnsf and canadian pacific to make sure that they would get fertilizer to our farmers. and then i got them back out again, and gave them rules to clear up this backlog on grain shipment. that it's not just green.

it's taconite now we know. it's cold for our utilities. yes i have worked with our rural electric co-ops. i don't want to get rid of cold that one of the things were using for electricity now is natural gas. that came from this renaissance in fracking which was developed by the department of energy. that's why we like to do energy research. so this is -- i'm chairman of the energy subcommittee, i'm the energy and natural resource committee and this is something we will talk about. >> thank you both very much. mcfadden: excuse me. with all due respect, your lack of energy policy o of the lack f an energy policy for president obama has caused a rail car shortage. there's not been one pipeline built a government approved any pipeline. the keystone pipeline has been under review process for six years. that's crazy. that is too long.

pipelines are proven to be the most effective, most efficient, most environmentally sensitive way to. >> moderator: oil. and and tell you start passing pipelines we are going to have a rail car shortage. i know how to fix this economy. i might get us back on the road of growth and prosperity. you are putting band-aids as opposed to going to the root causes. we need pipelines in this country. i want everyone to know in this room and in this state that i am for pipelines. i will get them built. that is the number one way to alleviate our rental car shortage. >> thank you. senator? franken: the keystone pipeline has nothing to do with the block an oil. this is for tar sands oil. -- bakken oil. mcfadden: i thought tar sands would high priority? franken: can i proceed? what i voted is to not

circumvent the regulatory process on keystone. but i have voted for, 111014 on the stove, what i have voted for, i have voted that if we make, if we build the keystone pipeline it would be built with american steel. mr. mcfadden, after our first debate, said that it would be fine, he it would be okay with him if the keystone pipeline were made with chinese steel, if we're a little bit cheaper. now, those are minnesota jobs. i fight for minnesota jobs. maybe that's the difference between me and mr. mcfadden. maybe he sees profit over people. when i see a pipeline, i want it built with american steel. we have other pipelines to carry bakken. where to make sure they're cited correctly, they are cited, not going through the headwaters of the mississippi. pipelines are a more efficient way than rail in many cases.

>> as much is about to move onto the next issue i do want mr. mcfadden to address the chinese steel issue. just very quickly, 30 seconds. mcfadden: the difference between us is i will talk straight to you. i will talk straight to you. i don't want to see foreign steel used in pipelines any more than senator franken does. he doesn't want you to know that he's voted against the keystone pipeline, period. that's fact. he has voted against the pipeline multiple times. i will get the pipeline built, and by taking advantage of our energy renaissance is the number one way to make u.s. steel as competitive as it possibly can be. i know that. i know that and i will get it done. that's a promise. >> nine long years, maybe 10, ultimate has been working to get permitted and start mining copper and nickel and other precious metals up in northern minnesota here. clearly in once and for all due support copper nickel mining? can it be done safely?

senator franklin, begin with you. franken: i think the vast majority of minnesotans want those jobs, want those jobs now. and they're going to be good paying jobs and good jobs. but also think the passengers of minnesotans want to make sure that their groundwater isn't contaminated. this is lake superior watershed. so minnesotans want to make sure this is done right. and not just minnesotans. executives at polly met who i've been talking with since i came to office. they say that this process is a good process. they say the regulators are tough but fair. and they want this done on the site. they said the project has improved, it's safer, it's less likely to contaminate the water, or for possibly centuries. i have the same view as the

entire iron range delegation. all the delegations of the state legislature have a uniform view on this. let's do this right. we want this to happen but let's make sure that we do it right. i can understand how it's frustrating especially to those people who want those jobs. but the only thing worse than taking a long time to get this right is getting it wrong. because rangers want sustainable minds. this is a new kind of mining. we've been mining iron ore on the range from 120 years. i just help expand what we're doing by giving, helping get them permits. mining is so important to our state. we need sustainable miners -- sustainable minds, sustainable

