>> next we go live to the university of delaware for the debate between delaware senate candidates incumbent democratic chris coons and his republican challenger kevin wade. live coverage. >> this is delaware's debate. >> moderator: welcome. on behalf of delaware public media and the university of delaware center for political communications welcome to delaware debate 2014. made possible with financial support by the william c. frank foundation of delaware and the american cancer society cancer action network.

joining me to co-moderate this debate is lindsay hopman university of delaware professor of communication and political science. the candidates in this race for the u.s. senate includes democrat chris coons the incumbent republican kevin wade. gentleman welcome to both of you. tonight's debate will be divided into two parts. following a one minute opening statement from each of our candidates lindsey hoffman and i will post will pose questions to the candidates. responses are limited to one minute and 30 seconds with a 1-minute rebuttal and then there will be the opportunity for moderator discussion. the second part of our debate includes questions posed by students from the university of delaware and delaware state university. responses in this portion are limited to one minute. each candidate will also have one minute for a closing statement. in our studio audience here in the mitchell hall theatre on the university of delaware campus

understands there will be no applause during tonight's debate debate. we just tell the clients ask prior to coming out this evening to determine our order and its determined we will begin with chris coons who has the first opening statement. coons: thank you to the university of delaware, delaware public media for hosting tonight's debate. i'm running for my first full term in the senate because i want to continue working for creative solutions to the real challenges we face in delaware and across our country. i worked hard to bring the delaware way to washington. i'm not going to sugarcoat it. washington is a very frustrating place to work. congress spends most of its time fighting over manufactured prices but i've been doing things differently. working on things that really matter helping the private sector to grow good middle-class jobs increasing access to college skill training ensuring all delawarians that a fair shot at the american dream. we are state that the man's principle compromise and values

results. these are the things americans and delawarians expect from their elected officials. we also expect to have nights like this one where we hear from our candidates in person in a civil discourse and learn about their vision and their values and priorities and i look forward to that conversation to my periods. >> moderator: now the opening statement from kevin wade. wade: tonight my opponent will speak of his four years in washington and will mention again and again his programs and his legislative record. he will speak of washington committees and subcommittees but he won't talk about his success in solving the problems in delaware. you and i will have a different conversation. tonight i will be speaking about us and the life we share here in delaware. i wasn't lucky enough to be born in delaware but i got here as quick as i could.

i earned a degree right here at this university and my wife of 36 years you may know her on campuses dr. gail wade has dedicated her life as a nursing professor to maternal and child health, healthy newborn babies and young moms but tonight is about you. we talked about the problems and common sense solutions and we'll we will talk about getting through these difficult times together with no one left behind. >> moderator: let's move to our first topic in their first topic is the question of foreign policy. from the handling of a bullet to the rising threat of ice as you can put a pin on the map of local unrest that we need to figure out where to put that pen. like the civil war and syria is a good place for us to start in implications of u.s. actions there. that's our starting point. an opinion piece in last week's

"new york times" asks the question whether syria will be president obama's vietnam. with the u.s. of airstrikes on the edge of a slippery slope to u.s. involvement in the region? coons: we are in a new face of military involvement in the middle east by having started airstrikes against isis in iraq and syria. i believe congress has had a constitutional role demanding of the that it sounded wonderful and -- i'm insisting that we pay for this war and that we make sure there's a route towards a clear and important victory against this terrorist group which has demonstrated their intention to massacre civilians, to americans to threaten our interest in the region and globally. in order to make sure this is not another vietnam to their question i think we on the senate foreign relations committee have an important role

to insist on a clear strategy being laid out two in insist on voting and authorization of use of force and to stay actively engaged in the oversight of the conduct of our combat against isis. >> moderator: mr. wade a 1-minute rebuttal. wade: if you had to put a pin on the problem in washington d.c. the past four years we have just a dangerous see a way from a world that has some elements of common sense of security, some structure to it with a world spinning wildly out of control. i don't know how we would consider foreign relations at this point but there are dangers coming from every direction at with people in this country. and i have not heard of a plan that looks like it leads to success in the least. i've heard something that looks less like eisenhower normandy and more like general colonel custer from little bighorn.

i know the people of the united states are unified and ready for the very bitter struggle that follows. >> moderator: we are moving to moderate discussion at this point. moving onto another issue the ebola crisis. nearly two-thirds of americans are concerned about all widespread ebola epidemic of the united states with recent news that two texas health care workers are infected. how can you reassure delawarians that the issue is under control? coons: we have a significant crisis and three west african regions. i want to erase board that i spoke with the head of the d.c. dr. tom frieden who is responsible for the public health and safety of the united states and folks from united states and delaware's response from the hospitals, the nurses in the public health service responsible for keeping delawarians say.

we have a significant concern and need to invest more in making sure we have got the resources in and the training and equipment in america's hospitals to effectively respond. >> moderator: there is no time except for the full discussion limit so you may contribute to the conversation at this point. wade: at the first problem is a lack of leadership. my opponent said out of tweak a few days ago terry lane america not to freak out about a single death of an american from ebola and now to more people have become infected. >> moderator: let him clarify if that is what the tweet stated. coons: this was a tweet that was supporting an article entitled don't freak out about a single death. let me be clear we should take seriously even a single death of united states. we need to tackle a bowl of rice out of control. and at the same time we are investing in making sure the united states is equipped to respond where there are

instances of a bowl of being brought to the united states or where american health workers contract ebola. >> moderator: can you compare the early response to ebola? wade: i'd like to speak to this. we don't have a confirmed united states surgeon general. that position has been open filled by enacting surgeon general for nearly a year. that's not the role of the u.s. house of representatives. that's the constitutional role of the u.s. senate. that spot has been empty and we don't have leadership in washington that falls directly on you senator harry reid and the democrats in congress. coons: the exact reason we did not have a confirmed surgeon general today is because of republican obstructionism. the nominee to the surgeon general made a comment about gun violence in a public health crisis in the united states. andy's been blocked from getting a vote by the republicans in the senate. and i would agree that it's a challenge that we have not been

able to fill senior positions in this administration for years because republicans in the senate have refused to allow us to ago. we need to surgeon general and there's a nominee that is competent and could lead us in that. >> moderator: . >> mr. aid while foreign-policy issues have become a big part of the national conversation jobs in the economy still remain one of the foremost issues on voters minds. a recent poll said 41% of americans stated economic issues are the most important country. what will you do to ease concerns about the economy? wade: i'd offer to put between five and 10,000 workers specifically blue-collar jobs for welders and pipefitters and electricians that pay more clerks and drivers. i know how to make two and two equal four.

it's the cheapest natural gas in the world. we are uniquely positioned and across the atlantic ocean are 300 million customers waiting to buy our natural gas. let's put this together. let's create five to 10,000 jobs right here in delaware and solve the problem. leadership and common sense. >> moderator: mr. kinzer 1-minute rebuttal on the topic. coons: i spent years in a successful experience from visiting with manufactures up and down the state to develop a bipartisan agenda to strengthen manufacturing in the senate have introduced bills and we have had hearings in the number of those bills turned into law. the best way we can move forward in our economy isn't just focusing on one particular niche like natural gas exports as desirable as that may be but a broader approach that helps the middle class by investing in skills and training access to capital and export markets and strengthening the overall american economy. >> moderator: we can now move

into moderating discussion on economy. >> mr. wade u. said we are in for what you call this on the economy. the most recent federal jobs report found employers added 248,000 jobs last month and the employment rate dropped 50% for the first time since the recession. would you still describe this as a zombie economy? coons: the stock market just two or three points today and into newly-created 284,000 new jobs. until you dig more deeply and find out the tune and 75,000 or so are part-time. people have full-time bills and they can't get by with part-time jobs. the affordable care act frankly is behind a lot of the separation of americas, full-time american and, full-time america and the part-time american i intend to fix that. this. coons: mr. wade this understands for those working at the lower

rungs of our economy, those who are seeking to get up on the first rung of the step but let me say more broadly you make a good point. the hundreds of thousands of jobs created in the last month a steady drop in the unemployment rate to point to steadily strengthening economic recovery. month over month year-over-year. we have succeeded in washington making tough choices that will cut our deficit by two-thirds over the last four years and we have succeeded in delaware in investing in the things the private sector needs to grow more strongly. i'm optimistic about our economic future. we haven't yet made enough progress for all americans. >> moderator: is there not a conservative is the minimum wage to appoint employers were off to do more with less? that's been the trend and so job creation will begin to slow do down. coons: there's a point where you can raise the minimum wage too much but i support raising the minimum wage. it hasn't been raised in years and the idea that folks should work full time and still be in poverty to me defies basic

