threat. >> southern command has been stood up for a couple years now. i've been intelligence officer for roughly 30 years am also doing reconnaissance and abandon all of the cyberas well as a three year air force veteran. i think russia is the largest existential threat. they have intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarines. putin has been weakness in this president and is trying to push out there to see how far you can go. we need to be strong. i think the more volatile threat is iran in 10 years. this one the destruction of the role and know how the nuclear capability that is recognized in a decade and not just scares most 10 years out. >> mr. bacon, how would, how much of a president obama a strategy of islamic state military in iraq and syria and what if anything would you do differently? >> i did one year in baghdad

with petraeus with the squadron of iraq. the last 10 years studying islamic terrorism threat. i think president obama did too little too late when it came to going after races. the campaign for several years was like six to seven strikes the day. those are pinpricks when you look at the territory databases controlled to be stepped up the air campaign and we need to do more. we have to have a holistic strategy to defeat the spokes beard we have to go after finances, degrade the cyberrecruiting may do over the internet and we also have to have a conversation about what motivates these folks to join so they can undermine them with the more moderate nations. >> mr. ashford, 60 seconds on a strategy of fighting the islamic state. >> first of all, we need a no-fly zone in. and if a stone in syria.

we should have done that before and i criticize the president for not making that decision earlier. we are up to 20 strikes today. we have killed 45,000 isis fighters, but the fight will go long and needs to go one. in iraq we have been able to push back isis and been able to put 45% of the territory back then was taken by isis and 20% in syria. wait novelization for use of force. i've called for that since the day came in the congress. authorization for use of force which will set the mission. in the middle east at three trips to the middle east. commander said we need this. we need it now. we need to make sure we do not cut the budget anymore and we need to have a robust funding from a stable funding. we novelization for use of worth from a no-fly zone and then we have to have some sort of way moving forward after isis is destroyed and that needs to be part of the au enough. >> if i may?

we need authorization for use of force. since 9/11 i would agree they are. isis is growing every day even though there has been success. they recruit every day off the internet and roughly 30 people a day are recruited. but it got to go after the recruiting of isis, which is worldwide in their home countries and self radicalized threats around the country. >> russian hacking at the national level has claimed the nation a stranger and a stranger and so is the country's election. how should america defend itself going forward? >> thank you. first of all we have a cyber command but we haven't had a cyberwars we are standing in now. by 2018 we will have approximately 6200 new cyberwarriors under the cyber command for us. i think we need cyber command is to be a separate combatant command in my view.

under start, not to be a separate combat in command. we also ought to a larger opportunity and bring expertise from silicon valley and quite frankly from omaha to help with the cyberfight. i had an opportunity to talk to the ceo mutual of omaha a year ago or so and they came up at the idea of land lays the private sector technology people that we could bring into the military to help at the cyberfight. and all hands on deck private sector military to get to not only defend that have defend that happen offenses strategy against the cyber. there's much more to be done. we haven't had a good start but we need to do more. >> i was actually there during the start about the cipher -- air force cyberin all the dreams were your building. russia does pose the largest threat towards cyber. china is very at given to her private industry trying to take her intellectual secrets. other countries involved as

well. part of the cyberstandoff we need to continue investing in cyberand growing the teams. we've made a lot of headway with russia and china but we need to do more with the counterterrorism part of our cyberto understand how the insurgents are using the internet to grow the capability as well. >> mr. bacon, similar topic. yet 60 seconds. re: discuss russia but let's further the conversation. how would she handle russian president vladimir putin should we treat him as a friend or foe? why or why not? >> he's become an adversary. he's certainly working against our interests. i fear what happened in georgia where he took away sections of their land as well as ukraine with the crimea area. if we don't stand firm in the baltics of lithuania, estonia and might be and i traveled there. they are great allies.