mining. that's what i'm for. >> mr. mcfadden, can metals mining be done safely? mcfadden: did you say nine years? nine years, right? i went ago industry to note here today that i support michael that i will fight for miners, i'm an advocate to get these mines opened. the fact that this is taken nine years and over $200 million in regulatory review is not acceptable. it is crazy. it is crazy, and i remind you that the democratic party in this city three months ago had the opportunity to put forth any platform that said they support mining, and they didn't. and watch al franken's actions, not his words. he has done nothing in six years to accelerate the review process of polymet. he has wrote multiple times to the fcc and the fcc on condition issues that is not thought for miners and he won't because he is connected at the hip of

extreme environmentalists. and i'm tired of it. i'm tired of this false choice that is put forth by the environmentalists that you're either for the vibrant or for jobs. you can be for both. i have not met one person in minnesota, itself included, and wants to do anything that would harm our 10,000 lakes. we have a processor that is taken nine years and $200 million we still have answered. the reason we don't is that are seven different regulatory agencies responsible for making this decision. this is lunacy. when al franken says he's talked to polymet and they're okay with the process, they have to say that. they are caught in regulatory limbo. they can't tell you what they really think. do you really think they think it's been a reasonable process? absolutely not. we have to demand that this process be efficient but we need effective government. i will fight for effective government. i've been in the private sector

my whole life. i know to have efficiency and make efficiency. let's be clear. i support the minds. i support miners. i'm the one that will get these mines opened. senator franken has had six years and we have made no progress. >> senator franken, i will give you a minute to rebut that. franken: i've been talking to polymet executives from the time i got here. i speak with them very frankly. they know that this process has improved, the project to make it less likely to contaminate the groundwater, which would be a disaster. we are talking about mitigating that for centuries, unbelievable costs. there are seven agencies because this is both federal and the state has to weigh in on that. the national -- the forest service has to weigh in because it has land exchanges. it's to the important -- it's

too important not to get this right. we need to get this right and if you talk, talk to the range delegation, the state legislators in the delegation. they get elected by the people on the range. they want sustainable mining. they want to make sure that this is done right and if it is done right, then this would be sustainable. this is the difference . mcfadden: this is a difference between alpha to myself. he has been washington ties. easier telling do that nine years is a reasonable process. that's not reasonable. that is the definition of unreasonable. it's not acceptable. we talk about it, al, conceptually for the good people up on the i in range, just lost another generation because there's not jobs. we had the opportunity not just with polymet up with a whole

copper nickel deposit because it is the largest, largest in the world that has the opportunity to create thousands of jobs. and billions and billions and billions of dollars of economic impact in the state at any region of a state has one of the highest unemployment rates, almost twice the unemployment rate around the rest of the state of minnesota. i am here to tell you today that i, mike mcfadden, will fight for miners. i will fight for rangers and i'm going to win in the range because i am your advocate. >> let's talk about the affordable care act. it has withstood dozens of challenges in congress. it's withstood the scrutiny of the supreme court and it is currently the law of the land. is this a settled issue or in your opinion where should we go from your? mr. mcfadden template template t with you. mcfadden: thanks for the question. we have a health care issue in this country. i know that as a businessman. but i guarantee you that obamacare is the wrong answer.

it is a train wreck and that's quoting a democrat, senator max baucus, and this trend continues to rack. and al franken was the 60th about for obamacare. we wouldn't have this disaster but for al franken. and what frustrates me to no end is that this policy was implemented based on lies. it's the largest domestic policy initiative in a generation. it was signed, nobody read it, and then was based on this truce. the first one thing that you could keep your insurance policy. while, 140,000 minnesotans found out that wasn't true. that second being that you could keep your doctor. we know that's not true. but the biggest lie of all is that it will cost less. president obama, whose senator

