actually what is going on >> you only have to smell that sweet smell of tear gas once to know tear gas. okay. how are media outlets who allow readers to comment on stories help lead the stories? stltoday has a history of racist driven comments on any story involving african-american victims. do they encourage the negative edit editorals? >> i agree with that. some of the opinions clearly need to stick to themselves and i wish they would follow that. but having said that, we allow comments on stories and that includes comments that piss me off but i don't get to pick and chose the comments and nor do i have the time.

some stories have thousands of comments. abusive behavior and profanity and such we try to flag and get rid of those. but it is a tough question; these comments. do they affect our editorial decisions? absolutely not. >> this is one thing i would totally disagree with you on >> good. >> i think the newspaper has the responsibility to take the racist comments off and has every ability to do that. you know, if they don't have enough people to do it, then hire some more people or don't run any comments. >> i think i would agree with that. if some of this is being blatantly racist i would love to lift theft -- that off. and we have one here who has killed thousands of racist comments. we don't want to see that crap

on our website. there are going to be comments where disagree with but it is no reason to kill them off. but when you good

that is where that comment may have been coming rop from. some people are say he had different socks on. how dsome people are say he had different socks on. how did heaviest time to leave

the shore. i think that might be where that question is coming from. i heard that a lot. they are like that guy looks heavier than they thought in the video. >> national media has been more aggressive covering and uncovering underlying issues local media failed to cover. why? i am not sure that is true >> i disagree with that. i think what happens is that i took a quick look at the stories that we have run concerning ferguson, michael brown, and the associated events since august 9th and today is september 17th. so since august 9th we have written 250 full length stories and published more than 200 photographs. and in the newspaper more than a thousands photos and videos online. we are just getting started as well.

sunday is the big showpiece day and when we try to put our best work and work that is the post important gets a lot of space and attention and the michael brown story continues to be our focus on sundays since then and it will continue to be until the foreseeable future. >> this is regarding wilson's police friends and family network. they are convinced wilson was nearly beaten to death. why can't the media dig up this information? i remember seeing a couple weeks ago there was somebody who talked to him and gave the account of what happened actually. and the media played this up. this is on the national cable channels that michael brown was a friend and she had talked to him and it was a second-hand account of what happened that

day. are you responsible for putting this on air when you have don't know who the person is? >> you are talking about darren wilson? it was a woman who had talk today a female friend of darren wilson so you are on third hand and she called the conservative reporter and i guess i don't really think it is responsible to use that. i was reading it because at that point we didn't have any good idea at all of what the police account was, so i sort of read it for bag backup -- background information, but i don't think writing a story about it would

have been helpful or if you did say this is third hp hand account. and i think it is good rule for journalist to stick with first hand. >> it is appropriate to report official and unofficial posts on twitter? anybody? >> well, i think it is okay to report a tweet that has been proven to be true. >> how do you prove it was true? >> dar -- let's say mike brown was wearing a red shirt the day he was shot. but if you look at the pictures you will see he wasn't wearing a red shirt. >> a tweet may tip me off and i will take it and try to investigate it some.

there are some times where i would -- i knew bradley and his work and i was like bradley is out there because i trusted him and i didn't do that for everybody because i don't trust everybody >> tweets can be totally wrong like the example of the eye socket or they can be the first place that news is reported. i mean i think almost all of the news about what was going on would have been first reported in a tweet. i wrote about why nixon couldn't order for wilson to be arrest and through the tweeting and retweeting it ended up with a

hundred thousand it's which was a new experience for me as a report reporter. the tweets are valuable to magnify journalism. >> what coverage or action will take place if there is no indictment? will the media pursue this? will the politicians? the question i have is you know when the indictment is coming down and being able to gear up? >> no body knows. >> they pushed it off to january after the election. >> it is hard to give a full picture on what can happen. i don't want to think he is

going to get out of this. there should be enough to question to move for a trial just an what we have seen. and i don't want to assume any writing is going to start again. there are people on both sides who are going to be upset regardless of the indictment or not getting the indictment. so we don't know what will happen or where people will come from and how they will be feeling to come out of the bag. has been very hard to come and think of a plan for what if because you cannot plan for everything. so what i will certainly say is this is on the minds of everybody who cares about the public safety and where are going through different scenario analysis of what to do and trying to be prepared for anything. >> i just wrote a story that says if there is no indictment, mccullf is going to release the

transcript and audio of the grand jury with approval of the judge involved and he will do that immediately. that is very unusual. but i don't know that it is going to convince anyone. i'm sorry? >> the question was how are people supposed to trust the transcripts. >> well, there is going to be both transcripts and audio. at some point you have to trust something. generally court reporters do provide accurate accounts of what is said in trials and they can in grand jury proceedings where they are recorded. so that is what would happen. if there is an indictment, then an interesting question is maybe the judge would open that to tv.

the first thing you will hear is our investigation is gone for possible federal charge and going ahead full steam. so there will be that potential back backup. i don't know if the combination of the transcripts of the grand jury and the audio and the promise of the federal government to pursue the case would keep people from wanting to be out in the streets. i don't think we know. even though the grand jury extended it to january i have heard people say it could be sooner. wilson testified for four hours to the grand jury according to the post so one might think it

could wrap up before january >> who else has testified? >> i don't know. well what his people have said is they are putting, and this is controversial in itself but they are putting all of the potential witnesses and the videos and everything in front of the grand jury and letting them make the decision and they are not providing a narrative of here is what happened that you would normally expect a prosecutor to do with a grand jury. and you know, some people say, like the "washington post" columnist said this is proof the grand jury is a fix to clear wilson because any prosecutor who wanted an indictment would be providing a narrative and be honing the facts in the way to get the indictment. but i talked yesterday on the other side of that, i talk today a guy david rose who used to prosecutor police cases in st.

louis and he thinks it is a good idea to let the grand jurors hear the evidence. and he is going to provide more legal guidance at the end of the grand jury once all of the material is before them. >> another question. when the curfew was in affect most of the reporters went into a roped off area far from the action. why did the journalist comply with this? >> we didn't all comply. i was out in the neighborhoods, getting stories and putting on instagram. there were times i went to the safe there. i am a day reporter so i know the night ones had to avoid the tear gas.

there were some reporters that wanted to be in t safe area where the equipment is and that didn't stop us from going down into the neighborhoods and getting the stories and bringing it back. >> the reason i stayed is because i don't have lawyer that can bail me out of jail when the police have guns and tear gas telling you to stay to the media area and hearing that you will be arrested if you don't return you fear for that. >> absolutely. bradley, i went through a similar experience. the first night of curfew it was and i wasn't connecconnected to major organization and i did want have a pass and all i remember is a police officer saying i cannot help you if you are out of those ropes.

so i begged to get into the media area. >> if is after midnight and there is a curfew, the first amendment isn't going to keep you from getting arrested and it isn't a defense if you get arrested >> i will say i didn't adhere to the curfew. many elected officials and journalists were in the media area. but no, because the juicy stories were when they put you in the pen. >> i do believe that was a police tactic. if they solve the media, they are the ones reporting the stories that were exposed and the police action. why not put them all in the area far from the action so they can thought report what was going on

>> they such switched up with whe where are line was. the night they start the police pen they left the original spot open and left the line somewhere else and there was a push of the crowd away from the media toward can field apartments. so i do know several journalist that didn't adhere to this. they were hiding in bushes. i was crazy to be out there. but if you want to good stories, be prepared to hide in a bush. i got a bulletproof vest and gas mask and the first person i saw putting this equipment on after day two was the journalist and the photo journalist especially.