we have to have a presence to serve a deterrence. nato does perform a valuable function here and we need to continue working with end and make sure countries contribute at the right level. nato made their presence as a deterrence. >> mr. ashford, how is she handle vladimir putin? >> user adversary attorney to handle aggressively. we have rotated troops in a knot of poland. we have our air force and romania. we are counteracting some of the social media efforts in the baltic states. i traveled to the baltic states and sweden and various other countries in the area and to our troops in england and there's actually no question that russia busting our 55th, god must probably better than anyone about the 55th and the buzzing by the russian planes. but we need to enforce our

boundaries and eastern europe. we need to be clear, very clear in syria with a no-fly zone that is assad goes after it areas and not let go, we resist up with a no-fly zone. we need to make sure russians understand that and that we are going to act aggressively if necessary. >> let me make one commentary on that. but the russian authorities there, there's a recipe for conflict with the russians. i do not think it's a wise move to do the no-fly zone. we do need the safe havens. we need to put refugees in these areas to help protect them and feed them closer to home so they don't become europe in the air. a no-fly air with the russians as a recipe for conflict. the no-fly zone was the thing to do before they got there. it's not that they now unless the court may.

>> i think we need to make it very clear to the russians that we are going to aggressively enforce that against someone. the diplomatic efforts in geneva have stalled. we have to make it very clear to the russian that we are going to protect civilians in safe zones but also enforcing a no fly zone not out in the field going after are sunni partners, but also the civilian population and obviously the 250,000 people who died in the tragedy is that the leopard in my view need to be stopped. >> you have to coordinate with russians on this because they are flying combat. it's a recipe for conflict. the no-fly zone should be done before the russians got there. our president was too weak and didn't stand up in time to get this done. we need safe havens for refugees. >> i think we need to aggressively do the no-fly zone and we can coordinate with russians. aside needs to go.

eventually someone needs to go. we are coordinating with the russians now and i've been in the basics and i know where those conversations go on between the russian and there is some coordination going on. petraeus is ray. we met with general petraeus on several occasions in the armed services committee. he has planned for a safe zone is appropriate. >> will move on to help her now. the first question goes to you to start off. one of them are popular features of the lot is insurance companies deny coverage based on conditions. the most unpopular partisan mandate that requires everyone to have insurance. the two go hand-in-hand. without the mandate people get insurance once they got a heart attack. can we have one without the other? >> first of all, in the congress there have the congress there has been closed to 70 efforts to

repeal the aca without a replacement plan. so we wasted from 2010 until now, we've wasted time when we could be trying to reform and i do think we need to reform it. in order to cover for a preexisting condition for 26 euros in their family and for lifetime caps, individuals will have to buy insurance. we need to make the insurance more affordable at work with insurance companies to do that. when he tore that. way to work for small businesses to remove mandates on them because i don't think they are necessary. employers to provide insurance to their employees across the country. i do think the mandates for individuals are important but we have to get the cost down by refining upon the care and that means working across the aisle to do it. it has to be done in a bipartisan way. >> along with the mandate.

>> would need to cover preexisting conditions. right after his standing obamacare, one of the worst things to our economy. i've been a small businesses all the time. the average family's pain more in premiums right now. obamacare has been a failure to the middle class and a failure to small businesses. i would repeal and replace obamacare. paragraph proposals in congress to put out there. we can fix this or put it down at the state level. we voted for it twice and it's a failure. >> i would take away all of obamacare to include the mandate. we do need existing coverages that the state level. we can assure folks are covered. we don't need washington d.c.

when a patient centered health care where people can take their insurance policy and go from job to job. the proposals now in congress we can enact. obamacare is a failure. he stood with nancy pelosi and supported her in this effort. >> don, let's get the facts straight. when i ran i said it would not have voted for obamacare because it was not a bipartisan affair. what needs to be done in washington is we need to address all of these problems in a bipartisan way. your party has proposed to repeal up on the care of seven or 12 times since i've been there. about 55 or 60 times before i got there without any replacement. when you tell a 20 million people now that you have insurance? when you tell people with preexisting conditions now been dealt with but they have insurance? we have to reformat, but that

means working across the aisle. i want to see a plane you're talking about. >> i would be more than happy to support changes. i've got 10 dozen cosponsors. >> one of the things you brought up in there, mr. ashford, for those of you who say get rid of obamacare to make sure that the between 16.5 and 20 million. i think it is nine on the exchanges in that range. would you support stripping people of their coverage and what would you do with the people who signed up, caught the coverage and in 2016 appears they might change. >> is a congressman from georgia. here in town this week briefing