common sense. the values that underlie the american economy that we should reward work. the smartest thing for us to do as much as raise the minimum wage but index it to inflation so you don't go through decades where stay stagnant and uses buying power. wade: the smarter things to do was to create jobs in delaware. congressman carney mentioned he had to do a carpet to save $500 -- jobs you have a tv commercial where he helped firemen and i salute you for that awaiting the healthy rest of delawarians. we carried insurance for 30 years that was canceled because obamacare. a friend of mine in june had a spinal coverage that expired because obamacare. people are being forced into paying for policies they don't want her prices they can't afford and that's the nature of

this two-part economy full-time and part-time. it's not the minimum wage. >> moderator: i want to give mr. kids a chance to respond. coons: that mr. wade mischaracterizes the impact of the affordable care but let's agree the work that i have done across tab to make sure unintended impacts on our volunteer fire service was an important effort made possible by bipartisanship. there are other things began due to deal with unintended impacts the broadly speaking 8 million more americans having health insurance and access to quality affordable health care is a good thing. >> balancing the budget is perhaps washington's unicorn. it looks really good on paper and it does lead to conscious constituency but is it realistic especially considering the uncertainty of our economy and the climate in washington? wade: i'd never heard balancing the budget described as a unicorn before so that's a new mental image for me to take into the budget committee meeting.

i will say actually balancing the budget again which we last did in 2000, excuse me where we have a surplus will take enormous sacrifices and very difficult choices. at a time when we are going back to war in the middle east and that we have a significant number of veterans returning home after 14 years of conflict at of conflict that had an aging population and we have significant costs on the federal balance sheet. the progress we have made in reducing the deficit and in making it a sustainable deficit i think is well worth noting but going forward i don't expect us to achieve a balanced budget in the next five years because the changes we would have to make to medicare medicaid and social security are unacceptable and wouldn't be supported by the american people and the depth of the cuts would have to make to her defense program would equal the unsustainable. i don't foresee a balanced budget in the short-term. >> moderator: mr. wade your rebuttal.

wade: we can get started on balancing the budget over the long-term. i proposed what i call the penny plan and i asked washington to do with moms and dads are in delaware can do over the next two weeks to cut 1 penny from each dollar in federal spending and make that cut once a year. so cut 1 penny out of each dollar this year and we will get washington 12 months not too weakens the 12 months to find a second penny the second year. year by year 1 penny by 1 penny while the lead revenues increase and somewhere between six and 10 years from now like mathematical certainty we will have -- then we can get to work on the problem of a 50 year plan to eliminate the federal debt. we need to get started and need to be based on common sense. that's the penny plan. >> moderator: where the porsche moderated discussion. and a few want to respond to that or change to a new aspect.

wade: i was a briefly to the penny plan proposed by senator enzi of wyoming is appealing in its simplicity but this is a basic point which i just made which is that we have steadily increased costs facing the federal government. to take her current baseline and cut from their misses the fact that simply committing our obligations are veterans and seniors and to those who rely on medicare and medicaid and social security which is more than a third of all delawarians can't be achieved by steadily cutting -. >> sequestration. we have talked about the unicorns and maybe the elephants that sequestration resulted from a congressional to reach a deal on the deficit reduction has left an annual automatic defense cut. given the increasingly violent nature of the situation in syria and iraq should more money be allocated to the armed forces? coons: yes. wade: sequestration took a

chainsaw to something that needed a scalpel. congress had months to reach a solution. they later complained about it and it's going to leave us with a united states army with fewer troops than we had in 1940 and then the navy smaller than we had in 1915 s. problem swirl around the world. there are cuts to be found everywhere and waste fraud and abuse at the federal government. we have to do some real thinking to come up with real priorities for our nation today in this crisis and down crisis and on the roads to the future. we are not getting that out of washington. >> moderator: where does our infrastructure fit into this? if you ask in a you ask any simple and generic error telling you the clock is ticking and we are on the verge of a huge infrastructure crisis on our nation's highways. is it just going to stay on the back burner? coons: we manage to get a

infrastructure bill passed in the recent summit and we do agree on a bipartisan basis away to increase both public investment leverage private investment to make sure we catch up on some of our outdated infrastructure but we are not getting there fast enough. he pointed central issue which is the investments we need to make in order for america to be competitive again against other countries like china and others that are investing heavily in world-class modern infrastructure. the united states needs to invest in education come in research and infrastructure to be competitive. >> moderator: i want to give you a chance to respond. wade: i will mind the audience that in $209,850,000,000,000 of the taxpayers money was authorized for stimulus program in the primary central focus was infrastructure. what happened to $850 billion? we need new management in washington not wear the same. we need to take a new path. >> moderator: we will move onto her next topic for lindsay.

>> with that about health care the verbal care act, mr. wade let's move onto a new topic. grade the affordable care act and describe your position. wade: it gives me unique perspective about balancing budgets and making decisions and coming up with engineering solutions that work and in september of 2013 after 30 years of providing high-quality insurance to our employees at no cost to them i received a cancellation notice that i called my insurance company i said what's going on? i was told his obamacare could i said i have less than 50 employees and the president told me if i liked my insurance i could keep it. they said well the insurance industry is in chaos and turmoil and you and many other small businesses are being canceled. i'm hearing the story around delaware. it's not a benefit to most people. there were 12 awesome policies canceled and that's 20 or 25,000 people. i was speaking to an ironworker

a week ago. his premiums have gone to $2400 a month. senator, now you were able to define a partial waiver for your staff and you that delaware needs a waiver. all of us need a waiver. it's a beast and it needs to be put down. it hurts people today and it will hurt people tomorrow. obamacare needs to be repealed and we need to bring back the market-based insurance system and bring back what i call neighbor health to provide a way for people who want insurance and don't have it through voluntary service. >> moderator: 1-minute rebuttal. sub -- coons: let's go back to where we were before the affordable care act and remind people that 900,000 delawarians had no health insurance and tens of thousands of delawarians who earned health insurance for their employers discovered it didn't work when they needed it. pre-existing conditions. folks who survived cancer would be denied insurance as their

reward for having survived cancer. women could be discriminated against and health insurance rates simply for being women in pregnancy could be a pre-existing condition. parents could give birth to a child that survived weeks in the nicu only to find out they hadn't annual cap. the insurance before the affordable care act had significant problems. there are challenges for small business and i'm working with the insurance commission and have introduced legislation to deal as some of the very real impact on small business at the larger goal of expanding access to high-quality health care i believe the affordable care act has made progress. >> mr. wade you said people have lost their jobs should be able to obtain health insurance. [inaudible] how would you enact this program?

wade: by leadership in talking to my colleagues in the u.s. senate and over in the house and knock on the door of the white house and say we have an idea that america wants. people who have lost their jobs have not lost their working skills. can we understand that? if you are a bookkeeper you still have bookkeeping skills and if you are an electrician you still have electrician skills in every community has needs. let's put the people who have those job skills that don't have jobs to work in the community. if they choose that ended return for 20 or 30 hours a month we will pay their health insurance premium. it's not low cost of its free but it's voluntary. allow the rest of us to get back to something we can afford. if obamacare were so good why did he ask for a waiver and why does he ask for carveouts for some? >> moderator: i want to make sure we get discussion on this point because we don't want to be left without time at the end. coons: let me speak to an untruth that mr. wade is spoken

about twice. the terms of the affordable character covered by the mantis which to buying insurance for ourselves and our families and our staff through the exchanges. i have personally the experience of going on line in trying to buy through the exchanges and learning some of the frustrations and the initial enrollment period. it's not perfect but i think it's made significant and realistic progress towards a major goal. making the insurance at many of us earn per hour employment really work when we needed and providing access to affordable insurance for those who didn't previously have it. >> would the think you can do and how can you improve the affordable care act? of the there are number of bills that i've agreed to co-sponsor so i will mention two. one of them senator begich is the lead sponsor on. expand tax credits to small employers so they can afford to continue providing health insurance. some of the minimum coverage requirements of the affordable care act mean you have to provide broader and more robust coverage than you would have to

force an employer. making that affordable to employers as a key piece of clear still obviously working out the details. second i joined with senator pryor to make exemptions for certain religious organizations that as a matter of faith. don't ask for some modern health care system that i was disappointed as the campaign season began our republican co-sponsors walked away from the bill. my hope that after the election if i'm reelected i will have a chance to work across the aisle by many the different ways we can deal with the part-time full-time problem the 50 versus 100 employer challenge. >> moderator: they will move onto her next topic since there's not enough time to continue a discussion that point emphasis on education that goes to mr. coons. , grace under fire in a windowless initiative the state level by the national governors association is seen as a precursor to what some feel the federal takeover of a public education system. some critics are dubbing it the obama core. how valid do you see this