i was surprised how much they put themselves in danger just to get that shot. i have a new respect for the pictures in the post dispatch. i bought the paper because of david carleson and andy cohen made be buy it. if you wind up having to stay in a media pin, know the good stories come from hiding in bushes, putting on a gas mask, a bulletproof vest and running from the police and possibly being arrested. it was awesome. >> absolutely. >> another important point to make is a lot of national journalist were used to reporting in baghdad so it is a bad thing they have to put on the bulletproof vest and masks in america. >> photographers have to be able

to get the photos and you have to go close. same thing with a still or video camera. put the video guys can stand back because they can zoom in and same thing with the photographer but i am a radio guy so i have to get close. for the police to say this is your area, you have to stay here. that wasn't a crime scene so how can they get away with that? >> the governor of missouri, you have to remember, declared the curfew and made it law and gave the law enforcement the right to arrest anyone who violated the curfew. so on the ground, the commanders on the ground, said midnight is the curfew and you journalist can stay here period. you cannot be on the street. you have to stay in this area. right? so i think what bradley was saying is very, i mean it hits home. your choices are you obey the

guy with the gun or he you get arrested or worse. those of you thinking about being journalist or starting it, this is real. this is things that journalist do. we have a couple who was decapitated because they were reporting in a war torn area of the middle east. we have one photographer who was talking a picture of the looting and totally focused on his job and one of the looters stopped, looked at him and said what are you doing and i think there were other words involved in that, but what are you doing and he started approaching and the photographer said it is okay your face is covered because the guy was wearing a hankerchief and the guy backed off but later

he was kicked and hit. >> i covered a case after the verdict in oakland where a guy was lying down handcuffed and shot in the back. one of my friends was punched by a guy. and being a journalist nowadays isn't as respected. >> we only have a couple minutes left. this question has been asked why hasn't research been done into the wilson? his family story is interesting and his arrest record as an officer as well you are trying to get that information? >> it is ongoing. it didn't help they got time to scrub the record.

but it is continuing on. believe me. >> has the media told enough of officer wilson's story to be considered fair and balance coverage? >> we have gone everything we can do as major investigative juniorism operations in the region. but i can say is it isn't over yet. this story isn't going away. we are on the path until we get to him and understand the full record. >> bill, why is it okay to tell children wikipedia can't be used as a source but the media uses twitter and instagram as a source. >> wikipedia you don't know who said what. that is that person that wrote whatever they did on there. if it is twitter, and it is only

130 characters, i can research who put this out and do more investigative -- and i don't just take tweets and run with it. >> that is the key. >> i am usually the one tweeting it. >> the media covering issues like the guy shot in new york city and california. >> my focus locally there is so much going on. my focus as a general assignment reporter is what is going on locally and the national outlets can handle that. >> eric garner was choked before the michael brown shooting. the local coverage is local.

there is national coverage which all of the local media has but if it is me i am spending my money covering local because there is plenty of national people. why is the post dispatch the only one to cover the date wilson testified. we covered that. how useful is it using ferguson has a hash tag? >> i think that is where all of the stories are kept. so we want to keep all of the information to that one hash tag. >> it gives you a way to catch up if you search by that hash tag. >> and the media still be considered unbias based on the coverage they convey to the world?

if it is the responsibility of the media to convey unbias information why does it seem that media footage doesn't cover events that general residents have able to cover? the community sees it but the media choses not to cover it? we all make decisions on covage based on journalistic experience. you might think it is a big story. like my radio station we ask who cares. if it is one street that cares ta as opposed to the market we will cover what the market wants. >> and that is when you should tweet or facebook it. >> did you cover gene powell? >> i don't know who that is. >> he was the guy killed in the

city holding a knife. >> we covered it. >> we wrote about it extensively online and in print >> that is a different story because he did have something in his hand and wasn't completely unarmed >> we took it to the next level and found out the same situation happened on the south side with a white officers or the black officers and the white guy. is it to the extent of ferguson? no, but we covered it. it wasn't only the facts but the emotions and the protest and stuff like that going on. that doesn't stop us from covering it. i know if you searched three or four stories would pop up. >> if you could respond to the

medical examiner saying the reason michael brown's body couldn't be picked up is because they were afraid of the crowd. did the crowd prevent them from picking up the body? >> that is a controversial statement because the fact he laid there made the crowd more embattled. so they made it worse in my opinion. that is just my opinion. my letting him sit there. >> you are saying the police? >> yeah. and i think there have been clear statements by the police expe experts that there was no police justification for him to lay out there. >> we have run out of time. we have answered a lot of question and answered a lot of questions. i cannot thank the panel enough. [applause]

>> stay in touch with our coverage and engage. follow us on twitter and like us on facebook and follow campaign events and campain related program. one of the races is for georgia governor as nathan meal is running against jason carter. the race is being rated as a toss up but governor deal is shown to be ahead. there is a run off if no candidate receives 50% of the vote. here is a look at the campaign ads running in that case. >> senator jason carter claims he is going to put education

first but voted against the largest increase in education funding in in seven years. >> over the last five years you have seen the worst con traction of public education in the history of the state. we have 9,000 fewer teachers and 45,000 people leave our technical schools. this year there are fewer hope recipients and i worry we will reap what we sew from that destructi destruction. when i am governor, we will have a separate fund for education >> i helped cut billions in spending and voted against obama and illegals won't like it when

i employ people to find the illegal alians but they are costing us over a billion. i am not worried about the liberals. my concern is you: >> jason carter will fund our schools first and put an end to paying for politician's pet projects with education money. today we have 9,000 fewer teachers and 80,000 fewer hope recipients and 45,000 fewer tech students. ...

that's why it had so much success working with republicans to pass legislation that's been special toilets. when the iowa national guard came home from iraq and was denied benefits for g.i. bill benefits and the hardship pay from the pentagon i worked with republicans from minnesota to get their orders change so they got paid the benefits they deserve. when i had a constituent named andrew connolly who was denied his aa adaptability grandpa helped him to get that city could stay in his palm. then i had them come to washington and testify in front of the veterans affairs committee and introduced a bill so that other veterans would have the same benefits because the program is going to expire. that's what i once expect from

their senator. somebody like senator grassley and senator harkin who can bring people together and not drive them apart. >> moderator: what unique thing is there a value to such a part? ernst: i have served in my community. i've served my state and i serve my nation at many different capacities. i work with many volunteer organizations of the community community level and i still am a confirmation teacher in the church that i grew up in. so i have remained committed to my hometown and my home community. but i also have served my state of my nation and the army reserves and the iowa army national guard. i don't do these things for personal gain. i do them because i believe in serving the public weather at the time of flood in eastern or western iowa, whether it's during winter storms, making sure that iowans are safe is important. but i have also served overseas during a time of four in combat

in kuwait and iraq. i believe that is important but sound bites do have consequences and i believe that i have a pure heart willing to serve iowans where congressman braley behind closed doors has poked fun at our senior senator chuck grassley. i got don't call that building bridges. i would say that's burning bridges. >> moderator: let's go ahead and move on. we have a couple of questions here. braley: the senator and as i didn't poke fun at senator grassley and i talked in that same day and apologized to him and i apologize to iowa farmers because that's what people expect iowans to do. so if you so if you're questioning my pure heart senator i can tell you that i've been an elder at my church. i've taught sunday school to adults and children. i have never seen a corporation sitting next to me in the church pew and yet you believe their interests outweigh those of women and iowa when it comes to contraception. >> moderator: again very misleading. i have said i will support a

woman's right to contraception. but what you say behind those closed doors really does matter to iowans. maybe you did apologize to chuck grassley that my father is a farmer also without a law degree. i think he's done very well and again i contribute to my community, my state in my nation and i'm ready to serve the people of iowa. braley: when i talk about talking behind closed doors tell us about the meaning you had. >> tonight on the communicator's technology in the 2014 campaign. >> historically the digital tools were largely thought of as the e-mail tools and on line contributions, the web site but i think it involves our company for example also offers tools that enable sort of the shoe leather side of the campaign so the canvassing, the phone calling, direct mail and then i think you are seeing many marketing channels come on line

where there are addressable tv ads versus on line ads. you address more interactions through social networks so i think now there is a pretty wide swath in which you could call digital. >> removed it from the broadcast era. we are still at the tail end of what we know as from the early 60s as broadcast folders dominating. as we evolve into addressable television it's really moving into a relationship. we have no doubt in the commercial sector, that if you are going to, you actually have somebody who is advocating for it, then influencing their sphere of friends how is it that we moved to just knowing not only with the messages because we have gotten good at politics and knowing what the right messages to deliver the people and an even better job of making sure we know who the right messenger is to deliver that message.