franken has voted with 97% of the time, has said repeatedly that it will lower the average cost of insurance for family by $2500. i will be the truth. that is a lie. that will not happen. period. i've come forth with my own plan. i look at cost. i look at accessibility and a look at quality. my plan will lower costs, increase accessibility, and maintain quality. and al franken most i don't have a plan. know, i have a plan. i put a proposal forward. obamacare is a disaster. it's not working but it's too expensive. we can't afford and i will tell us to i will tell you the truth. i will go to washington to get this fixed about make sure people with pre-existing conditions can get insurance at a reasonable rate. that's a promise. >> senator franken. franken: look, their opposite been problems with the rollout in aca. and my job is to make the

affordable care act work as well as a camp for every minnesotan. but let's look at what's happened. we have reduced the number of uninsured in minnesota by over 40% year minnesota now has 95% of its people with health insurance. second in the country. people with preexisting conditions can no longer be turned down because they have a preexisting condition. if you hit, you step lifetime limits. if you get your lifetime limits you were thrown out. i talked to imam whose daughter has cystic fibrosis, who had hit her lifetime limits. her child is alive today because of the affordable care act. kids now can stay on the parents policy until they are 26. seniors get free preventive care

comment they hae seen the pharmaceuticals that they plot under medicare part d, they've seen the closing hole. medicare solvency has extended come been extended by 11 years. do you want to take that away? part of the reason for that is it now costs $1000 less for a medicare beneficiary than was projected in 2009 that it would cost method that's because of the reforms that were taken and the unbelievable work and delivered reform, health care delivered reform that we do better than anybody in the world, or at least in this country, in minnesota. we leave and that. and -- we lead in the. we need to incentivize health care and not sector, which is what we used to do when you do pay for service. we have a number of so many accountable care organizations in minnesota that are doing

unbelievably delivered reform. understand this. if he reveals this, if they repeal the estate goes back to square one. it goes back to square one and it goes back to a divided congress and all of this goes away. mcfadden: al, let's be clear. obamacare is a train wreck. it continues to be rack and i will fix it. we have a health issue in this country. i've traveled around around tht state. i've been to all 87 counties, al in the last six months. i have story after story from people where the system is not working, the 29 year-old man with the type ii diabetes lost his insurance despite the president promised against ago on an exchange the cost to times more. god bless and. i hope you didn't have preferred one because now we've got to go find a new policy at a more expensive way. i was in rochester last week. a woman came up to me with a look in her eyes between fear and date. she works at the mayo clinic,

the largest private employer in the state. she just received her premiums in the mail. you know what it's going to cost her next year? 50% increase. 220% increase in a deductible. that's not there. we do have the best health care in minnesota. that's the difference between al franken and i. i want to solve it on a state level. i believe minnesota has the best health care minds in the world but i believe the states leverage is expended if we allow the federal government to do our health care system will look like the va. i'm not going to allow that to happen. i'm going to fight for you. >> senator. i but, of course, it is the state system, and understand this. we really had a turning point. we can do one of two things. we can repeal the affordable care act and go back to square one. no guarantees you get health care for pre-existing, if you have pre-existing conditions.

no guarantees you won't pay more if you're a woman. just because you're a woman. no guarantees that once you've gone through your lifetime limit, you are just thrown off. 50% of all bankruptcies in this country have been caused by health care crises. we have a choice sure, that's the difference between mr. mcfadden and me. make no mistake about it. you repeal this, it goes back and it will be 538 different health plans. and the you think that this congress now, as gridlocked as it is, is actually going to come up with a health care plan that gives people guarantees that they have existing editions and all the other stuff that we have seen? mcfadden: the great recession is still being felt up in northern minnesota was the recovery has been quite as quick as perhaps elsewhere. what should the senate be doing

or what could the washington be doing to spur and encourage economic development and economic recovery, special up north here. senator franken, let's begin with you. franken: well, we've had 54 straight months of private sector employment increases. but it's not going to the middle class. and part of that is because this is kind of a top down economy, and a lot of, the economy is rigged, frankly. companies offshore. they make the corporation in ireland or bermuda. they do in versions. we need to focus on the middle class. because 70% of our economy is consumption. when people have money, that's when businesses hire people is when people are spending money. so that's why i'm so focused on