criticism since it could be argued that it is somewhat on point that the goal of common chorus to set a baseline standard nationally? coons: the idea of a baseline standard skills that students should get on completing high school where that santa has been developed in the collaborative conversation between state education leaders and governors does not frighten me. in fact what i hear from educators and manufactures and employers up and down the state of delaware is that there has long been a yearning for a clear roadmap for what it is young people should be learning at different stages so we can measure their skills and their progress. this isn't a washington mandate in a washington takeover of education but it's important for us to be attentive to that. it's a legitimate concern. unlike many other countries who don't have a centralized national education bureaucracy. education is largely funded and driven at the state level and here in have been blessed to have the governor and the

secretary of education and in the dsca union that represents most of our teachers that works well together to implement changes. i am optimistic that as long as we keep on an equal basis the importance of educating children and respecting teachers as professionals while still providing for the private sector and education that produces the skills we need in the modern workplace that we can keep making progress. i frankly think calling common core obama core is trying to glom on a "fox news" cynical take on education to something that was started at the state level and has real promise. >> moderator: mr. wade a 1-minute rebuttal. wade: this is a universal recipe to teach every kid in to public school the same thing in the same way. we are not distinguishing between louisiana and maine florida and -- common core

delays the onset of -- the eighth grade to the ninth grade. one of the leading advocates opponents for common chorus bill gates. he is a brilliant man and a college dropout i will add but the most important thing to take away from this discussion is bill gates since his children to one of the most exclusive private schools on the west coast and that school on the web site says we don't teach common core. not that i i want hermione both during our moderated discussion you do not need to wait. you are allowed to defend a question to let me jump off of what you said enough both of you what education choices that you made for your family's? where have your children attended school and i believe your grandchildren as well. what is the educational landscape for you?

coons: my wife is catholic and i'm partisan. she grew up in parochial schools and i grew up in public schools are a great and a great inslee racer on children with a wide range of public parochial and private schools. we really liked this balance. a balance of values diversity in educational. wade: our daughter went to -- at burkas school. we are not roman catholic. we are protestant but we value the foundation that they used to teach in the principles that if you live in the school while it existed. the economy made it too difficult for too many parents to get that tuition. now she is married with two wonderful grandchildren for galen. there are public school now but they have now decided they do what they can do to get out of public school system. they are disappointed with common chorus and understand it. that reaction is taking place

across delaware because it's a centralized system designed by washington. >> moderator: i will bring up appalled at the university of delaware released today which finds residents give mediocre grades to the public schools the higher grades to the private school system. what would you do to ensure a good education for all students in delaware? wade: what i propose is very simple. equal opportunity universal vouchers. every parent has one chance to educate his children, one chan chance. it costs $14,000 a year to educate a child in a delaware public schools even under common core. a 10,000-dollar voucher available to every child allows them a full range of opportunities that my daughter has and the children have.

coons: respect teachers and teaching as a profession. my mother and grandmother were public-school teachers at different points in their careers. engage parents in education. parents today are often stressed from working two jobs and juggling different children different schools. the national aca gave me an award for my leadership on parent-teacher engagement have introduced legislation to strengthen our investment in parent engagement centers in our schools. third better align employers in the future needs of our workforce is what we are teaching in schools whether it's in boats or charter schools or private schools would need to have a better sense of what the skills are that are needed in the modern workforce in last make we are making children aware and their parents aware of the cost of higher education and making access to college more affordable. >> mr. wade the gallup poll on america's ratings of congress 14% approval rate was the lowest

before 1974. if the republicans gain control isn't the selection how can we expect to see more partisanship on capitol hill for the next two years? had a plan to fulfill your campaign promises in such a climate? wade: i've told people up and down delaware i'm not going to be the republican senator from delaware and i certainly won't be the democratic senator from delaware. i hope to be the independent voice. my opponent has voted with his party leadership harry reid 97% of the time. that's part of the log jam. i will work as an engineer with anyone who has a solution. liberal conservative center democrat republican. if it works i want to get behind it. that's my promise to delaware and i keep my promises.

coons: i committed myself to doing something with each of my 2010 classmates 1313 of whom are republican. as recently named the third most bipartisan democratic senator could have introduced legislation with more than 35 members of the republican caucus so my opponent might cite some rating in terms of how may times that go with my leader. that's correct we are talking about confirming judges and ambassadors but in some ways about the matters most will be the vote cast in the first day day. will you be voting for mitch mcconnell is leader? i suspect it will. will i be voting for democrat? i samba democratic values. i will continue to fight for raising the minimum wage in dealing with the equality gap and strengthening our economy because those are the things that delawarians expect of us. >> this summer the supreme court ruled hobby lobby could opt out of providing birth control coverage for person -- for

religious reasons. wade: i think the recent developments by the supreme court in hobby lobby to extend to corporations first amendment rights that were previously understood is an unfortunate direction for the courts to have taken. they love isn't just some small family craft store. the multibillion-dollar issuing company while i respect the religious views of the family that owns this large company i think the decisions about a woman's access to kant deception should be made in the doctor's office not in the boardroom. wade: let me set the record straight if i could. that decision denied no women birth control. not a single woman was denied birth control because of that. it was his decision about freedom. it was a decision about freedom. the employees of hobby lobby

were not prevented from going to the pharmacy and buying inexpensive birth-control. it was about freedom senator. he mentioned the first amendme amendment. let me bring up the point that george will one of the most respected columnist in the country writes for the "washington post" one of the most respected newspapers specifically named ute delaware senator coons as an extremist for attempting to redefine the first amendment of the constitution. it was about freedom and that was a good ruling. coons: but let's be clear. i join many centers in supporting a constitutional member that would restore the previous balance the forces unit that allowed for responsible and reasonable regulations on campaign contributions. citizens united took out more than a century of precedent and is open to floodgate to literally hundreds of millions of dollars in secret campaign contributions from corporations labor unions and wealthy

individuals. while i respect their difference of opinion on what the first amendment means that to suggest i'm an extremist for trying to restore balance and to get back to a place where flood of campaign cash shouldn't be allowed to influence elections i don't think it's extreme. wade: i would like to respond to that if i may. george will is not an extremist. senator you have raised $9 million in campaign donations in the past for five years. i would like to ask the audience to raise their hand. don't raise your hand but i will ask the tv audience raise your hand if you are 9 million dollars in federal -- i think it's interesting he brings up cash in politics. $9 million senator. coons: i wish i would have raised $9 million. you exaggerate. wade: that's a public record. so the that's an inaccurate sighting of the public record.

the important differences all of my contributions are transparently available in terms of who made them when and where they are employed. with citizens united made possible its millions of dollars in secret contributions for the public has no idea from whence they come. >> moderator: we are going to move on to student questions. their first question -- wade: do we have any engineering students? >> or question comes from a freshman political science major from the university of delaware. >> in light of the white house launching their key it's on this campaign what can congress do to support the movement against sexual assault and rape on college campuses? coons: i think it's important to congress joined campus leaders in making our campuses safe for young women and young men to insist on accountability and transparency to make sure those campuses that often largely rely

on federal funds were there for grants for higher education or investments in research that they abide by the law and they investigate, prosecute and deal responsibly with sexual assault on campus. i think this is an important issue that there's our attention and focus. wade: let's expand the safety zone beyond the campus. i had a great opportunity to speak to an inspiring woman a few weeks ago. she has an organization called meet me at the well. she's out there supporting women who have to prostitute themselves because they have no place to go and they are on the edge of drug addiction and they live in a world of violence and fear that if we are going to provide a safe place for women let's make it everywhere senator. let's expand it everywhere for every woman. thanks. >> moderator: now we go to our second student question the issue of immigration reform and they question comes from a

political science major at delaware university. >> what is your view on immigration reform and what action steps you plan to if elected into office? >> moderator: mr. wade. wade: i learned a great lesson by going to the southern border five or six weeks ago. i met with ranchers and shopkeepers and loss -- one person shares. we ever broken border and it's hurting people on both sides. because we don't have effective border security it has created a vacuum. that vacuum is being filled by the say the cartel for control passengers from the southern side. everyone who crosses must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars per carry drugs that displays part of the flood touching so many homes and neighborhoods in delaware and with women they have to use their body as a -- we have to secure the border so we can stop hurting people on both sides.