people on this proposals. the regulatory authority out of washington d.c., out of the hands of d.c. bureaucrats. get it back to the state level. we want to ensure that patients when you get your own coverage you can go from job to job and take the coverage with you. we want more competition. obamacare is what the cost skyrocket. we can cover folks and provide preexisting coverage and also help a 26-year-old and still have the health care run at the state level and get it out of washington d.c. >> that's not a proposal. i've been there on the floor for 19 months taking several votes on the issue not to repeal, but to find a way to fix it. i know that people talk about this sordid mysterious plan out there. i've never seen it. i've never seen one single

suggestion in legislative form. i would be happy to look at the reform of obamacare if someone would bring it forward in a legislative package. it is legislative negligence in my view to take what is purely a political position to repeal something because it's called obamacare the president proposed it in a partisan manner, which i don't agree with. but that isn't fixing it. we have to fix it. we have to make sure those 20 million continue to have coverage. we need more competition and to give insurance companies the ability to do that and to regulate positions. they've been overly regulated. we need to do it with a plan. i've not seen a plan. i'd be happy to look at it. >> if you have a divided house and senate, the republicans control the house and the senate now. if democrats take back the senate that the republicans control the house, what you just

said about fixing and improving it will see a stalemate. >> we are on the road to fixing it. first of all, the cadillac tax is gone. if the tag to small businesses are medium and large sized as if it, the one area that we could do right away and i think he might do it in the lame duck is to get rid of the cadillac tax for the first time in the history of health care insurance, we are taxing health care insurance. we've never done that before. one of the reasons employers body and after the war was because it was a benefit not taxed. we need to get rid of the cadillac tax. and employers with the other day talked about large employer 40% increase in the premium cost of a document of the cadillac tax. we need to make sure we get rid of the mandate that businesses over 30 employees have to buy insurance. that's a crippler for small business. we need to look at the taxes are required to pay.

i would go for all those things. i vote for getting the states more flexibility on projects. >> we've tackled national security and health care at this point. at this point to let the candidates catch their breath a little bit. when we come back, they will ask each other a question. you are watching the tree into daycare and congressional debate right here on kmtv. >> we are back and we are going into the debate where each candidate will be given a chance to ask his opponent a question. based upon drying of cards, mr. ashford goes first. >> i have only three democrats have voted more times than me with republicans. the congressional quarterly has said that in the six most

bipartisan member of the united states congress. there's an objective observer of the hill. i have voted to back my party on many communications. a buddy to keep gitmo. in every antidote and i voted for full accountability at the veterans administration. would you pick three republican initiatives of issues where you would like your party? tell me what desire. >> first of all, depending to wins the presidency this election, i will support nato because nato deserves support. if president trump comes in and makes that one of his initiatives, i will stand and ensure that i'm a strong voice for nato. i also will be careful about the use of force in syria. i think i see combat firsthand and i want to be careful about the use of force. i'll be a voice to ensure we don't overreach in a bad situation. >> two of them there.

mr. ashford, nato in syria that mr. bacon just noted. >> the republicans on the armed services committee support nato wholeheartedly. i don't think that the republican position. as far as syria, there's a difference of opinion, the state may republicans support a no-fly zone and republicans who don't. i would ask are there any issues were you at differ with the republican position. not the trunk position because i don't think the trump position are exactly the same -- necessarily the same. >> only two points they appear to third two points there. the third one is said be careful how we talk about immigration and secure borders. the 300,000 to 400,000 folks come in illegally. once we do that and we do other measures to secure the border, i would have a more moderate approach to how to handle the 12-point folks. i don't take a one-size-fits-all

approach works. some people are good neighbors doing good in their community. we provide a pathway for legalization. i have a more moderate approach. i'm not a blank check for either party or for that matter either president. i want to do what's right for this district and to defend our constitution. >> it's not your turn to ask mr. ashford a question. >> i want to talk about isis in terror. do you know which cities in nebraska on the list and what would you do 48 hours after a major attack if one occurred in nebraska? >> i don't know what cities are on the kill list. i've never been briefed on that. if you do, tell me. >> i will. but go ahead and finish. >> what's your next question? >> what would you do if there's a major attack in nebraska from isis? >> my first response would be to

bring together our local law enforcement people, homeland security people, fbi and number one to first of all aggressively resist the attack obviously and our local law enforcement people need to have -- that's why he voted to make sure local law enforcement has the equipment they need is such an attack were to occur. i voted with the majority to do that. prior to any attack hopefully we have an integrated response to any future attack and i would have those individuals, those groups, fbi, homeland security, counterintelligence groups come together. i would also make certain we have access to technology so we can find out what sort of additional attacks are occurring. get into their cell phones, get into their technology to make sure nothing else happens.