his skills gap. three plus million jobs sitting there, and they can be filled if these jobs, if these people are trained. and it will make us more globally competitive. it will give people jobs. this is win-win. we also need, there's $1.2 trillion sitting out there in student debt. refinance student debt. let people refinance their student debt. you can refinance your car loan. you can refinance your home loan. you can refinance a business loan. why not be able to refinance a car loan? raise the minimum wage. why can't you refinance a student loan? people are delaying buying a house good people are delaying starting a family because of the

student debt. it's not just young people to its people in the '40s, it's parents and grandparents. i've introduced a bill in the senate. we got three republican votes. we can get this done. just allow people to refinance their student loans and put that money into the economy. mcfadden: here are the facts. ever since senator franken took office and president obama who al franken has voted with 97% of the time, we have had the slowest rebound from a recession in history of the tourney. that's a fact. we have announced a stagnant economy. in minnesota wages have only gone up $8 a week over six years. that's not acceptable. it is not acceptable. is another fact. the federal debt has gone up 70% under al franken's watch. the $17.5 trillion. i have a plan. it's the three d's.

it's energy and mining -- three e's. it's education, and its effective government. i will get the minds open. that's a huge game changer. i will get pipelines bill. senator franken said we're only talking to the keystone pipeline. we are not just talk about the keystone pipeline. we're talking out of a lasting, sandpiper, the alberta clipper, and many, many more if we start getting this review process accelerated. we need people who can go to d.c. that will get things done. i'm glad you brought up education and i couldn't agree more with you, al, that we need to match skills with jobs. but i have to tell you something. you sat on the education committee for the last six years. in minnesota we have great public schools that we can be really proud of. but, unfortunately, we don't have great public schools for everyone. in fact, we have the worst outcomes in the country for minorities. where the lowest regulation rate

for hispanics, the second lowest for after the americans. graduation rates significantly low 50%. that is immoral. where is the moral outrage on that? i've been involved in an inner-city school in one of the toughest neighborhoods where 90% of our kids are latino or african-american and we 100% graduation rate and we do it for 60% of the cost. i want to radically change the school system in inner cities. to all children regardless of zip codes have the right to a first class education. >> senator franken, a one minute rebuttal t. the issue is economic recovery. franken: well, by some measures it's been the slowest recovery from a recession began was called the great recession for a reason. this is the worst recession that we have ever had. but we've had 54 months of private sector growth in jobs.

yes, so much of the income has gone to those at the top, and that's a big problem. ceo salaries now in the '60s, the ratio of ceo to an average worker with 20 to one. it is now 300 to one. we have a top down economy. you want someone who will be fighting for those in the middle and those striving to be in the middle. we need to raise the minimum wage. we need to make sure that women are paid equally for equal work. those are things that mr. mcfadden is against. we need 560 minnesotans, 560,000 minnesotans would benefit from refinancing student loans. we need to do that. >> moderator: one minute, mr. mcfadden. mcfadden: you've been in washington for the last six

years with president obama who you've supported 97% of the time. you don't have a plan. i just listened to it. that is not a plan to verify what was the number of? mcfadden: 97% of the time. franken: let me write that down or i will forget. [laughter] mcfadden: i have a plan to get this country back under the road of growth and prosperity to i've traveled around this great state. i've been to all 87 counties in the last few. have you been to 87 counties in the last year? franken: had over 1300 public meetings and 600 at a town hall meetings and election? i was present obama has done more town halls and you have in the state. franken: i have done so many public meetings and in which people have a chance to ask questions. i have a minnesota breakfast in washington every wednesday that your son came to. and they asked questions.