and we have to get realistic about that dates to be done first because it's first in the minds of people in america. coons: we have a robe border security issue that deserves to be addressed and as a senator i've worked in a bipartisan way with republican senators like john mccain and jeff flake and marco rubio and colleagues in my cart party to introduce immense strength and then pass a broad bipartisan conference of immigration reform bill first to the judiciary committee which a serpent in the senate of the united states. we need to invest in strengthening border security nearly doubling the size of the border patrol but also providing a path forward for the nearly 12 million people in the united states illegally that allows us to identify detained to port those who are dangerous and too to set in place a long-term path for those who are here illegally to confess to the crime pay a fine learn english and go to the

back of a line. this is a bipartisan compromise that i think is worthy of our continuing to advance. >> moderator: because of a topic we will stick with it for follow-up question from lindsay hoffman and we will go to mr mr. coons for us. >> children across the border without their parents some of them have found refuge in delaware. what should be done with situation what does it tell us about her immigration policies? coons: tells us we have a bad situation both our law under border. unfortunately in the last couple of months a number of young children coming from three central american countries where there's a huge amount of drug and gang violence has dropped partly because we have strength in a border patrol partly because we have invested in speeding up their immigration review so we are sifting out those with legitimate asylum claims and partly because we have invested in educating their parents that they are not guaranteed to stay here and they don't have a pre-pasteur citizenship or residency united states. what do we need to do? we need to respect and enforce

the law as it exists on the books which requires those who present legitimate asylum claims in the traditions of the united states get a chance of being refugees here. those who don't have legitimate asylum claims are returned to their countries of origin. this is a difficult situation but one where i am proud the united states has acted in keeping with its best traditions of embracing immigrants while still working to secure america. >> mr. wade. wade: are priorities for 200 million americans would like to be first in her own lines. our priority is to stop this chaos at the border. i met a young ranching family a sheriff of valverde county was with me. their young daughter found a piece of paper on the ranch property two miles from the rio grande. that piece of paper was a freshly printed note from the bank of obama.

why is middle east currency being found in the country of texas? it's because we have a broken border and it's not working chris. washington isn't working. it's time to put america and delawarians for us. that is what i will do as a senator for delaware to be their voice. not a republican voice or democrat voice but their voice and that's what we desperately need. >> moderator: we are going to move onto next student question concerning federal and local law enforcement and it comes from michael nichols a sophomore business management major at delaware university. >> to the federal government provide the local police force with military style weapons? wade: the answer is no. we don't want to militarize our police force. our plea should be representing the best nature of those in our society. the original meaning of the word is to clean up the area and make it nicer to police in area. we don't need heavy weapons. we don't need armored vehicles and apparently some police forces around the country.

we are building a wall of tension between the people and their police force. we don't militarize the police. it's a very simple answer. coons: it's important to understand the premise of the question. ferguson was a heart-rending situation in missouri where the visual image of the police response to protesters was one where they were seen to be aggressive and militarize. we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. there's a long-standing federal program is taking military equipment and providing it to local law enforcement. as someone who co-chairs the law enforcement caucus i can tell you some of that equipment has been essential to delaware safety at response to national disasters. in some communities were a humvee a surplus military humvee is provided it's used to evacuate the seaside community where superstorm sandy is bearing down.

what we need to do is separate out that equipment that is uniquely military that probably should not be provided to local police and that equipment which helps provide capacity to respond to crises whether man-made or natural. >> moderator: let's follow up on this point. >> let's talk about gun deaths in the u.s.. a study released by the united states revealed that the united states have more gun deaths than any developed country well. what can you do to reduce gun violence in mr. coons first? coons: i stand with law enforcement calling for stronger background check in making sure we don't allow those who are mentally ill and those have been adjudicated and 10 on causing harm to others or have felony records have easy access to weapons. we weapons. we have to balance the fundamental freedoms of the second amendment with keeping our communities safe. nobody wants to take away the guns. those who have them for sport so protection are law-abiding

citizens that we can and should do more to knock down the straw purchasers allowing people to get guns illegally. and to ensure we are not allowing guns to get in the hands of criminals as easily as we currently do. wade: and glad that senator coons share respect for the second amendment. these tragic outburst of violence we have seen around the country tie in most cases directly to an untreated and serious mental illness. the problem is not the national rifle association. it's not the second amendment. it's not lawful ownership of a firearm. the problem is we have too many people who are in this community and communities across the country who are seriously mentally ill and they can't get the treatment they need to help them and prevent harm to themselves as well as harm to the community. some mental health issue and

it's a leadership issue and it's a public health issue. >> moderator: we are going to move onto the next student question from elizabeth pitt junior environmental and energy major at the university of delaware and this is about the sea level rise. >> is an environmentally conscious student i was wondering if you could elaborate on their plans to mitigate the effects of sea level rise. >> moderator: mr. wade you have the first response. wade: newcastle bound by the dutch and the dutch have an expression in holland. god made the world but the dutch made holland and that was by a series of levees and poulter's and. the first thing they did was they build a levee to drain some of the swamps. the struggle that man has with rivers and the seacoast is never-ending. it's always been with us. as an engineer who needs to professionally follow the science and the data wherever it leads i remain a very informed

but skeptical person in terms of the mandate global warming driving the rise of sea level. there's a studies that it's been used unfortunately by some people in delaware to alarm people about a potential five verizon sea level. the study concludes sea level is rising off the coast of delaware but not off the coast of new york city and i can't quite balance this is good science. coons: too much to respond to there. god may have made the world but man is making the climate steadily change. towns like newcastle wilmington lewis and many others up and down our state have the lowest mean elevation state in the country. we will face significant impacts from climate change in the

coming decades. i have worked hard in the senate as a member of the energy committee by first two years to propose and seek passage of the clean energy standard new ways to finance renewable and clean energy in ways for us to responsibly set up a deal on an international basis with the real challenge to the future of our world presented by climate change. my hope can find a bipartisan path going forward and those that claim to be well-educated scientists are skeptics over an area where there's an overwhelming scientific consensus are disappointing because they stand as barriers to real progress. wade: i would like to respond. >> moderator: in the interest of the rules i needed to make that point in your closing statement mr. wade. i need to move on. out of respect for the rules that we all agreed upon. the next question on ethanol speech or comes from chris a senior biochemistry major at the university of delaware.

>> considering the role of big oil and government do you thin think -- [inaudible] >> moderator: mr. coons you have the first response. coons: to chris' response i'm optimistic that cellulosic avenel and other forms where dupont and a number of other companies are real leaders will eventually replace gasoline although the scale is dramatic. we are in the most early stages of developing widescale productions for things like cellulosic oven on and will be a long time before it replaces gasoline but i'm optimistic that plant-based rather than petroleum based fuels in the long-term obey the most reliable most renewable sustainable source of fuel for future. >> moderator: mr. wade. wade: is the only engineer sitting here it will never happen. the amount of fuel that we need to propel this economy far outstrips our ability to raise

saudi low-scoring. i believe in an energy policy that includes all sources that they have to compete and they have to meet our needs. washington can't pick winners and losers because they always get it wrong. we have an abundance -- we have become the world's largest oil producer. the starting wage in north dakota is $15 an hour. this is what is blooming the economy does. we can't close her eyes to the possibilities of the treasures that lie beneath the ground in this country. i like pipe dreams but only in children's novels. >> moderator: we will move onto student will move on to student questions and the university of delaware. this comes from a senior international relations major jordan levinson and the question is about college tuition rates. >> is a student at the university of delaware i'm concerned with the rise in tuition rates and i was

wondering both candidates what your positions were on how to cope with that. >> moderator: mr. wade you have the first response. wade: i think we need to ask the administration of this university and across the country to understand that if someone's money they are charging this tuition. they have allowed tuition rates, the cost of higher education to rise faster than the cost of living over the past 10 to one ears and it's a reaction to people who are trying to find a path forward in their lives because of the lack of blue-collar jobs who are willing to pay anything to get that degree. unfortunately too many people graduate and are unable to find a job much different than i would have gotten coming out of high school without a college education but burdened with debt. we need to talk to our leaders in academia and asked them to do a little bit more with a little bit less to give a break to her students. coons: we need to strengthen the federal state partnership in providing funding for higher

education. as the federal government continues to provide through programs billions of dollars every year to make higher education affordable states across the country have receded in terms of their support for higher education. so we have got the difficult situation where tuition is continued to rise. the amount of state support for universities like this continues to drop in the cost of higher education and its import an increasingly competitive economy go. i sponsored legislation of get afes -- access to guaranteed loans and it would seek to penalize those for-profit colleges which are not doing by the best interest of their students. there is more we should do it to reduce the rate of tuition and sustaining the federal role of access to higher education. >> i think lindsay hopman and i have several issues but we are at the point now for closing statements.