>> now a panel of texans discuss what to do about undocumented youth coming to the united states. the tea party official and democratic member of congress, the county judge in the texas land commissioner also a young woman who was the first undocumented latina did testify before congress take part in the fourth annual texas caribbean festival at the university of texas in austin.

>> good afternoon. thank you for being here today. i am manny fernandez from "the new york times" and on behalf of the "texas tribune" we are very happy to welcome everyone to the fourth annual texas caribbean festival. our panel today entitled what to do with the dreamers. our panelists are jorge baldor a dallas businessman who started a web site supporting the texas d.r.e.a.m. act. also none as h.b. 1314. veronica escobar, the county judge of el paso county. she became the top elected official in texas six largest county in 2011. we also have gavi pacheco

program director of the national zealots -- scholar fund for documented students called the dream.us. last april she became the first undocumented latina to testify before congress. [applause] we also have with us jerry patterson the texas land commissioner. he is a former state senator who helped the texas republican party adopt a more moderate decision on immigration and its 2012 official party platform. we also have george rodriguez, the south texas coordinator of the tea party patriots. he cohosts a show on reaching elephants radio.com and in 2011 he became the first hispanic president of the major tea party group planning head of the san antonio tea party. we also have with us congress men marc veasey who represents congressional district 33 in the

u.s. house of representatives. the congressman has been an outspoken supporter of comprehensive immigration refo reform. in 2013 he invited his undocumented immigrant from texas one of the first undocumented students to pursue a higher education in texas right here at u. t. austin to be his guest that president obama state of the union address. our discussion today will last 60 minutes and will include time for 15 to 20 minutes of questions from the audience. i would like to ask everyone to please silence your phones. in june of 2001, texas became the first date in the country to adopt a law allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition rates to attend public universities. there have been efforts in the legislature to repeal this law since then but all of them have failed so far. conservative activists and lawmakers will try once more this coming legislative session

to stop what has become known as the texas act. the texas republican party's official 2014 platform calls for repealing the law. nationally meanwhile, comprehensive immigration reform has stalled in washington as dreamers and other advocates are pressing congress for an overhaul that would create a formal path to citizenship for young people who came here as children. gamers have become an influential political voice, appearing on the cover of "time" magazine and playing a key role in shaping immigration policy. gaby i would like to start with you if i could. two are the dreamers and how many are there in the united states? >> so? >> so there are about 2.1 million dreamers who came to the united states when they were children. they are usually categorized as people who came to the united states before leaving at 16 and

we have seen different traymack legislation so the majority of the students to follow that criteria. these are students that have gone through our public school system. these are students that identify with the american culture, that categorize themselves as americans and seek the opportunity to be able to one day be able to get a green card and hopefully after five years apply for citizenship. >> congressmen if i could ask you, there is a lot of argument out there for dreamers to get a path to citizenship. i know you have made some economic arguments. what are some of those economic arguments that you have made? >> i think some of the biggest economic arguments that one could make is you know most of the dreamers are educated here in texas and they have gone to a public school. their parents have paid taxes, sales taxes and other taxes but

people don't want to give them a path to citizenship so they can be more productive citizens in our society. to me that doesn't make any sense for us not to want to do everything we can to let that talent come out of the shadows and even make the american economy stronger. to me it makes sense that you would get these dreamers a chance and many who want to serve in the military. they want to contribute to our national security and so why not give them that opportunity when they want to participate like everybody else. >> jorge let me get you to jump in here. what is wrong with h.b. 1403 which and texas is. >> let me start with just asked the question. what part of the word illegal do not understand?

a the problem we have with illegal immigration. the problem we have with illegal immigration and the only way we are going to stop illegal immigration is to stop having magnets in the united states and the texas d.r.e.a.m. act is one of those. the other thing we have got to stop is to stop apologizing for being americans and somehow feeling that we are going to be the orphanage for the rest of the world. we can't do that. the reality is that we need to remove as much of this emotion because everybody, there are billions of stories in the world about people who want to come to united states and that's understandable. we are the greatest country in the world. but, at what point do we say we control who comes in and who doesn't. we have all sorts of excuses why we have all sorts of allowances but we have all sorts of

justifications for anyone regardless of what age they came to the united states. that's the problem. you cannot enter a spurs game without a ticket. you can't enter a ute game without a ticket. why is that different from entering the united states? >> commissioner can i ask you to jump in? is george's view on the extreme end of the republican party or is it on the mainstream? >> you know if you take all republican voters i think and the term extreme was let's say far right. let's not say extreme. i think we take all voters to the right, considerably to the right. if you take all voters, i'm confusing myself here. all voters are in the middle. the point i would like to ask george though is we talk in these black-and-white very

legal, first legal, first of all they are illegal but they didn't break any laws when they came here. it is impossible and let me ask you this. do you have any gives? if you want to rob a bank and you had your 6-year-old with you -- [applause] >> robbing a bank is still robbing a bank. it's still breaking the law. >> the car didn't break the law when they robbed a bank. >> the car is going to be taken away though. >> no no go ahead. let's follow that. what you're saying is because i commit the crime then for some reason the child is not responsible. >> that's exactly what i'm saying. >> what i'm talking about here is that they had come in illegally. >> they did not. >> their parents came in illegally. >> they brought them as contraband.

>> they were brought here illegally. what part of that don't you understand? i agree with you that their status is illegal but those who were brought here when they were below the age of majority by their parents broke the law. in other words when i hear thi this -. >> so since they are innocent we are going to leave them alone? >> they are here illegally. they broke the law but there is next -- there is a distinction. if they are here illegally i agree with you on that. they didn't break any laws but what are we going to do about a? the real question is immigration debate is what are we going to do? >> to prevent any more from coming. we have a situation near el paso were 2-year-old child was sent out to the border. how are you going to keep that

from happening any more? >> can you answer what do we do is the question? >> do we deport them? until you enforce the law as strong as possible you're always going to have illegal immigration. >> very close on that point but my question is as a trigger what do we do? do we deport them? i would say yes. >> i would say yes because the same argument that marc made a little while ago about how beneficial they are too benighted states, the same argument can be made about them going home to their native lands. >> i admire you for doing this. >> we will fi fix it this way. >> let me just say this. you have boldly taken in position and i admired you for doing so.