local law enforcement has to have the equipment and ability to respond and then we would bring in the national team, the fbi to enforce that. >> what actions would be done by the governor and presidential decision, but there is one city on the kill list and that's bellevue with the office air force days. it's important to know because a list of cities they want to attack. someone on the committee should likely know that. the reason i brought this up as i have a close relationship with the mayor of all of you who supports me. i've known her when i was a soccer mom. her kids are playing soccer in the 90s then i would talk to her and make sure i knew what she needed to help her out with congress or any congressional actions. the commander of the 50 victory the 50 victory as someone at server three times. i would call him. both share a sped away in this district support me. i would talk to them.

the county attorney who's also a supportive of mine. i have a lot of great relationships i could leverage. i would make sure i know how we can support them through the actions of congress. >> i like all the people that support you by the way. mayor of bellevue has a lot of enthusiasm. she's a runner like you and i are. she's great. we are talking about rita sanders. she does a great job of bellevue. one of the proudest things have been able to do with my colleagues in the delegation working across the aisles, when you were there in for years before that, the family could not be done. i worked with the white house, other members of the delegation and were able to get the air force to go along with that runway, which is going to help the 55th president erin also our security. >> in the past year there's been increased talk about racial injustice in this election.

he believed the backlight is modern movement it on complaint about racial injustice in the way police sometimes interact with african-americans. >> i served as chairman of the judiciary committee for a number of years and we dealt with these issues all the time. i've worked with the empowerment network since it was formed in north omaha. we have been nebraska some legal responses to some of these problems. i've talked to many of my friends were members of the cities to have these issues. one of the things we do here is we have a grand jury automatically impanel whenever there is a dad in the custody of a police officer. the police officers above that involves transparency and provide stability for the public to know that this particular incident has had an immediate looksee. we also when i was on the judiciary committee, we made sure the crime commission collected information on all traffic stops and the community. we know when anybody can vote at

where those traffic stops occurred and that gives us the data we need. i also work to promote programs on the state level and federal level to prevent violence. >> the question is do you believe the blacklist matter of a valid complaint? >> sure. that is why we have to have -- amir dula had a great response to what happened at northwestern i would not is not obviously when the national anthem was played, but those young people had a point and the right to protest. a mere abdullah in detroit for the wines had a great idea. bring one person in together. this is an opportunity to have a collaboration and discussion. >> yes because there have been situations that were wrong. the gentleman in the carolinas i was pulled over and he was

behind in child support payments, that was wrong. i think blacklist matter of also has a higher meaning when you look at unemployment rates that are three, four, five times higher in those urban areas. we've got to fix that. ..

folks would know there was honesty and transparency, no cover-up, we need to have that philosophy when these situations occur. >> let me ask the. >> and i just just respond. >> we actually have a bill in congress, north dakota and georgia, we have a bill that targets, i think it's it's very important, it targets 18-year-old, 35-year-old black male's, 41% of them are employed in this country what this bill does is in any large public project, the finance personally financed or whatever, the department of labor meet with community-based groups in the area with a project is, develop a plan to directly employ black youth males between 18 and 35. that's the problem i was talking about. he's right, and needs to be addressed in this is a bill that can do that in a bipartisan way. >> let me ask investment we can continue along on the same track. you say we have to fix this and

you cited an example. they had just mentioned a bill in an odd what is the effort to address the issue of racism in this country, the federal government. >> we do have a role at the federal government level, it's a team effort. i had a meeting in omaha working with community leaders to learn more about how to support these issues. one of the things we talked about was ensuring the agencies in washington, when we find out where to spend money at, we get it to the right spot so it's working. i wanted to know what programs were working so we could invest more there and reduce money in areas that are working. we have to give more support of our business community.