each of you will have one minute for closing statement. we begin with kevin wade you will have the first. wade: thank you for your questions might be that much enjoy. thanks for being with me tonight. the problem today in america is that our leaders in washington no longer believe in us. we believe in each other and all of us together will see that we get our way through this most dangerous and disturbing time we are in with ebola and broken borders and isis. i went to work three days after high school. i climbed the ladder of opportunity right here in delaware. everything good in my life happened because of that climb climbed. i spent 40 years from the board to the boardroom pay no how to create high wage blue-collar jobs. i know we need to get parents real choice in education. i know we need to secure the border. i know how real the threat of the bull is here and islamist

terrorists they are and here. i know we need honest experience leadership in washington. on election day we are going to set things right. we won't be deceived. god bless all of you and may god save the united states of america. coons: thanks for coming tonight into everyone who listened and watched into nancy and lindsay from uttering. tonight i hope you learned a bit more about my vision for delaware and america service about why and seeking my first full term in the senate. i believe in delaware's workers and i believe we can grow things and make things in the state again. that's why every day i'm fighting hard to help the private sector create good jobs. i believe every young delawarian deserves the same opportunity to succeed which means making sure markets get to college and can afford it when they get there. it's not easy to get things done in washington but when i'm able to break through the gridlock and help our volunteer fire service the relief from the new

health care law or secure funding to help save our child advocacy centers and i'm making a difference in the lives of people i care about. the only way we are going to get things done in washington is to work together. if i am fortunate enough to earn your vote on november 4 that will keep working to find common ground reach across the aisle and get real things done for this great state of ours. >> moderator: gentlemen thank you both for joining us and thank you to lindsay hopman for joining me and our audience in mitchell hall. on behalf of delaware public media and the university of delaware senator -- center for medication thank you very much for joining us. ♪

.. why is is continually on c-span? is either on one, too, or three. >> i enjoy very much the intelligent discussions on c-span, and i love the fact that there are no

commercials. >> c-span is my favorite station. >> continue to let us know what you think. call us. e-mail us. more you can send us at tweet. join the c-span conversation , like us on facebook, follows on twitter . >> defense secretary chuck hagel was aquinos speaker at the annual meeting of the association of the u.s. army. in his remarks he spoke about his proposal to reduce the active duty army force and one of the consequences of sequestration. to technical difficulties we missed the start of the speech. this is 25 minutes. >> the united states army helped define me. and i have always been very proud of my service as a

soldier. it allowed me to witness courage and nobility that would never have had the opportunity to see if i had not have been a soldier in the united states army. i know it helped me in may be made me a better person. my brothers serve with me in vietnam and feels the same about his service. so i deeply appreciate, general sullivan, the privilege to address not only the strongest advocates for america's army but also our one million-plus active duty guard and reserve soldiers. to understand the place of honor that they hold across our military one need only look to the words of navy seals and recently retired admiral and the craven who earlier this year said, there is no more noble calling them to be a soldier

in the united states army. together we had a time of great transition for the army and the nation a service. in december, as we responsibly end our combat role in afghanistan and transition to a train and assist mission, the afghan national security forces will be fully responsible for their country's security an accomplishment made possible by the tremendous sacrifices of american troops. our partners and the afghan people. as the army emerges from over 13 years of large-scale combat operations, the longest in history, it faces new challenges. the world is becoming more volatile aisle, less predictable, and in many ways more threatening. at the same time, our defense budgets are declining. the theme that you have chosen this year, trusted

professionals today and tomorrow is well-suited to describe the kind of soldiers america will need as we navigate this time of change and uncertainty. before i address where the army is and where is going, we should remind ourselves and the american people of where the army is coming from. over the past 13 years more than 1 million soldiers deployed to the wars in iraq in afghanistan, one out of six of these soldiers was deployed to both countries. more than half a million soldiers, 30 percent of them guardsmen and reservists in toward all the multiple deployments command as ground forces the shoulder of very heavy burden. they fought in the mud and the sand in the streets doing most of the fighting and dying in adapting under fire to a kind of conflict far different from what the

army trained and prepared for during and after the cold war. 70 percent of u.s. personnel wounded in action show will last 13 years were from the u.s. army. countless soldiers have come home with a visible and invisible ones of war. our enduring obligation to take care of them and their families is a sacred responsibility that we must always uphold. through the crucible of combat and a grinding counterinsurgency campaign the american soldiers fought on. and as a result, today's army is as battle tested as it has ever been. of all the soldiers who served in iraq since 2003 and nearly half are still on active duty or in the guard and reserves. of those who served in afghanistan, almost two-thirds are still on the army. the strength and resilience, and dedication of these

soldiers are what the army is about. then make the army has foundation, and our military's global presence and engagement. the army's contributions to our security are as critical today as ever. we see it in west africa. soldiers support -- soldiers and fort campbell and fort bragg will soon deploy as a key part of america's contribution to the global effort to stop the spread of ebola before it becomes an even more grave threat. we see it in poland and the baltics where soldiers from fort hood first cavalry division are reinforcing and reassuring our nato allies in the faces of russian aggression. we see it in iraq where soldiers are deploying to train by advise and assist forces and the fight against

isil, and we will soon see it in saudi arabia where soldiers will help train and equip members of the moderate syrian opposition. the president has been very clear that he will not commit our armed forces to fighting another ground war in iraq or become involved in a war in syria. this is not because we think that wars cannot be waged without committing troops to combat. our strategy and iraq in syria does require forces on the ground. they must be local forces. we will help them, support them, train and. this is not only the best way to degrade and ultimately defeats terrorists, but it is the only sustainable path to defeating terrorism and extremism. this is a critical point that the chairman and chief of defense from 21 other nations discussed yesterday

at andrews air force base. at an important congress that helped reinforce our coalition against isil. in the near term the army is unlikely to repeat another iraq or afghanistan type campaign, that is regime change and occupation followed by nation-building under fire. however, this does not mean the demand for the army is diminishing or that the army's place in our national security strategy is lowered it is not. while there are no longer 150,000 soldiers in ground wars in iraq in afghanistan as there were five years ago, there are still almost as many soldiers either deployed or four were stationed. that includes some 80,000 soldiers in the pacific command area.

more than any other. nearly 20,000 soldiers in south. standing ready to fight tonight. there are also 40,000 soldiers under central command, 28,000 soldiers in europe, and thousands in both africa and south america, some of whom i visited in columbia last week. the demands on the army will only grow more diverse and complicated going forward. threats from terrorists and insurgents will remain with us for a long time, we also must deal with a revisionist russia with its modern and capable army on nato's doorstep. and as disruptive technologies and destructive weapons proliferate in the hands of state and not state actors, the specter of so-called hybrid warfare looms large.

the tactics of insertion -- the tactics of an insurgence with the tools of armed forces and their sophisticated technologies. the army will remain the essential to helping to teheran confront every national security threat facing our country. there will always be a need for a modern, ready, well equipped, well-trained standing army, but maintaining a ready and capable army as we come out of the 13 years of continuous large-scale combat will not be easy. for the army to fulfill its role as a guarantor of our national security flower soldiers must continue to be exceptionally well lead to a well-trained, and well-equipped. that is especially true because the global security environment is more unpredictable and never. with crises erupting at any time, crises that require america to lead the world in response. we must not forget the lessons of history.