you have advocated that we deport the dreamers. you know so therefore whether or not the other illegal undocumented here. >> until we deport everyone. >> your position is we deport 12 million people. do you want to live in a country that has enough police power in light of what happened at ruby ridge. >> yeah. >> i want jerry to repeat that. you are saying the effort. >> i'm saying too many federal cops are there. >> i have faith in my local law enforcement in the dps the county in the city. i don't have as much faith in federal law enforcement because i have seen what they do. atf is a classic example. >> can i have you jump in and especially can you talk about your own status and your views when george was talking about what to do with the dreamers? >> currently i have daca that

allows me to be in the country with a lawful presence for two years. it's renewable and in december i'll be renewing back. if i was to be given a chance to get on line which is another line that we usually hear i would do it. i would gladly do it. i don't think anybody in the country who is unauthorized likes this. we do not like living in fear. we do not like being afraid of calling the police when there is a disturbance because we are afraid that they are going to access our documentation. we also don't like not knowing the uncertainty of what's going to happen to us tomorrow. not being able to contribute, and texas alone in 2010 the unauthorized were providing about $1.6 billion in taxes and today when i was buying my lunch

the guy, nick i didn't get to say hey nick i'm undocumented please do not tax me. that's just not a reality. we are contributing members of society. [applause] i think that one of the things that we talked about is a ticket. there are people that are standing in the line better saying come in. our people and businesses are saying let's go. we need more people to work here and this is not as simple as somebody having a ticket or not. the reality is that the united states has a broken immigration laws. the reality is that there is a magnet and it is called businesses and is called politicians who did not want to fix this issue and i think that for us to just put it so simply when we know this issue is very complex, yes this issue creates a lot of emotion because we are not just talking about a number. we are not talking about 12 million people.

we are talking about individual lives. we are talking about mothers and fathers and workers, individuals like myself you have a degree, who are contributing wants to do a lot more but are limited because there is no system. there is no way for me to get a green card. i have got daca when i was given the opportunity to get some sort of status that there is nothing else from that. so i think for too long, i think the argument that george makes is an emotional one. it's not a rational one that opens up to have our elected officials like ted cruz who doesn't necessarily bring us a solution. deporting 12 million people is not a solution. we are not going to be able to do it. we don't have the manpower. we don't have the dollars and frankly there are a lot of people who are hiring undocumented people that want to be able to have those people

have legal status because they know what a good workforce they are, but they can't. >> congressman do you hear a version of george's argument among the republicans in congress or do you hear something different? >> i mean there are certainly members of congress, i mean the senator from iowa steve king. he is a perfect example of someone who lives up. >> you hear it in the black community. >> here is what i will say in the black community, i think president obama has done an outstanding job in making sure that people come together and say this is an important issue, people of all races. as a matter of fact there was a poll earlier this year that showed how high immigration reform was as far as being able to get it passed and the african-american community comet had overwhelming support in the african-american community.

he has done a good job and i think as more people speak out about the importance of comprehensive immigration reform and they see the economy and they understand -- i mean and a lot of the african-american communities in fort worth and all around the state of texas the kids live and go to school there. predominantly african-american high school so people that are friends of one another. people of the african-american community have lived with neighbors that are undocumented for years now. so i would say, so i would disagree with you on that but yeah there are members of congress absolutely that do take those extreme positions. >> george can i interrupt you? george would you say the black community would side with the republicans? you can deny it all you want. deny it all you want because i have been in towns where black

residents have stood up and been very very angry about the issue of amnesty and an open border. i know for a fact that when the city of houston when maurice county was preparing to open a site for undocumented minors in one community, there were black residents that were fit to be tied the called up sheila jackson -- other than playing politics. >> well let me say this. i think that there is a lot of education and again i think the president has done a great job of bringing everybody together. oftentimes particularly texas border state people oftentimes think of this as a hispanic or

latino issue but guess what if you go to new york city the people living in new york city that are undocumented many of them look like me and some of the kids that have been coming from central america from honduras in places like that, many of them are black. some of them are black and again once people are educated on the issue and they see how it's a global issue and it's not just about one region of the world, think many of the people that have tried to turn it into a racial issue they have only centered on mexico and central america. this is a global issue that is affecting many people around the country and many of those are blacks as well. >> george how hard is it going to be to convince voters like george that we need to keep the texas d.r.e.a.m. act and it does not need to be repealed at a time when there is this sort of momentum and some of the

arguments that george was making, like how do you try to keep the laws on the books? >> while i think as a texas business person my perspective may be a little different. i have been in business for a little over 20 or so i've had to be pretty pragmatic. i have met over 600 payrolls in that period of time so i understand the importance of bringing the sides together in making things practical. in that regard i know it's a business person, all of us in texas really benefit from having an educated workforce and i think the value of that is really underestimated and not discussed enough in this discussion. i think we as a society benefit by having a more inclusive and a more educated workforce that can maximize the potential. i think also on the pragmatic side, we are spending about $8600 a year to educate each of

our students in texas. and so to spend that kind of investment and then when you get to the college and university level and let them at that point not have the opportunity to continue their education i think we are losing out on the potential, you know not just their individual potential but their collective potential as a society. everybody wants a piece of the pie and there's a piece of pie but collectively the more involved and the more of these resources we can use we are going to have a bigger pie. that's what it's about and i think the reality of 1403 stems from we are talking about less than 1% of the students in the colleges and universities. about 80% of them are junior college student so we are spending a lot of time and energy focusing on this one subject i think a lot of it has to do with an easy target. this is not a voting population so it's easy for them to be picked on and they are kind of

bullied. >> can you touch him at a little bit about why spend so much conservative energy on an issue that affects less than 1%? >> it's just a magnet. contrary to what has been said the immigration laws are not broken. they're not being of enforced. they are not broken. i worked on them in 1986 and allow myself. i have seen how businesses are not find or punished for hiring illegal aliens so while we still have that illegal aliens are still going to, obviously. the other issues as far as workers go and the workers program goes the other issue is that we have got to not only enforce the law to stop illegal immigration and illegal workers from coming in, we have got to do something about the welfare reform. there are a lot of people

sitting at home watching jerry springer who could be out there working. >> let's focus on atf. let's focus on these kids. these are the ones that have gone to our local schools. >> the headache that we have got in the issue of workers is when we did a study in california and 1985, to see how it would work to get illegal aliens out of the field and into, and folks that were on welfare out to work we found that the comparison of somebody receiving benefits to somebody out there working was almost the same. they are not. why get out there in the sun when you can be in the welfare business. >> the point is we have these

children that are in our schools and in our neighborhoods and these are kids that have grown up here. they have gone through the universities that it has taken to complete their education. a lot of them are working to support their families while they are going for high school. a lot of them are valedictorians community leaders so what gets twisted with the argument about 1403 is that it's about taking someone's seat in that classroom. 1403 is strictly on finance. they have arctic on to the admission process through their own volition do their own achievement and they have already then accepted. 1403 is about whether they will pay in-state tuition or outs of state tuition. you asked me to complete. >> they are illegal. [applause] >> the argument that we hear about repealing 1403 that they are taking space away from other students that's not a valid

argument. that's an admission issue. 1403 is strictly finance of these are students paying an additional price because their requirements ford their ability to be an state is a three-year requirement instead of a typical person from another state which is a one-year requirements of the requirements aren't any tougher for them to me. i think as a society for us to turn our backs on the students that have been raised in our backyards and gone to our public schools and we have had this investment board to turn around and tell them that they don't have the opportunities. i came as an immigrant from cuba and i've had the opportunity to achieve the american dream and i live it everyday. i want to turn around and try to help as many people as i can and this is why i live as they -- why i'm the only private citizen the panel and started h.b. 1403.com to help the students who need a helping hand. they don't need a boot need a helping hand.