regulations make it hard for small businesses to open and grow. it's the worst growth we've had since 1949 coming out of a recession. we have to do better. we have some outsiders in washington who can push this because the insiders in the career politicians are getting this done. >> is this a federal issue, state issue. >> it's all of the above. >> i think all hands need to be undressed as deck as we address these issues. community outreach is important in every community. we have had a remarkable number of exceptional police chiefs and members of the force. we have a bill in the congress to carry a bill that gives special status to the military for the spouse of a law-enforcement person who has been killed in action. the federal government has two roles. needs to make sure the program

is robust and help support community please. detect any cheap here in some of those mentioned, they need that funding. secondarily, i think we can provide federal guidelines for training on how how we deal with violence and how we interact with police and community leaders and people in the community. the decisions have to be made on the community level. i think there is a funding opportunity as long as it's efficient and earmarked to the right people. >> i think expanding some oversight would be a mistake. we want to make sure our local police, there's more about getting the long arm of the federal government to micromanage and do some training in federalization of the police force. that's big government and i would oppose it. >> i absolutely oppose it. to. i have had a lifetime of work with the police division and all the police forces and other

community projects. it shouldn't be a federal program. what i am saying is there is money there for cops and the cops funding program should be robust and expanded to address the concerns that you've raised and it enhances cities like ours and it shouldn't go to every city. it should go to things i have done the job of enhancing community policing. >> you both agree the nation's borders need to be strengthened. this deals with the 11 million immigrants in this country illegally. would you consider a pathway to citizenship or decide with donald trump? >> were not going to deport 11 million people. i don't support, i support a path and i always have, i believe it needs to make sense that we provide a way for

individuals who are here, about 50% have overstayed their visas and 50% have not of the 11 million. we need to find a way for there's individuals to earn their pathway to citizenship. whether they have to pay their taxes, they could not have violated the law, they have to adhere to the rules that apply to everybody and congress doesn't debate this issue. i don't support wall, but they say first secure the border and the we talk about citizenship. we need more technology on the border, we don't need a wall but we need a pathway to citizenship with clear rules so individuals know what the rules are and can get there.

>> the executive orders, are commenting around congress, it's been wrong. i think it has to be connected in a more comprehensive way to securing the border. you not to be able to come up with a compromise the last folks in our country know we secure the border. unless you do that, i think people must be more willing to discuss how do we appropriate appropriately handle the people who are here. i propose a pathway to citizenship because people have been waiting to do it right. i think there's pathway for legalized status for those working with community neighbors

and those who are just good neighbors in general. those who are bad or have had crimes or not supporting themselves, they need to go back home. >> under president obama, we had issued executive orders because congress has failed to act. the excuse given by those who oppose immigration reform, and i don't think you can say to a young dreamer who came here at two or three years old and has gone to school here and lived his life and played sports and is a constructive part of the school and the community, you can't say they can't turn citizenship. why on earth cannot young person not have an opportunity to earn citizenship. we've deported more people than we've ever deported before because congress have failed to act to set forth rules and regulation. bush had a bill that i supported and i said support something like it now. the congress wouldn't even take it up. >> we are not sporting more people than others ever.

it's catch and release. we are letting people out of jail that were arrested to go on to commit crimes. it's wrong. it's because of president obama's executive orders of which they help fund those orders. we should've taken a harder line when this came up. we have between 300 400,000 people coming here illegally or overstaying their visas every year. we have to secure that border and then we can do the compassionate right thing with the folks who are here. it won't be a one-size-fits-all approach. >> i need to respond to that. >> my thought on homeland security was not what you just suggested. i voted to maintaining keep the security office (what the vote was was in fact not to support the executive order. i voted against my party on that

because i would never vote to shut down homeland security. that was the vote. it was cynical and i would never vote to shut them down. also, david young and i have this sarah route bill. we have a bipartisan bill which that if you've created a violent crime ice must take custody so that what happens can never happen again. we are responding. we are responding. >> the funding, when an executive order breaks the law, congress has to take a hard line line because separation of power demands it. we been working in a very dysfunctional gratian environment and brad as part of the problem. >> let's continue the discussion on immigration. you each have 30 seconds on this particular specific question.

we've seen the images of syrian refugees including children and about 50 of those refugees. donald trump wants to ban refugees coming to this country. would you support a ban and what would you do with the refugees who have settled in nebraska. >> 10,000 folks arriving here, here, there's a proposal for 50000 more. i think we should say no and we need to be very good vetting. allowing the 10000 without hard vetting, you know isis is trying to infiltrate the refugees. we need to be very careful. we are better off trying to protect refugees closer to home. >> 30 seconds on refugees here nebraska.