we have seen how quickly a battle hardened army can weather into a force that is ill-equipped and ill prepared to carry out its mission, and we have seen the consequences. in july 1950, 5 years after america's military victory in world war ii, the soldiers of task force smith were sent to the first battle of the korean war with orders to halt the north korean advance. undertrained, under equipped, outnumbered, and i'm prepared. within hours of engaging the enemy it was routed and ultimately suffering a casualty weight of nearly 30%. soldiers page for portraying to import equipment and manpower leaders with their lives. we have also seen how past drawdowns sought to protect the training and equipment that is the essence of military readiness. when general sullivan was

army chief of staff in the early 1990's after desert storm in the end of the cold war, the army made it difficult but necessary decision to reduce the size of the force in order to safeguard readiness. with no more taskforce smith as its mantra. as general sullivan said at the time, the reason we cut was to keep what we've retained a trained and ready . today no more taskforce smith must once again be our model. we need to maintain an exceptionally ready army. but because of the steep, deep, and abrupt defense budget cuts that sequestration has imposed on us the last year the army had to cancel some many critical training rotations that we had only two active duty brigade combat teams that were fully ready and available to execute a major

combat operation. thanks to the budget compromise reached last december and the army's relentless focus on training , army readiness as improved whereas a year ago was 12 out of 37 brigade combat teams that are trained to the highest levels of readiness. well, this is a direct result of the army's ability to adapt to unreasonable budget restraints falling short of what i believe is sufficient to defend our nation and our allies with minimum risk. we must continue to put readiness first in the current budget environment, which is why we have modestly reduced the size of the army and protected training and maintenance in our budget. training readiness for capacity is the past to a hollow force. our soldiers deserve better than that. they deserve a stable and

predictable budget that gives them and their families the training and support the need. but despite temporary relief, sequestration remains the law of the land. congress does not act it will return in 2016 stunting and reversing the army's readiness, just as we have begun to recover and requiring even more dramatic reductions in force structure. the military as a whole will face a similar readiness crisis if congress does not accept the program cuts and compensation reforms we have proposed in our budget. across the department of defense we could face a $70 billion gas in our budget over the next five years as congress prevents us from moving forward with these changes. and we would have little choice but to make up their differences through custer readiness. the department of defense leaders understand there will be less resources

available, but the army in our military the congress to be a partner in responsible, long-term planning and budgeting. we will continue to urge congress to put an end to sequestration, and irresponsible deferral of responsibility. i greatly appreciate general sullivan and the asu a support. if your support for many of our hearts and necessary trade-offs meant to protect readiness and the department of defense budget proposal. we must also continue to press congress to join us in making these tough decisions because our challenges will become far more difficult and far more dangerous the longer we defer the tough choices. army have expressed concerns about uncertainty. i have been very clear, chairman dempsey has been very clear. we have been clear with the

congress, with their troops, with their families, and with the american people. i fear -- i share many of these concerns. but as we work through our current budget challenges the army must still face the new reality of shrinking resources, sustained demands , and a more competitive and unpredictable strategic environment and environment that our current defense strategy remains capable of addressing. the army and our entire military will need to continue thinking critically about its future role and mission is to insure that it is not only ready but irrelevant for both the short and long term missions it will need to continue to learn, adapt, evolve, and innovate. readiness demands agility. i want to commend the secretary mccue and the

general for taking the critical first steps in this direction, setting the course for the armies forced 2025 and beyond, shaping the new army operating concept unveiled over the past week here. i will continue to work closely with both of them and all of our army leaders to build the army that the nation needs, the army that the nation deserves, and the army that our troops need for the future. to succeed, i believe the army must renew its commitment to readiness across three critical resources, its people, its capabilities, and its partnerships. first, the army must keep all laser focus in their readiness of its most precious resource, its people. because soldiers are not in the army.

they are the army. our soldiers need to be well trained at all levels from the individual to the brigade commander must be prepared to face challenges from across the spectrum of conflict remind us that even as we prepare against high-end threats like cyber and precision missiles, the human dimension of war is inescapable. so we cannot forget what we have learned about counter-terrorism, counterinsurgency, and building partner capacity. we must retain the skills. at the same time, our soldiers must also be ready for full spectrum operations it takes time. it takes resources. to be ready for the range of challenges will most likely face in the future, soldiers

need to experience nonlinear the full spectrum training that mimics today's complex operational environment. this kind of decisive action, this kind of decisive action training is best conducted at the army combat training centers, the joint readiness training center and the national training center at fort irwin, california which will visit next month. at these brigade level training centers soldiers are immersed in realistic threats in areas where they face a dynamic fix -- makes of guerrilla terrorist and criminal, and here fear conventional opposing forces in addition to preparing soldiers for full spectrum operations prod decisive action training helps develop the kind of agile, adaptive, and innovative leaders that the army needs to be ready for future threats. many army leaders already recognize that in a volatile

world with a ride in range of missions we can no longer get by with training soldiers what to think. we must train them how to think. so they driving conditions of uncertainty and chaos and are unpredictable to our adversaries. going forward whether we can keep our soldiers ready in the future will depend on congress's partnership in providing the resources to fund the training our soldiers need. second, the army must be ready with the right capabilities both today and in the future, ensuring that the equipment are soldiers currently have is well maintained and that we continue to innovate going forward. more than any other service, the army is well-suited to this task because the army knows its key weapons platforms for everything still comes down to the

soldier. it also knows that a capability is about more than just new technology or equipment with less money. it is also about how we creatively use our technology and equipment to achieve our objectives. the army has begun adapting capabilities to be ready for the most likely missions of the future, ensuring that prepositioned equipment stocks can support a wider range of operations. and even flying apache helicopters of navy ships to gauge fell army aviation could contribute to surface warfare earths, the army is combining manned and unmanned capabilities, enabling combat helicopter pilots to monitor and operate weapons from blanks, aerial drones, testing driverless resupply convoys that can free up manpower for more important tasks. to stay ready for future

challenges, the army must keep innovating for the long term. ongoing rebalance in the asia-pacific, the army could broaden its role by leveraging its current sweep of long-range precision guided missiles, rockets, artillery, and air defense systems. these capabilities would provide multiple benefits, such as starting the defenses of u.s. installations, enabling greater mobility. greater mobility is of navy aegis destroyers and other joint force assets and helping ensure the free flow of commerce. this is worthy of consideration going forward. such a mission is not as foreign to the army as it might seem. after the war of 18 to of the army was tasked with america's coastal defense for more than 100 years. finally, one thing we learned over the past 13 years is that the army is effective but more than a

combined arms maneuver in white areas security. it is exceptionally effective at training with friends and allies, helping them grow stronger while improving in dropper billy for the future. building partner capacity is one of the army's most valuable capabilities, which is why the army must continue taking steps to expand and diversify its partnerships while ensuring that this critical mission continues to be embraced throughout the army's divisions. but we must also be clear ride upon our missions. building partner capacity cannot happen in a vacuum. as we have seen in iraq this year, a political context is critical, as is the los and especially. today the army is better positioned to work with partners because of its regional allied forces.

nearly every unit from division headquarters to the theater enablers to combat brigades is now aligned with a geographic region, which makes it easier for the army to provide tailored responses to engage with our allies and partners. and because soldiers receive specialized cultural, regional, and language training before deploying, they can better understand local underlying social, political, economic, historical factors to of all are involved in securing. ultimately making them more effective in accomplishing the mission. shaping the security environment has become a core competency for the army so rather than return to garrison, our soldiers must remain prepared to engage around the world. those stationed here at home must be trained and ready to

respond to a full range of contingencies was there mission includes building partner capacity, reassuring and reenforcing allies or providing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. across all these efforts people come up capabilities, and partnerships in keeping the army ready for today and tomorrow's challenges will not be easy. the future security environment remains uncertain. trying to predict it will continue to be as challenging as ever. six months after austrian archduke franz ferdinand was assassinated president woodrow wilson spoke to congress and predicted a growing cordiality among nations foreshadowing an agent of social peace and goodwill. he spoke those words 101 years ago. we all know that history

proved the president ron. this so-called war to end all wars was anything but a war to end all wars. a century later, we cannot know for sure what conflicts, challenges, or threats the next 100 years may bring with the next ten years. we cannot say for certain whether history will be repeated or made a new. but we must prepare our institutions for the unexpected and the uncertain. that is the greatest responsibility. we know there are risks. we know we will make mistakes, but the american people depend upon an army to be prepared. they trust that army to be prepared. they expect and know the

army will be prepared. and i know, everyone here knows those who represent today's army in this room know that we will not fail. gordon sullivan, thank you for your support of this country and your continued lead in allowing me an opportunity to give you some of my thoughts and recognize you for what you do. thank you. [applause] [applause] [applause] >> thursday fbi director james coming talks about increased security and privacy on technological devices and the impact on

criminal investigaons. live from the brookings institution at 10:30 a.m. eastern. and later, faa administrator is the featured speaker of the aero club of washington. you can see the event live at 1:10 p.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> be part of c-span campaign 2014 coverage. follow us on twitter and like us on facebook to get debate schedules, video clips, debate previews. c-span is bringing you over 100 senate, house, and governor debates. you can instantly share your reactions to what the candidates are saying. the battle for control of congress. stay in touch and engaged by falling house on twitter and liking us on facebook. >> minnesota representative michelle bachmann, founder of the house tea party caucus spoke at the heritage

foundation on wednesday about the rise of the tea party and its influence on the american political process. the congresswoman is not seeking reelection and will be leaving the house in january. this is an hour. >> good morning and welcome to the heritage foundation. we, of course, welcome those were joining us on c-span and some other television networks as well as those for joining us on the heritage foundation website. i ask everyone in the house to make that last check the self as a been current -- turned off as a courtesy. we will take internet questions at any time. we will post the program for everyone's future reference as well. hosting our guest today and welcoming her to the heritage foundation is the executive vice president of the heritage foundation. >> thank you, john.