[applause] >> you and i had a conversation right before the panel started and it's pretty remarkable that we are even having this conversation. when you look at texans like gaby these are people you want in your state. these are the very young talented leaders that make our communities strong, that make our educational system strong, that make our country strong and the fact that we are even talking about what to do with the dreamers is really stunning. it's unfortunate that in our state we keep going backward and in fact we don't take the long view forward. excuse me sir. we rarely have the long view forward to when you think about the long-term in your state you want a talented educated workforce so that you can be competitive and when you are saying people like gavi should be deported and where he will

agree with george is we have to take the emotion out of the argument. when you take the emotion out of the argument there's no rational reason why we should go down this path. the more money that we invest in deportation or boots on the ground or various other republican measures that try to create a crisis where there is none, it's not just a waste of taxpayer resources, but what we are doing is we are putting a strain on the very taxpayers who are wanting a competitive state, who are wanting to be able to -- so part of what we need more of frankly is more of what we saw, a very exciting human drama moments ago where the questioner pushback on a member of his own party that's trying to pull the state backwards. >> commissioner. >> my memory is not very good but i agree with you and i'm sure we agree and i disagree with the false crisis at the

border. we have a crisis at the border and it's got a new dynamic in the last year and it's called terrorism. it's not just the usual issue that it used to be and it's not just on this border. it's on the northern border in the border that comes in with commercial airlines. we have the terrorism issue but when george says that we -- there's nothing wrong with immigration system that's the most bizarre statement i can respectfully george. the maximum number of immigrants that are allowed in this country on an annual basis from i.c.e. is the same messages for mexico. mexico is a population of 125 million. iceland 350,000. how is that a system that you can defend? you can't. it's not a system. it's broken. it's nonexistent and it doesn't serve our needs. >> the immigration systems the number one consideration should be that which serves or need in this country.

no other country, not in mexico and not in central america or iceland. it has to benefit us first. intellectual honesty that's lacking on both sides probably including me when we say and i saw this in recent campaigns. we had some candidates and not one of them supports deportation of the 12 million that are here but i know of no republican including steve king and i could be wrong that supports deportation. it's a fact they are here. we need to deport the coyotes and the criminals but to say we are going to wholesale deport these people is intellectually dishonest because it ain't happening and furthermore 1403 is an economic bill. it's in-state tuition and then when you say we are not going to love allow them to have been state solution but they will pay regular tuition which is still subsidized by the taxpayers of texas, we have to figure out

what we do and how we fi fix itd address it. i will give an example. i was in the marine corps in vietnam and i served with the young marines who were illegal and they were fine marines and they ought to have a right to stay in this country. military service which i would think you'd agree with george is a pathway to legal status and i think you agree with that. do you? >> no i don't. >> you wrote that in your column in the san antonio express. he said that in your column but the problem with military service is that can only serve a certain number. doing something to make their status legal and go ahead i'm sorry. >> the problem again is illegal immigration. we will always have illegal immigration. i don't disagree. but what do we do with the 12 million better here. >> they would go home.

[applause] >> i think we are getting somewhere. also she would go home if there was no employment. >> bare statistics that show that people who are in extreme poverty usually stay home. it's the courageous, super courageous that leave the united states. my people left behind everythi everything. a comfortable family, a home, everything but they did it because they loved their children so much. they want to give us a future and that takes courage. and you are right. let me finish. we came to the united states.

we came with a legal visa. >> so why are you a illegal than? >> because our system is broken. we overstayed her visa. but you are illegal and then you are breaking the law. as if that's the definition for illegal that are using for someone who is undocumented we have all broken the law at some point. if that's all you are hanging onto then you're clearly hanging onto the most emotional part of the argument. >> what are you talking about? >> i just wanted to say specifically on education part, the scholarship program for dreamers is privately funded. we have many families in the united states that are more affluent who are part of this and started it. we currently have $33.5 million in the fund and its growing and the scholarship program is giving opportunities for dreamers and many of us here in

texas to go to our texas schoo schools, in dallas, in houston and the rio grande area and el paso and we do that because we understand the power of education. it is said that people who go to college are most likely, 80% more to give to taxes and also people the majority of the immigrants their average income is $36,000 and if you don't give them the opportunity to pay in-state usually that's about $20,000 a year that they would have to pay. no family would be able to afford that. so i think that the arguments for the education part of there. i don't really think that anybody that loves their country, loves where they live in their community would be against anybody that has the heart and desire to serve in the military or go to college and receive an education can be against someone wanting to fulfill that dream.

>> commissioner the 2014th republican party of texas platform calls for the repeal of the texas re-manned. do you support that? >> the texas re-manned is a symbol. it's not something that belongs in this debate. texas had to do something and whether you like it or not they did something. the problem is on the federal level, the federal government and is not going to happen as long as obama's president because we are so polarized and the incompetency of our present as part of that. it needs to be fixed on the federal level where there is a method for those who are here who are illegal, who did not break our laws in coming here to obtain a legal status. military service is clearly one that would work but that's not available for everyone. there needs to be a method for those that did not break the law when they came here to achieve a status so they won't have to worry about if the state legislature passes and in-state tuition bill for those that are

not documented you are here. >> would you want to see it stay on the books? >> i would like to see it stay in on the books for the mere symbolism of it. if we say okay we are going to repeal 1403 the question that follows is okay what do you do with those that are here? that is why i keep bringing up this argument. you can have all these platitudes and lines in the sand and until you say okay this is what we are going to do with the 12 million illegals are the 2 million dreamers better here, it makes no difference. you need to talk about what are we going to do with those that are here and if you don't have a plan for them it's status quo which is in effect amnesty. >> let me say this. it's not going to happen because of the president. a comprehensive immigration bill that passes the senate overwhelmingly passed the senate and we can pass one in the house tomorrow and it will go to the

president's desk. the problem as boehner will not let it go to the house floor. again the republican primary you saw the ads during the with blue tinted governor's race when they were using outlandish language like invasions and things like that and until the more extreme elements like the team party -- tea party stopped taking over the republican primary we will continue to have this problem. the republicans decided they were not going to do any immigration reform for the rest of the year. that is the problem and that's where we are average now. it doesn't have anything to do with the president. >> the problem problem with the immigration bill is it was too big for the republicans to accept because it came with a bill for citizenship. we are not ready for that now and the other thing is that you

know our congress is afraid. all politicians are afraid that the rhetoric in the government primary we talked about -- we have to secure our border. >> our borders are not secure. >> i think there's a clear difference in education whether you are for more moving forward for education in texas or whether you will go backwards and reduce funding for education and for teachers and produce the ability for these dreamers to have an opportunity to get a college education. i think that's a clear difference in the lieutenant governor's race. i think whether you move forward or move backwards. >> there was no policy difference on the guest worker program. all four candidates were in favor of a guestworker program. all four candidates were against

the deportation program but they exception was what george is advocating. it's public record. >> george, how how focused is the tea party on repealing the texas d.r.e.a.m. act? >> we are very focused. we are very very adamant and contrary to what everybody believes that we are extremists, we represent the majority of what the american people want. not with latinos, not with annie's subcategory for what the american people want. >> let me tell you something. just illustrate to you why you are wrong on that. [applause] comprehensive immigration reform overwhelmingly passed in the senate with his 70 boats. well past the 60 votes needed to break the filibuster.

if there was a comprehensive immigration reform deal on the house floor today it would pass. john boehner won't let a bill on the house floor. if you look at the polls that are out there most business leaders, the american people as a whole, african-americans, latinos believe, whites believe that we should have immigration reform. so i don't agree with his sentiment that it's the mainstream of america. i think most people would agree and i think we have freedom of speech in this country and he certainly has the right to express his opinion as he feels blessed when you use words like invasion and things like that and you don't correct people when they use that sort of language like the tea party has been. >> what do you call that? >> you will keep it in the extreme category.