>> there are 4 million refugees from syria. republican, congressman came to me and asked if i would be a sponsor to provide for more robust vetting. i was and i am in homeland security and fbi have changed the vetting rules so that when a refugee comes here, after 18 - 18 - 24 months of vetting, they come here and they are vetted for the first year that they are here and at the end of the first year, which is a change, in response to the bill we introduced, they have to go through another background check. i think we should allow the refugees to come in. they should comply with the procedures that have been implemented but as far as i no,.

[inaudible] so many of our viewers and listeners have seen, both of you have seen like honest guys but your political parties are running fear mongering ads on your opponent's record. the campaign committee is running an ad suggesting your opponent wants to raise the rays of social security for everybody even though he has said he would not change the retirement age for anyone nearing retirement. do you support these out and what would you say about social security. >> i don't support raising retirement age. i don't think you need to do that ever, whether it's going back to 40 years older 30 years old or 20 years old. think there's another plan to make a sustainable for another 75 years and i think that's a reduction in benefits. that's my position. >> what does the ad say.

>> the ad has a couple that sitting on the couch and they want to raise social security and they just found out that they may have to work longer and harder. they can't trust them. that's not our ad and we don't have control over. the point that's being made is that raising the retirement age is not good policy. they're trying to graphically show that raising the retirement age is not a good policy. >> first of all, i do not want to raise the retirement age for those in retirement when you're in retirement. we have to make that clear. she wants her diet in the house. [inaudible]

not i'll give you one. the nancy pelosi stuff is fine and i know it's good politics and you keep talking about me as a career politician. the week after i got elected you decided to run for office. you said we need to change and i didn't even unpack my luggage. >> sure i voted for nancy. i voted against nancy on almost every major initiative. >> it is true. >> those votes happening congress and you need to study. >> i'm not a legislature like you are. >> your good military guy, but i

think, you are and i commend you , your service is commendable, without question. i have had 18 years of being a legislator and it is complicated, it is different. >> what those votes are our procedural votes. >> you're only a moderate here in california or new york. not nebraska. >> it's time for our second and final commercial break. when we come back, closing statements for each candidate. you're watching the congressional debate in tandem with the omaha world herald. >> welcome back, before we get to the closing statement, one final question. the only have only have 30 seconds to answer. do you believe the second amendment allows restriction on any type of firearm person can own and can or should we ban assault rifle. >> no i don't think we should ban them. i do think we should have background checks and we have

them in nebraska. the no-fly list in the terrorist watchlist, those people, there should be background checks done between 2004, and 2014, thousands of people on that list were able to purchase firearms. i think that a risk and many people support that. >> i would defend the second amendment. i've defended our rights for 30 years in the air force and i'll defend this one. let me point out about the no-fly list. ted kennedy was on it. we need a due process so someone who is on that list lawfully has a way to get out of that because that's important for our rights. the fifth amendment should be protected. >> it's time for closing statements. each candidate has 90 seconds. mr. ashford, your your first. >> thank you again both of you and thank you to the world herald and km tv.

everybody needs to get out and vote and this will help us do this. my family has had a life of public service dating to nebraska to 1856 when my father's family came from ireland and my mother's family came from sweden in the 1870s. public services in my dna and it's in the dna of all nebraskans. i had the opportunity to serve in the nebraska legislature for 16 years. that was public service in my mind. i owned a business, i ran a law firm, i raised a family. the nebraska legislature taught me many things spread the one thing it really taught me was nebraskans have a unique way of being. the legislature is incredibly unique. there is no other place like it. there are no parties, people don't sit on one side of the other. people don't even get voted on feast on their partisan designation that they may have. it's the nebraska way. when i ran for congress i thought i would go to washington

and i worked with republicans and i did some incredibly important pieces of legislation. i have been ranked the sixth most bipartisan member of the congress. those aren't just things that i'm thrown out there, those are factual. i will continue to go back to washington if i'm elected and i would appreciate your vote in doing the exact same thing. >> you have 90 seconds for your closing argument. >> thank you craig and michael for doing this and thanks for being here. i'm running for congress because i love our country and i want to continue to defend it. i think i bring in very useful experience. our country. we have a regulatory environment that's crushing the community. i want to be a leader that comes from washington working the bipartisan way on all of these

core issues. career politicians are not getting it done. i also want to bring useful experience there. we talk about bipartisanship. he gave us a tie breaking vote that gave us obamacare. when the chips are down we will be marching against nancy pelosi and we can do better. we have core issues facing this country. i look forward to serving you and i will work hard for your vote and i would ask for your vote. thank you. >> thank you. that will have to be the last word in the night but i'd like to thank both of our candidates for participating in your willingness to run for public office.