thanks. i have learned not to bring myself on anymore. we are delighted to have you. i appreciate you joining us. hopefully we will get out of here before the rain starts. we are delighted you're here for this very special session we have today. in boston harbor in 1773 a bunch of patriots got angry about taxes imposed by distant politicians and threw tea overboard. move ahead in 2010, a bunch of patriots get angry about taxes imposed and through the politicians overboard. those men and women took up the tea party mantle and achieved more electorally and legislatively than the grass roots movement such as the occupy wall street which received far more pandering from the elites. well, the tea party principals were simple. tax less, spend less, and

get the government out of our homes and businesses. their roots, however, lay in extensive intellectual history in american founding. behind that stake is a deeper message then just don't tread on me. it is coming in fact, a bold philosophical statement. liberty is of more fundamental importance to human dignity, and a government which sacrifices the former for the latter tramples upon the rights of its citizens. well, few have exemplified this ideal more than our speaker today. it represented minnesota's sixth district for almost eight years now and importantly for this session she is a founding member of that tea party, the house tea party caucus which has remained a strong force for keeping conservatives true to their principles and

congress. and i believe she ran for president a couple of years ago. although she will soon leave washington, and we will dearly mr. she will return to the real world. she will always remain a shining light of the tea party movement and a testament to what could people can achieve when they get a fighting mad. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome representative michelle bachmann. [applause] >> thank you for that warm introduction. that is the question everyone is asking me right now. what are you going to do? i tell them that number one i will have a very long, extended vacation. you get really tired. i have chosen the perfect spot for the most secluded place i could find. in as nbc primetime.

actually, that's a lie. i do want to thank you for that introduction. it is an honor for me to be here, and i can't think of anywhere i would rather be to give one of my final speeches by an official member of the united states congress. truly the gold standard for conservatives thought, the heritage foundation. this is a stellar organization. i am thrilled to be here. page tell and american and the family research center as well as your form as well as concerned women for america. this city is filled with terrific organizations that have stood long and hard and valiantly have fought for american principles and american exceptional doesn't. and for 40 years heritage has been at the top of the heap. in many ways i believe that, as you said, the american values and principles that heritage has espoused have provided the framework for the tea party. limited government, strong

families, free enterprise. there is nothing new here, but just because it is not new does not mean that it is not profound. these are not new ideas. they are the same values that have been espoused since the time of the american revolution. what is different is that it was time for ross. we were in desperate need of our reawakening plan that is what the tea party was all about. republishing the american values of american greatness. all the media wanted to talk about was whether this tea party was up or down, dead or alive, but that missed the point entirely because the tea party never was, never has been, never will be a political party. you see tonight is a movement. it is a movement about returning us and our nation to our founding principles front and center by contending for them in public discourse. as you said, the patriots

threw tea into boston harbor , they were not just protesting an unfair tax it was a also about cementing the soul of our nation and the sole, opposition to an overreaching government and a fierce passion for self-determination. and it is the idea of the declaration of independence that confuses, really, the meaning and being of what it is to be an american. it is this, the idea that there is a creator, and we eggnogs that in the declaration. that a creator created all of us and created as equal. that in itself is profound. as the declaration of independence says, it is not a government. it is not a politician that gives any of us our rights.

we were given those rights by virtue of birth, by the fact that a creator created us and gave us these rights. they are inalienable, which means no politician, no government takes them away because only a creator can give them to us. it is a phenomenal philosophy upon which the nation was founded. those three inalienable rights that the founders enumerated were these, that inalienable rights to life, all the creator can give it, and all the creator can take away. the second was liberty. freedom, the franchise that was intended for every human on the face of the surface. every human does not enjoy it, but that is what makes this government exceptional. we recognize that freedom is yours, not something government can give and certainly something government should never take away. the third is the pursuit of

happiness. in that is not just want to hedonism. quite profoundly you have a right turn and keep the fruits of your own labor. what a concept. the life, liberty, and the right to earn and keep what it is a you aren't. they're not just nice sounding words. what i say to you is this. our founders gave us the ultimate social compact, governments work instituted among men for one reason, to secure the inalienable right given to us by our creator. so government cannot interfere with them and certainly cannot take those fundamental rights away from us. that is what makes us an exceptional nation. and as phil said, the modern tea party stands for three very basic things. we are taxed enough already. the government should not

spend more money than what it takes an. number three, government should live under the constitution. pretty extreme. pretty radical. last night our vice president of the united states said that the tea party is crazy and that the tea 40 it -- tea party lacks judgment. that is rich because if these are the principles that we stand for, i think whether you are democrat or republican they are ones you would agree with. if these ideas are extreme, then that is all we need to know about the challenges. our current president has a failing grade. every step of the way he has pushed for governments that would have a more intrusive role. and the president tells us his intention during his first inaugural address when he says it is time to begin again the work of remaking america.

he went on to say that we should no longer be asking the question whether government is too small or too big. instead he offered, we should simply pursue government to get the job done. mr. president, the job is not getting done for the american people. and i think we know that all too well. of course, some of us realize whether government has the right to do something is far more important than the question sisyphus thought it if there is nothing in the constitution that says that government is a charity. there is nothing that says that government is meant to be our family. it is not meant to be the church. the constitution is clear, and certainly government should never be our doctor's office. though the president wants it to be all of the above, including our banker, student loan officer, and even our car dealer, placing government at the epicenter of our life changes the game

of the social compact. political liberty and economic liberty are in peril, entwined, woven together by our creator who provides the above. you don't get political liberty without economic liberty, and you don't get economic liberty without political liberty. history teaches us that people are most productive, most happy, successful when they are free and when they can be independent. if you restrain freedom, sack a person's independence, you will lose that a vital spark of liberty that is made our country so great. to be fair, the love affair with a government did occur under the bush administration. it occurred long before that, harking back to the days of fdr and lbj. you can even go back to the time of give me liberty, give me death patrick henry. he was worried about big government. president obama took the mistakes of his predecessors and hit the accelerator with

a quantum leap of unimaginable proportions and it it began when i was here with the wall street bailout i was a freshman member of the united states congress. it was one of my first major votes. i was sitting as a member of the financial services committee in the midst of this consequential debate. as you recall, this was a blank check for $700 billion. it is never been seen and never been heard of before in the united states history sent over from the white house was treasury secretary hank paulson. he came to our republican conference to sell us on the bailout. i confronted him at the microphone with a few very important questions, none of which received an answer. one of my questions was, where did the number 700 billion come from? the second one was, what will you use it for? since we could not get a straight answer to either of

those fundamental questions, not only did i vote against it, we put together a great ad hoc group of democrats and republicans who came together and said, maybe this is not a great idea for giving the treasury secretary a blank check. the first vote failed. you could have heard a pin drop in the chamber that day when the vote came up. nancy pelosi thought she had the vote in the back. she did not. four days later i voted no and again, but enough arms had been twisted. you could hear bones breaking from here to san francisco, and the vote, rammed through. that $700 billion bailout laid the predicate for bailout mania here in washington d.c. the next time was for the automobile industry. once again, the taxpayers were on the hook to bailout private companies to the tune of billions of dollars. and up and 150 years of

settled bankruptcy law and protection for investors. the government gave pink slips to 3400 privately held automobile dealerships. this was shameful. many were ordered to close their doors within 30 days. imagine that. you own a private business, and the government since you have a pink slip. you have $300,000 worth of spare parts and inventory and are told we are telling you to close your doors. unconscionable. next came the trillion dollars stimulus package. if you are a politically connected ally of the obama administration, you got a leg up. so-called green energy companies received hundreds of millions of dollars before they went bankrupt. it was cronyism. the department of energy became the epicenter of

loans to obama donors, and then there was obamacare, the crown jewel of socialism amounting to a government takeover of one sixth of our economy. and look how that turned out. a politically connected allies one after another got a waiver. false promises like, you can keep your health care plan if you like it or you can keep your doctor if you like him or her or you will save $20,500 annually on your health care premium was not so funny for the american people that have to live with this abysmal health care system. $2 billion were spent on a dysfunctional website. that was not funny, and it does not include all the money wasted on state websites either. and now conveniently the government will reveal insurance costs for next year until after the midterm election is over. the american people watched all this unfold and set up

the modern tea party was born as a positive turn. i founded the tea party caucus in congress just so every day real americans could have a voice and a way to share their concern with their elected representatives. more than anything, i proved to be a listening caucus to get the polls of real people who live outside the beltway bubble. this was pretty refreshing for washington d.c. americans of all backgrounds organized rallies. they went to town hall meetings, showed up here at the u.s. capitol. it was a spontaneous, organic uprising. of course, the left called its astroturf. could not possibly be real people who would stand up and say that they want to be able to have self-determination. a rally to stop obamacare that i called produced tens of thousands of americans showing up here at the capitol.