>> if u.s. people across-the-board do you believe in amnesty yes or know you will get a lot of nose, probably majority. if you asked them deeply than securing our borders you will get a majority yes but when you get down to the details of that is where i think george is with this argument. i've spoken to a lot of hostile crowds that attended the evening i have them on my site because i went into the details and i didn't stop at the clichés and two word bumper stickers. our current system includes and encourages more illegal immigration. we used to have a circular immigration nonetheless illegal but people come and work and go home to their families. they can do that anymore because it's too difficult to cross the border. they want to bring their family care so our current system encourages more illegal immigration and assume we have a guestworker program or not h-1b visas or the guy working in a restaurant or at the guys doing drywalled building houses

framing working landscape who wants to come here and do it and go home we will continue to have immigration. i want them chasing narcotraffickers not the guy who was washing dishes and that's what we need to focus on. [applause] >> commissioner why have so many texas republicans, leaders then i guess sort of afraid of coming out strongly and agreeing with you and saying look we need to keep the law on the books or n not. >> it's here. it's too much of this and not enough of this. and frankly, also i lost badly however if i would have had the funds that would have been a different story. my point is if you talk to them and go over it in detail and

don't use clichés they will follow. there are just not enough people doing it. >> we keep revisiting these old issues. when texas passed the traymack they had bipartisan support. it was overwhelmingly supportive. governor perry signed it into law and so here we are years and years later moving backwards. the same thing with the border issue. you know we keep having to find someplace, some group to demonize. some kind of rationing to make it seem like i'm going to be out there fighting for you and frequently is that the border. it's hispanic so it will take i think a lot more internal debate among the republican party to say we have got to stop going backwards like this. >> the democrats are the problem.

>> i would say both. >> i would say both. raising the hispanic issues. this is a hispanic problem. he is already said it's not a hispanic problem yet that's what they keep saying. they run on the idea. >> did i say that? >> it sounded like it. >> this will be 1403 would apply to anyone not just hispanics said the issue of having the ability of someone to comment achieve the dream of an education so they can better their lives and society as a whole would benefit it's not a hispanic issue. on the stage if we are talking about canadians or the french it doesn't matter. it's the ability to have someone enjoy that american dream that

live in our neighborhoods, that work in our grocery stores, work at our restaurants and kids that through no choice of their own are being excluded because they don't have a piece of paper that they did not have the ability to get. >> i would like to ask gaby a question. you know the term go back and get in line and do it correctly. we are tired of people cutting in line and bumping those up that aren't doing it directly. if there were a line in your country of origin would you go there and get in that? >> that's all we are asking. >> that's the point. there is no line. even if you go back to the country of origin there is no one because immigration system has not allowed it. like i said iceland has the same quota as mexico. >> let me say something about that. through the deferred action for childhood rivals program versus

advanced -- you are able to leave the country and come back in without being subject to the three n. tenure bar. some attorneys would say be careful because we don't know yet but a lot of students that have visas waiting for them in their home country have been able to ask for a referral, go back to their home and come back with a green card especially people that have been married to a u.s. citizen which right now before dachau that was not available. there are currently 4 million people and a nation that could right now get legal status but they can't because of arbitrary laws that have been put in place since 1996 the three n. tenure bar one of them being and people are willing to do whatever it takes. if it's going back to their home country to come back and get a green card. i wanted to add something something to it for ronica was saying about going backwards. i do believe that in this issue and trying to repeal 1403 we are going to go backwards. texas was the first state to do in-state tuition along with

california and i think texans should be very proud of that because they lead the nation. they saw that they had an issue. they saw that there were a lot of latinos and yes it's a majority of latinos and that is why usually once talked about that too we talk about but a lot of young people were dropping out of high school. they turned 16 and they said well i can't go to college, why continue continue? and they said i'm going to go into the workforce and go to work. it has changed that around and is allowed for hundreds of thousands of students to be able to go to school less usually the 1% of population but at least it's helping people. there's a student from use -- ut austin that ice on washington d.c. and she has her masters degree in pharmacy. she's in washington d.c. doing her residency there at the children's hospital making ut austin proud, going out in fulfilling her dream but also contributing to society.

being there and being able to help and support. since 2001 we have 21 states who have passed similar in-state tuition legislation just last year or this year we have had florida and the florida governor relies hey i need to do something about this and i need to show latinos that i'm serious about immigration or at least this issue. what did he do? he went behind it so that people that submitted it were republicans of the house and the senate. some republicans are realizing that like in-state tuition, 1403 is really going to hurt their party and take majority of the population is poor. new jersey did it, maryland did it and the state realizes this is a good thing and even if we don't talk about immigration it's a good economic thing and it's a good thing for the country and for just and people within the community that are

going to be affected if they get the opportunity to go to school or not. >> are right thank you. i'm going to open it up to questions because we are getting toward that time so there should be a microphone there so if you can address your question either to the whole panel or a specific panelists. speak up into the microphone please. >> i would like to pose -- i would like to address my question to representative, excuse me mr. rodriguez and i would like to take the possibility of deportation the 12 million who are off the table since that's not really a possibility and i would like to ask you why it's okay if this bill is repealed and the students have to pay more in tuition why is it okay for the students to pay that money and taxes that are unavoidable regardless of taxes, why is it okay for and i hate to use the word take illegal money?

>> they shouldn't be here anyway. they have got to pay something. they need to pay something. >> do you really think about what you say or do you just say things to be provocative? [applause] >> it's so absurd. it's beyond absurd. the guy is irrational. they should pay out-of-state tuition because they are not residents. >> the geographic definition they are texans. >> they are not texans. they pay city and county taxes. >> it does not matter. >> that is your definition.

>> that is my definition. we are talking about geographic definitions. >> i know but that's wrong. [inaudible] >> let's get the next question here. >> hi. i'm a journalist in houston texas. mr. rodriguez and by the way wonderful last name. how are the dreamers -- give me just three examples. >> they are not necessarily hurting the country. they are just here illegally. they are here illegally, okay and the problem is illegal immigration. they are here because somebody brought them in illegally. get back in line and come in the way. there's a right way and a wrong

way. >> and my question for gaby if you get citizenship what will be the first thing that you will do for this country? >> i think one of the things that's really important to me and it's funny i dream of serving on a jury because i feel that the responsibility and i cringe when people try to get out of serving on a jury. they call in sick or say they don't want to. i think another thing that i would never take for granted is voting. i think one of the reasons why we are where we are at us because not lot of people vote and not a lot of people vote not just in primaries but also during midterm elections. i think that's really important. and i think the other thing that i really want to show politicians what it is to be a

true public servant and so my hope is to one day be able to have the opportunity to serve my nation, to serve my country and community by becoming a public servant. a positive. [applause] >> i have a two-part question for mr. rodriguez but before you do i said at the beginning of the debate -- he said apologizing for being american and conservative. i think we are all americans and there are many kinds of americans. there are native americans and there are white and latino, all kinds of americans and i think that's not right. first of all creating immigration magnet to attract people that come here people are going to come here because this is a great country full of opportunity. the united states is number 17 in the nation and it has a

health care system. i would like before you speak in front of a panel to say thing things -- my question is why won't conservatives embrace what it means to be american and embrace diversity and participate in a solution that brings a preemptive solution to this immigration problem that opens ourselves to the world's? i think it's really stinks that we are going to close the door and not let anyone in. it will continue to happen and i want to know why the conservatives won't engage in a debate that will bring a solution. we are all interested in finding a solution. >> george did you want to respond? >> i'm not sure what you are really talking about in the sense that we are hijacking

anything. >> what you said that. >> wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. the solution that we see his first of all the first that this got to be to secure the border and to enforce the law. >> but that is being done. >> no it's not. we disagree. >> it's being done. >> there you have it. i thought you wanted my response and that's my response. my response is that it's not happening and it needs to happen. >> who says it's not happening? where do you find that? you can't say that you have seen it because you can't bring anecdotal evidence. >> there are some other people with questions. i want to get some other questions in there. >> hi. my name is deborah and i wanted to let you know that i benefited

from h.b. 1403. i have been here since i was four years old. i'm now 23 and i graduated from ut austin this past may. the only reason i was able to attend this great university is because of in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants. i hate that you all keep saying illegal. [applause] ..