for more analysis on this debate and to re-watch the debate in the coming days, you can go to km tv.com or omaha.com. we encourage you we encourage you all to vote in the election. don't forget it's tuesday, november 8. thank you for joining us tonight >> our campaign 2016 coverage continues on c-span with five debate for the house, senate and governors races. tonight at 8:00 eastern, republican senator mike lee and democrat misty snow debate for the utah u.s. senate. then on thursday, the pennsylvania eighth district conventional debate and democrat steve and at seven richard burr and democrat debate for the north carolina u.s. senate. on friday night at 80 string the debate between republican senator ron johnson and former democrat. that's followed at ten with

republican congressman and democrat catherine debating for the nevada senate. watch our complete campaign 2016 coverage on c-span and online at cspan.org. watch and listen on the c-span radio app. c-span, created by america's table cable television companies and brought to you as a service. >> now candidates for utah's district debate congressional ethics rules, the economy, economy, climate change and america's criminal justice system. >> from the campus in salt lake city, utah debate commission welcomes you to the fourth congressional district debate.

[applause] >> welcome to salt lake community college for one of the most anticipated exchanges sponsored by the commission during this 2016 election season. tonight we gather for a debate between candidates in utah's fourth congressional district. our debate is a rematch of an exchange that took place two years ago. we will hear from the republican candidate, mia love. each candidate receives.

[inaudible] it was determined dog would have the first opportunity. >> good evening everybody and i want to thank the debate commission for organizing this debate and can for moderating. thank you. i want to thank salt lake committee college. this is one awesome institution. they educate 60000 young utah's and give them a great insight into life. i am proud to be here. i want to tell you why am running. my dad came from a town in southern utah. he was the youngest of nine children born in a one-bedroom house. my grandfather had lost his arm in the depression so my dad grew up dirt poor. he did not have a toothbrush until he was 15. he believed in the american dream and so at 18, he came up with kentucky fried chicken job. he was able to put himself through the university of utah. i know you students here aren't able to do that. you are taking on heavy student loans. i am running because we need to keep college affordable and every other pathway that people follow to get into the living

wage job, it's critical that we hang on to every single one of those pathways so that college and job training and making sure everybody in the middle-aged has an opportunity to get back in a living wage job. i appreciate the chance to be here and thank you for moderating. >> now on 92nd opportunity for representative. >> thank you can. thank you to all the students were here today and thank you to all of those who are watching from home. i know it's easy to take in the doom and gloom of the daily news, but i want you to know i have confidence in our nation. i have been able to work with the district and extraordinary people. people like gordon ewell who is here with me today. he was severely injured in combat while serving in iraq. think you gordy for everything you've done for us.

we know you a great deal of gratitude. there are a of people that believe we can't solve our problems because were too divided as a nation. although i disagree, quite often with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, i think there is more to actually unites us than divides us. i've been able to host several of them here in the state's show them what we do as a community to elevate people who are striving for a better life. we have made so much progress that we've been able to bring people along with us. people like david scott, a democrat who has endorsed this campaign. this hasn't happened in heaven knows how long. it's because david scott knows the issues that we face aren't just left to right issues. they are american family issues. i think it's time that we elevate the conversation past the politics that are going to help our utah family. i hope we can do that tonight. >> the utah commission has established a format that allows each candidate 90 seconds for an initial reply to a question.