it wasn't surprisingly kind of hostile. mcfadden: to listen to what he says. look at his actions. i was at the university of minnesota last week but we are supposed to debate the senator franken decided he didn't want to debate. he showed up, spoke in left. i stay there for another. i did a panel. i took multiple, multiple question. i was there for an hour with college student. i love doing that. you've got to go out and listen to the people. teeple know this economy is not working. young people know that. that's what i'm winning with millennials. they want jobs. i will create jobs. i had a plan. >> moderator: let's move on and turn our attention overseas for a moment. we are confronting a growing terrorist threat and isis. united states has led a coalition airstrikes but experts say strikes alone will not win the battle. the administration says we will not commit ground troops. but how do you propose we do with this issue of this growing terrorist threat? mr. mcfadden. mcfadden: roger, i was very

happy that the president went on in front of the nation and said we're going to do strategic bombing in syria and iraq. isis is a huge issue. they are barbarians. they need to be stopped. but i can't tell you how frustrated i am with the complete lack of foreign policy vision from this president and al franken. this president went into office sixers ago, i remind you, i'm just going to sit down with the leaders of venezuela, north korea and iran and we will make things work out. this is naïve. the world is a more dangerous place today because we have not led. leading from behind is a mistake. we have an ambassador that was killed in benghazi, and we did nothing, and the world watched. and then this president drew a

red line in syria, which was crossed. and we did nothing, and the world watched. so there should be no surprise as to what happened in the ukraine or in gaza, are now in syria and iran. and what's really scary are the facts that in minnesota we become the number one recruiting area for terrorists, in minnesota. and i'm really concerned about that. i want to know what al franken has done over the last six years, because this didn't just happen with isis. this recruiting started in 2008, 2009 with al-shabaab. it wasn't until a couple weeks ago that al franken sent a letter to the attorney general. the letter. i mean after this is been going on for multiple years. that's a day late and a dollar short, as my dad used to always say. i will fight for minnesotans. i will fight for your security. i will make this world a safer

place. >> moderator: thank you. senator franken. franken: this is a barbaric group, and they need to be degraded and destroyed. they pose a threat not just to the region but to us. i voted to train and equip the moderate rebels in syria. i support the bombing in syria. isis doesn't observe the border between iraq and syria. we shouldn't either. let's talk about this terrorists group, recruiting. this is incredibly devastating to the families. there are about two handfuls, about 10 to 12 minnesotans that have been recruited to iraq in syria. this is an issue right when i got there, in 2009, we knew that

shabaab in somalia was beginning to recruit from our communities. the first days that i was in office i got, i went to the fbi and got briefings on that in washington. my first recess i got briefings from the special agent in charge in st. paul. i have worked with the community. i have worked with law enforcement. i pressed the secretary of homeland security. i pressed the director of the fbi in hearings, in the judiciary hearings on this recruitment. and we diminished what was going on in terms of shabaab, and i sent a letter, yes, to the doj to ask them to spend more resources and our committee. and the answer was yes, we are going to do that. and i was at a community meeting just two weeks ago with senator

klobuchar and congressman ellison, and with the community understood this is really important to get those resources and. mcfadden: a couple comments. a couple comments. al, i'm glad you voted to support the president and the arming of certain rebels. i want to make sure the record is clear. this president was advised by every member of the national security council and his secretary of state to arm the free syrian rebels two years ago. and he declined to do it. he was also advised by every member of the chief of staff, the military army chief of staff, to keep a residual force in iraq, and he declined to disappear so this is a president that al franken has supported 97% of the time, and when we talk about the terrorist recruitment in minnesota, i've

met with community leaders in east african committee. one of the biggest concerns is education. we have the worst education outcome for minorities. the worst. lower than 50% and al franken sits on the education committee. he is complicit. these are the root causes that need to be addressed. i will get them address. i'm a problem solver. >> moderator: thank you. senator franken. franken: let's be clear about something. a little over a year ago, mr. mcfadden had the opportunity to weigh in on what to do in syria after president assad used chemical weapons. every republican candidate for the united states senate was asked by minnesota public radio for their views on what to do. everyone answered except for mr. mcfadden. he refused to answer. because it was a tough call.