guaranteeing them job security, making sure that ice stops rating our homes and workplaces. let us focus on things that matter. we have in state tuition. stop going backwards. i just want to know -- ino -- >> start enforcing the law, is that what your saying? >> no. not at all. i am saying, allow us to give back. >> let me ask you this question. let's say that we did go ahead and compromise and say, all right. let's give amnesty to the dreamers. what about the thousands of kids who recently came across or the millions who want to come across or that will be brought across in the future? what will we do with them? where does it end? >> i think that is why we

need to -- and that wish -- >> where does it stop? >> i wish all the energy that is put on this debate to go back and forth were put on congress to find a solution. >> it is up to us to find the solution. >> well, they need to vote. well, u.s. government, i was taught that it is congress that rice pilaf, right? >> but the people look telling them. >> and the people are telling them that they need immigration reform. [inaudible conversations] [applause] >> they're telling them we need to seal our borders or immigration reform. it is not either or. >> one more question. [inaudible conversations] >> about being an american. american means a nation of immigrants. and we cannot try to hide their issue and think that it will ever be resolved.

we are lying to ourselves if we think that if we build these huge walls, both in the southern and northern borders, that that is going to end. what we do need is to figure out how to reduce the fact that we have 12 million people who are not authorized or undocumented in this country. we need to realize that there are people gaining from the fact that there are people who are not here with legal status. and a lot of those people include president obama, the speaker of the house, the democrats and republicans, politicians that use this issue as a political football to throwback and forth. and that is just the reality >> congressman, do you want to jump in on that? >> well, you know, again, if he thinks that we have a problem, then i would like for him to call the speaker of the house.

ask him. >> but boehner is not a congressman. >> he has tea party in plants. he is the speaker of the house. ask him to put a deal on the floor. >> we have asked -- [inaudible conversations] >> you're saying we have a broken system. >> we have asked the president, your president -- [laughter] [inaudible conversations] >> he has not shown that. [inaudible conversations] >> and he has not chosen to do anything to enforce the laws were protect the border, and that is a fact. >> george, he is your president. again, you should call your speaker of the house. >> no. [inaudible conversations] >> comprehensive reform. >> we have a problem. >> we need immigration -- immigration reform. what we need is enforcement at the border.

[inaudible conversations] >> fiscal conservatives. that me ask you something. you are saying that you want to -- basically what we're talking about would be constrained, which sounds like it would shut down the border. we do this with mexico. our economy is very dependent upon us being able to have easy access between mexico and the united states. so what would you -- >> it is funny that you would talk about fiscal mess when the democrats are the ones spending like crazy. >> again, how would you avert a fiscal disaster by shutting down the border? >> jump in. >> the young woman, the recent graduate from the university of texas. congratulations, number one. number two, the university of texas at el paso has a program where we actually or they actually expand the definition of who qualifies as a resident for in-state tuition because the

universities benefit having these talented students in the university. and so they can enjoy the benefits of in-state tuition. so we want that talent. we want folks like cue, a talent like you. so come to el paso. we would love to have you, your talent. >> u t l. passover is one of our partner institutions. >> next question. >> i would like to bring up the fact that those who are undocumented cannot receive welfare. so whoever is sitting, watching jerry springer, they're not undocumented people. those who are undocumented are the ones getting paid little wages to be under the sun. and is not because they're dumb. it is because they have to survive. after that, i would like to say have been here since i was one. i was born in mexico city. when you say, go back home, this is my home.

i literally to not know mexico at all. so that hurts. and i hope that -- i share your last name, and we have ancestry. i hope that one day you realize how much you heard these families. i wish i was not crying right now, but it is just that i am so passionate about this and want to be a politician one day just to be able to say we don't all want to be broken. we all want to work together . i have always been an ap, honor student. and to see that america does not want to accept me and give me a job and let me contribute, it is really disheartening because i consider this my country. and to see that rodriguez does not want to consider me a worker, i just hope to be a public servant to teach is completely the opposite to that. and thank you so much for

whatever you think you're doing. [applause] [applause] >> how do you argue with emotion? how do you argue with emotion? again, the fact of the matter is, the law was broken. what do we do? okay. we go ahead and grantor amnesty. okay? what is that going to do for the thousands that came across recently in the millions that want to come across? the parents, there are lots of parents all over the world that would love to send their kids to america. what do you do with them? >> you have a system that allows them to -- >> one more question. >> it is more a comment on what you just said and what the young lady very briefly said there. i am charity talk shop -- talk talk. my mother. looking iraq this room, by our standards most of y'all

are immigrants. you are welcome for the houses. we say thanks for the blankets. [laughter] anyway, my question is, when you are talking about illegal aliens and children that were brought over as young, young children -- and i used to teach public school. their is a supreme court ruling that says when children appeared in my classroom -- and i taught entitle one. i had quite a few of these kids. and they are not -- what was it she called them? contraband or whatever that was. >> contraband. >> they are kids. they are my kids. [inaudible conversations] >> here in harris county, right? [laughter] how did that work out?

[laughter] [inaudible conversations] >> it is what it is. call it what it is. >> i think we need to hold ourselves accountable. >> you are making statements there is no way -- [inaudible conversations] >> with all respect -- [inaudible conversations] >> gentleman, the point is when those children showed up in my classroom, the supreme court said regardless of how i felt about the contraband that showed up in my classroom, i was required to give them as good an education as every other child of showed up in my classroom, whether there were differently able to, whether those kids were differently colored. they could be pulled it out. it did not matter. i was to teach them. it did not matter where they were from, and i could not ask them where they were from legally. here is my question to you. if you are saying that these children, brought over here by their parents, are

illegal and need to go back, i am asking you, how far back, how many generations does that go? guess what, folks? i taught u.s. history in texas history. there are quite as effective as quite a few folks that bypassed ellis island and came in on our shores. and i'm looking at all, irish, italian. we tend to think of this has texas centric. how many generations do you intend to go back? by your definition if every person that came to our shores without going to do than normal, legal, documented way is illegal, how many generations do we go back? two, three, four, five, seven generations? how many, sir? >> how long has your family been here? >> five generations. [inaudible conversations]

>> i came across -- >> buy contraband. >> the first illegal immigrants in the state of texas were people who had names like mine, and they came across this the been common at the rio grande up. so we have a long history. and that they used time was 1914-1918. none of this is new, and we can learn from what happened at 100 years ago, and it applies to what we do today, but we have to figure out what we do with those who are here. it ain't happening, no matter how much you believe in the rule of law, and that think you admitted that is probably not going to happen. so what do we do is the question. [applause] >> did you want to talk about your own background, your own family background? >> there is nothing to say

about the family background because the issue is not -- it is a historical fact that we have never had a secure borders. we have never had a secure border. it is time to do it. since 1858 we have not had a secure border. it is time to do it. it is time to do it. >> any other questions? i see one. >> a statement was pretty telling about how one person who makes outlandish comments can hold behind this conversation. i see one, two, three, four, five people that have been contributing to an amazing debate to find an answer. there is one person who has taken it backwards. it is probably not as many times as you have used the word is legal. it backwards, i mean, one person is all it takes. hopefully you will see. it. [applause] >> we're not going backwards

we are not. >> one more question. >> i just want to respond to your statement and say, there is one person that is attracting everyone, and that is what that tea party is doing. that is why we are where we are at. we just have to go out and vote, people. >> all right. thank-you, everyone, for being here. thank you to all of the panelists for coming. a lively discussion. thank you very much. appreciate it. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> c-span campaign 2014 is bringing you more than 100 debates for the control of congress. stay in touch with our coverage. also, candidate events and campaign related programming some of the ads running in senate races in wisconsin and kansas. ♪ it. >> mary burke lied about her jobs plan. how she is at it again attacking the record of scott walker on jobs. attacks that are false. she is twisting numbers, and it is not the first time. in the last year third in midwest job growth.