they had less than one week's notice, no organization, no one paid them to come, and they came here simply to beseech their legislators, not with my health care you don't. one woman from hawaii came telling me that she saw me make the call on a television show. sean henties show. i went to my phone, ordered a plane ticket on the spot so that i could be there with you the following noon thursday at the capitol. people came from alaska. all 50 states. over 20,000 people, doctors, lawyers, people from all walks of life saying, the country cannot embrace socialized medicine. well, the grass-roots energy said a wave of freedom loving reinforcements were sent in 2010, including the likes of senators mike lee and rand paul, and it took the gavel away from nancy pelosi in the house of representatives. with the largest number

since 1948, i wonder what this election this year will yield. even the establishment moved toward embracing the tea party messaging have on constitutional principles like national debt and balanced budget. you know you are affected when tea party organizations were systematically targeted by the irs which tried to diminish their voice in 2012. the irs admitted that there broadly cast conservative faith based groups for their donor list. even for the content of the prayers of people who are in tea party organizations all to intimidate and of the slowdown applications for tax-exempt status before the crucial 2012 election. ironically, president obama himself once made the case for less government intervention in the marketplace. yes, he did.

during a town hall meeting in new hampshire in 2009 president obama's said, i mean, if you think about it, ups and fedex are doing just fine, right? no, they are. the post office is always having problems. a rare moment of clear thinking from our president. if all the action had follow suit. i also bring that up because it illustrates the choice facing us in just a few weeks. on one side you have president obama, bigger government and more spending is the solution to every problem that comes along. if a better model exists, the answer is not change the model but spend more money to prop up the old model. on the other side you have a philosophy that believes in maximizing your choices, not forcing you to choose the government preselected choice but encourages entrepreneurs and lets the free-market decide whether or not your id will succeed.

earlier this year i had the privilege of traveling to england to speak at the oxford union, both about innovation and the bureaucracies that stifle innovation. in that speech i told the story of a great american. his name is norman borlaug from the university of minnesota. in a very unique class, one of only three americans to win the nobel peace prize, the congressional gold medal to land the presidential medal of freedom. those distinctions go to luminaries like martin luther king jr. and elie wiesel and also and i when minnesota and. i am pretty proud of norman. his story is worth studying because it illustrates why human capital and human creativity as an invading

force has to be nurtured, defended, and allowed to thrive. the short version is this. the research led to thousands and thousands and thousands the failures. failure upon failure upon failure, year upon year of failure, trials and research, but ultimately it led to a strain that was able to succeed in two very different environments. and as a result he was hard year, more resilient, tougher than any variety that had ever been produced before. and today he is credited with literally saving the life of over 1 billion people across the world. who can say that? because of what they did over a billion people live today? he is remarkable.

how fortunate it was that he had the freedom that he needed to test his ideas. he did not have to go to some bureaucracy every time he needed to get approval for each of his 6,000 varieties of wheat that he bread. but when he saw an opportunity then no one else saw, none of the experts could dictate to him where he could your could not plant those feet or how he needed to do is work. he himself saw these bureaucratic threats to innovation more than 40 years ago. this is what he said. one of the greatest threats to mankind today is that the world may be choked by an explosively pervading but well scofflaws' bureaucracy. this urge to control progress from the top down is exactly what stifles innovation. it freezes the dynamic process of trial and error. it privileges the status quo over the new.

it embraces the powerful over those who are powerless. it embraces and less of the rich over those who are poor, and it helps the big hit the expense of the small. you see, centralized control discourages the thousands and thousands of tankers across this country and the small businesses to individually and together move our great american forward. we see this with the transportation industry. but instead of trying to make your company and more competitive, they're calling on lobbyists and powerful friends in government to impose even more regulation on the upstart ride sharing service. we see this in california where even education bureaucrats are trying to forcibly shut down and levy fines against computer software. these new and exciting approaches to learning do

not fit inside governments preconceived. we see this in the medical technology. the fda is stepping in to regulate one of the most innovative markets in the world. we could spend an hour just talking about all of the developments that are going to change our lives in the next five years in the realm of health care. exactly what we don't need government to put an that over innovation, we see explosions in greatness and the medical industry. the fda is stepping in to regulate one of the most innovative markets in the world, particularly when it comes to mobile apps that would allow each one of us more personalization and more control of our health care. imagine if you had a disease , your prescription drug could be designed in exactly to fit your dna, not just a one size fits all penicillin, but one that is designed for you to get you

healed. all of these regulations caused this statement. health is so heavily regulated it is a painful business to the end. but it is not just government. the shortage of companies who like their counterparts in government to fix the regulatory environment to invest their particular business and restore protect themselves artificially against the competition. crony capitalism, that is what corrupt nations do. that is not what america does. it is no coincidence that the greatest explosion of innovation in history accompanied our very first experiments with political liberty and free enterprise. it is because only freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of association, certainly economic freedom allows us the freedom of experimentation, the debate

and a chance for risk takers like the great norman what to start and, yes, failed time and time again. it is in the use. of the particular knowledge of time and place, the innovation demands. it is the genius of an idea that no one else sees, the environment of freedom has caused the greatest leap ever in our human well-being , not just for america. our ideas and innovations here are scene almost immediately and replicated even in third world and developing nations. you can go to the poorest country in the western hemisphere and see cell phones by impoverished people all across the world because impoverished people want a leg up. you see trickle-down does work. when you have innovation, when you have a gross, when you have a new wealth that is created, the bottom of

the economic ladder, those have the most to gain because the environment of freedom has created the greatest leap ever in human ball being, improving our lives by an order of magnitude, representing the opportunity to thrive regardless of age or race or gender. the recipe for success is simple, encourage work. don't discourage it. that is what england recently found. embrace human creativity and human capital. do not limit it. expand freedom for people to follow their dream. don't stop people from the benefit of failure because those who overcome failure ultimately learn how to succeed. and here is this example. i am a former federal tax lawyer and know firsthand that our tax code has become too complex, to one fair, and blatantly a tool for political cronyism and control. that is what lobbyists are

all about. we need a flatter, fairer tax system that levels the playing field for everyone, that encourages innovation and growth and stops taxing investment and productivity. last year saw the 100th anniversary of the united states federal income-tax code. hardly something to celebrate. just go back down a trip down memory lane. in 1913 the top tax bracket in the united states, this is how the tax code was sold , a 7 percent tax race. the tax cut was 400 pages long. one hundred years later the top tax rate bracket has now ballooned to nearly 40%. that excludes state and local taxes. and the tax code today is over 74,000 pages long. and that does not include the rules and regulations. i just returned from speaking at the reagan ranch center in california.

i had the privilege to speak to a wonderful group of young conservative women. when ronald reagan came into office in 1980 the top tax rate was 70%. it sounds like france? not working so well. it did not work so well for the united states either. by the time ronald reagan left office our top tax rate dropped from 70 percent down to 28. he also secured a 25 percent across-the-board reduction in income taxes for all americans in every tax bracket and simplified the tax code from 16 brackets down to two. in addition to cutting taxes he also reduced spending. he reduced regulation and maintained -- excuse me. he maintained -- excuse me. it has been a long airplane ride.

sorry. and he maintained a strong u.s. dollar. that is the winning formula for a strong economic growth, no matter how you cut it. the result was 92 consecutive months of economic growth, the longest peacetime expansion in american history. and as we saw from reagan's example, what drives innovation ultimately and growth is the free market enterprise environment that fosters it. today too many of our policies and institutions are on the opposite end of free-market spectrum. one example in the news recently coming from the financial-services sector, the export import. does not attack it -- does not sound terribly sexy but overwhelmingly subsidizes the most politically connected corporation in the world. last year handful of fortune 500 companies received more than half of the financing.

no one would care if this was a private bank, but it was a government subsidy that amounts to cronyism financed by tax dollars and puts american small businesses at a competitive disadvantage. you see what i mean when i say that government is lifting of the big at the expense of the small? enabling the rich at the expense of the poor. that is not what government is supposed to do. it is time to let the free market work and allow the export import bank to expire we can and must advance opportunity for all americans without giving special handout to the select few. ..