there are a lot of tough calls. it is easy to score political points from the bleachers. this is a serious job. you've got to make real choices in real time. understand this. every republican candidate for the u.s. senate was asked by npr what they would do in syria, and mr. mcfadden blinked. >> moderator: thank you very much. let's turn back to domestic issue. transportation from dredging in the duluth harbor to making sure bridges are safe. how can we pay for it? senator franken, we will begin with you. franken: i'm very happy we got the funding for dredging, which is so important under the word of bill. the water resources department bill, and i thought for the. -- were to your we need to pay

for infrastructure. i think the three drivers of prosperity in our economy are education, infrastructure and research and development. and the highway trust fund is running out of money. now, there are certain ways that we can pay for them. there's money there to pay for this. for example, i have voted to end the subsidies to oil and gas companies. the oil and gas companies are the most successful, richest, biggest companies in the history of the world. and yet they did billions of dollars a year in subsidies. you asked before about this commercial where i was attacked are voting for higher taxes. one of those was i voted to end the billions of dollars of subsidies for oil and gas

companies. i was attacked because that's increasing taxes. we should not be subsidizing. we should be building roads. we should be building highways. now, mr. mcfadden was asked at a press conference, with you before raising the gas tax backs and he said yes. then he reversed himself. he made it clear he said, let me reiterate, i'm against, after meeting with advisement. there are ways to do this, but one of them is to stop subsidizing the oil and gas industry. and there are other places that we are wasting money. we are spending up to come in the next 30 years, a trillion dollars on upgrading our nuclear weapons arsenal. those are weapons we will never

use. i will, i know i have rebuttal. >> moderator: mr. mcfadden. mcfadden: chuck, it's a great question. we have a huge infrastructure issue in this country. i've spent the last six was traveling around minnesota. roads need to be repaired. bridges need to be repaired. it is the role of the federal government to finance infrastructure. we need to dramatically overhaul how we do it. senator franken talked about making tough calls. you've got to make tough calls but you also need to take responsibility for making wrong calls. and i believe that the way that we fund for infrastructure isn't working right now. the gas tax is unsustainable because as cars continued to get more and more gas mileage, we are going to have less and less revenue.

so we got to find a better way to do it. it's got to come out of general revenues. it's got to be part of a dramatic overhaul of the tax code. and in order to call bush that, we've got to dramatically change the mindset in washington, d.c. it is so partisan. it so partisan and no one takes responsibility. republicans don't take responsibility for outcomes. they say we can ge do anything e because we can't work with the president or we can't work with harry reid. the democrats say we can't get anything done because we can work with the house of representatives. well, this is representative democracy. it's what we signed up for. you will always have friction. you will rarely have one party will. it is the wisdom of our founding fathers of our constitution. and i put forth that al franken has proven over the last six years he is part of the problem, not part of the solution. he is the most partisan senator in the democratic party despite what he says. look at what he does. he has voted 159th out of 161 votes. he is number one in the inner

credit party. he is in a universe of one. he is part of the problem. is not part of the solution. >> moderator: senator franken? drenthe i don't know how you cherry-picked those votes. i've taken a lot more votes than that, i can tell you that. look, again, one of the things i was attacked by the mcfadden campaign was voting to get rid of a tax break for companies that send jobs overseas. i was in winona a couple years ago, i talked to a woman at a factory come in tears as she told me how trw major train one of the mexican workers is going to replace her in the jobs in mexico. and guess what? trw gets to take attacks -- a

tax deduction for closing the factory. i wanted to get rid of that to pay for the things that we need, like infrastructure. i was attacked by the mcfadden campaign for taking that vote. >> moderator: thank you, gentlemen. one more minute, yes. mcfadden: thank you, roger. appreciate it. so just to be clear. this is from open congress. you can go on the website. this is a ranking of how often democratic senators vote with the majority of the senator democratic caucus. it's 4113th session of congress which is the last session. it's over the last two years. al franken is number one. there's only one member of the democratic party in the u.s. senate that is never one. is the most partisan senator in the u.s. senate. in the democratic party. that is a fact. so once again i caution you,

look at reality. look at facts, not what al franken said. i will go to washington to fix things. i will roll up my sleeves. ..