the facts are wisconsin gained 100,000 jobs under scott walker. we can't trust mary burke. >> he made a pledge. >> 250,000 new jobs by the end of our first term in office. >> and asked us to hold him to. >> is this a campaign promise? >> absolutely. >> today wisconsin is dead last in midwest job growth, at tenth out of ten. >> lags behind most of the country when it comes to job growth. >> those 270,000 jobs, not even close. broken promises, dead last in jobs. scott walker is not for you. >> it has been called the line of the year. >> if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. >> and mary burke supports it. >> it does not mean the government will tell you which doctors to go to war which plan to have. >> but while millions have lost their doctors and their plans, mary burke still

supports obamacare unequivocally. wisconsin cannot afford liberal mary burke, end of story. >> a really good idea about taxes, ronald reagan. surprised you, didn't i? radiant expanded the earned income tax credit cutting taxes for working families. our really bad idea, scott walker did just the opposite, cutting taxes for the wealthiest and raising them on 140,000 wisconsin families. raising income taxes on working families is not just bad economics, it's wrong. >> mary burke the governor. >> i'm pat roberts, and i approve this message. >> the new debt, obamacare. nearly 10 million americans unemployed. now barack obama. >> make no mistake. these policies are on the ballot. every single one of them. >> about this candidate,

greg orman. a vote for greg orman is a vote for the obama agenda. >> pat roberts is attacking me, and that is exactly what is wrong. they would rather attack opponents than the problems we face. typewrite most. and as an independent i will not answer to either party, only to the people of kansas. i will -- step up for the best idea. i'm greg orman, and i approve this message. while the attack and try to label me and our country's problems only get worse. >> hello, everyone. in case you have forgotten, i am bob dole. i want to talk about my good friend, pat roberts. this supports generation kansas, shares our values and fights for kansas' every day. protecting our national security, creating thousands of new jobs. pat roberts is a workhorse

in the senate. the choice is clear. we need to keep pat roberts in the senate. >> i'm pat roberts, and i approve this message. >> when pat roberts first got to washington there were under 1 million illegal and rinse it in america. the problem has gotten worse. today we have 11 million. instead of working on the solution he has come back their kansas to lie about greg orman. >> i'm greg orman, and i approve this message. while the attack and try to label me, our country's problems only get worse. >> and montana is and other senate race we have been following. tonight vying for the seat vacated by max baucus. appointed by president obama to be ambassador to china. democrat john malls currently filling the seat dropped out because of plagiarism charges.

live coverage of the debate starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern tonight. here's a look and some of the ads being run in the race. >> i am a man the curtis command i approve this message. we all know that it is not people like us. >> i'm amanda curtis. the only way to change washington is to elect folks to know what it is like when times are tough. i come from a family that is a lot like most others. the reason i have stepped up to the plate is a chance to be the voice for working families like mine. >> i'm amanda curtis, and they deserve one of us in the u.s. senate. >> a fifth generation and proud sportsmen. he understands how important hunting, fishing, and the outdoors are. in congress steve daines is fighting to increase access to public lands and past bipartisan legislation to

protect pristine areas around place here national park. steve daines defending our montano way of life and in getting results speak. >> up next, a forum on the obama administration's isis strategy. they talked about successes and failures in the region and macy's it -- suggestions for how best to pursue the campaign in the future. this event last friday. >> could afternoon. thank you for being here. welcome to the hudson institute. we welcome our c-span audience as well. my name is lee smith, senior fellow here. i will be moderating this afternoon's panel. can the obama administration is isis strategy work? i believe we have assembled

a fantastic panel to address a remarkably timely issue during the midst of the obama administration isis campaign. and we will talk about the campaign. one of the other things that i want to do this afternoon is to really fill in a lot of questions which i think are still -- i think it is still kind of unclear do exactly isis is, where it came from, what its goals are, what its capabilities are. i think that between the three panelists we have this afternoon i think we will get a lot of answers and have a very interesting conversation. and so i am going to start introducing them. to my immediate left is andrew tabler. the washington bureau chief for al-rai. to his left is michael pregent who has served as an adviser to the iraqi

security forces, having spent a lot of time throughout iraq. he can address and number of these issues and will start this afternoon with a short introduction and is an introductory statement. it will move on to the other panelists. please take over. >> could morning. thank you for having me. one thing we saw when isis moved in june 12th, the iraqi security forces dissolved away and isis took the advantage of an environment where there was disenfranchised sunni population and an impressive shia government in charge of iraq to be one of the reasons that isis was able to come and as we have heard over the last four months or so is that there was a concerted effort to politicize the iraqi security forces by putting loyalists in key positions in this second iraqi army

division. get rid of competent commanders. competent sunni commanders. that same security apparatus that was in place was able to deny al qaeda territory as well as the tigris and euphrates river valleys. that was dismantled, taking 90,000 vetted at eight out of the security apparatus, replacing commanders in the iraqi army in the north. what isis was able to do was take advantage of temporary alliances and move into territory. the one thing that we started doing with u.s. policy is immediately started splitting up advisory groups to get to baghdad and these operations centers to partner with the iraqi security forces. one of the things that was caution plus, we do not want to look like the air force

or iraqi security force when it is considered a sectarian , iran-backed security apparatus. we worked in these operations centers, we caution against -- you put american advisers in these operations centers, even if they know arabic they're not familiar with the nuances. and the shia officers already have more leisure time. and there are kurdish force operatives. and if we were action and we would be implicit in the indiscriminate targeting of sunni population centers. the majority of targets that have been successful were generated with vetted kurdish intel and vetted sunni intel from the previous, now dismantled iraqi security force which was stood up with sunni intelligence officers that actually wanted to go after

al qaeda and shia militias. that was replaced. they took over the structure, and that became something that became part of the sectarian intelligence and security apparatus. so that -- the u.s. air strikes come back key strategic defeat for isis. so the question is always asked. they can hurt isis militarily. able to take up positions, but paired with-murder of an special forces, they were able to take back territory. that was the first a. ♪ loss that isis suffered in iraq and syria. in iraq, that was huge. they wanted to deal to provide services. that would provide water and electricity for the people who live in northern iraq. have a better capability to provide services. that was taken away. they also lost to oil fields

. when need to exploit those opportunities. when isis loses key infrastructure, we need to be able to say that. are other things that happened with the u.s. air strikes, before that we saw equipment moved to syria. they would face a less capable regime. key leaders started moving back, also to the sectarian fault lines. what was left behind were four and fighters. now, and opportunity to exploit isis, who actually comprises isis, foreign fighters who came in wanting to fight assad. so you have to remember. if you do back of the envelope math there are 750,000 sunni males that are waiting to see what the government will do, what we will do, and any time isis

has a public demonstration, there are guards with ak-47s watching the crowd. they're worried about what this sunni male population will do. they do not subscribe to the ideology, but they're not going to kill it without some sort of concession. it will not do it without getting something for it. anything that we do as part of the u.s. strategy has to put pressure on the body to fill the ranks of the two divisions and put in 30,000 sunni that were already part of the iss in the past and make them fill the ranks. that is what the advisory effort needs to beef. we need to be the third party guarantor. they were able to call in u.s. air power, close air support, and do these things we can't simply say fill the

ranks with sunni because there will not trust the central government. so how do you get a body to do that? you have to put pressure on iran to get a body -- they might want to do it now. i think this is a fight that they want. i think i have gone over my time. >> terrific. i was just taking notes. really great. thank you very much, michael . hussain abdul-hussain and i tell-authored an article in the weekly standard about a month ago. hussain abdul-hussain did all of the heavy lifting. i just added my name to get credit. an interesting article about the origins of isis and who is a part of this and what this large rebellion looks like. i think that -- will start today by talking about that somewhat. >> thanks. thank you. thank you for having me