these were from voter input from the website. other questions will come from our audience including students from the community college. each candidate will also have rebuttal time to speak directly to the views of their opponent on each question. let's begin. >> the last five days have represented a new level of intensity and a spirited debate with qualifications for candidates getting to serve as the next president of the united states. throughout the nation they are beginning political conversations with, i could never vote for, and then they fill in the blank. what are the values you are looking for the next president and who best represents those values in 2016? the first 92nd opportunity goes to you. >> being the only woman in the delegation, it is incredibly difficult to deal with the environment in a male dominated

congress, but i'm from utah and comments and different things like that roll off my back. however this past weekend has really given us an insight as to what is really at stake here in washington. let me give you an example. for too long our members of congress have given their power away. our members of congress are people in utah and around the nation who have been looking to washington for the answer. now we need to look within. i have stood very firm and have not endorsed donald trump and i certainly have not endorsed hillary clinton. now is the time for us to make sure that we have a balance of power to the administration. now is the time to make sure nancy pelosi isn't the speaker of the house. we must do everything we can to make sure there is a check and balance in washington because it's time to restore utah and make sure we are concentrating on us and what we need to do to

restore the people's voice back in washington. >> i don't mean to be naïve, but you have seem to injected none of the above is a box to check. i want to ask you, once again, does the candidate represent your values in 2016? >> i can tell you right now, hillary clinton doesn't represent my values, donald trump doesn't represent my values. i have been looking into the other candidates and again, i have not not closed the door on the other candidates but, there is still some time left. >> your response. >> i don't look for values and national politics. i look here at home. i know many people have struggled with this issue and i think there's been too much focus there. i ran from congress not to play in the presidential race but to do what i could do for utah. six generations of my family have called this place home. i am in this to do what i can for utah. i have set i am voting for my

party's nominee, but i have not endorsed any candidate, i have not participated in any race, i am trying to do what i can for utah. i don't look there for value. i think we need to take our values to washington. i think people like firefighters web endorsed my candidacy. those are folks who run to the problem. if we had more those kind of values and congress, if we could roll up our sleeves and get the job done, that's the kind of values we need to take. i think of teachers who are really struggling. my mother was a teacher. she put her heart and soul into her job and used her own salary to help pay for the materials in her classroom. those are the kind of people who are educating our children. that's where i look for values and those other types of things i want to take to washington. it's important that when you look at the presidential race, it's all the more important the person who can go to washington and take our values there and do what's right for us. >> apparently i missed the distribution of polls.

i had never been in a setting where neither candidate would publicly endorse the top of their ticket in a presidential year. i will come back to a more time. what are we hearing about the american state of politics that you to feel you cannot endorse your own top of the ticket? >> i said i wouldn't endorse, and i am not going to vote for the two nominees at the top of the ticket. however, i think it's important that you actually go and vote for somebody. there are people who are looking to you as members of congress and you become that example. i find it really interesting that my opponent says he supported and voted for hillary clinton. this is a person who has lied to the american people. this is a person who took their e-mail server and hid them.

this is a person who left soldiers in benghazi on their own and did absolutely nothing. again, i am actually sticking with my district and sticking to the issues that my district is affording and i'm not looking to washington as an example. >> your 45 seconds to respond. >> i have indicated how i'm going to vote. what's more important is how i will but when i get to washington. i can work with the president of either side. i can hold them accountable matter which party there from. that's why i'm in this race. it has nothing to do with national party politics. i think people in washington are entirely too stuck on party labels. i was taught to one guy over the weekend who said it was like a nightmare he couldn't wake up from. i think it's all the more important that you get focused on this race and what either of us can do for utah. >> let's move on to our next topic. they revealed concern in the heart and mind of average

americans onto general topics, the economy and national security. we have students standing by that will pepper you on questions of the economy. at this point let me turn the question to national security. americans are expressed thing concern for their own safety and their own state in their own community. short of declaring a police state, how do we fight terrorism on our own shores without trampling the principles of justice. you have the first 92nd opportunity. >> thank you. the highest priority to me is keeping americans safe at home. that is absolute top priority. i think it's uncommon for the congress to give all the resources they need to make sure people who come into this country are safe and we are safe at home. that's top priority for me. it's clear when you look around the world and you see in

expansionist russia and china in trouble in the middle east and domestically, it's all the more important that congress go to work to make sure we are giving our military and our police the resources they need to combat terror. domestically it's interesting, if you look at those last three incidents of domestic terror, all all three of those guys have come up on law enforcement radar before the incident. law enforcement for various reason had not gone after them. i think it's on us to examine those incidents and make sure that the police and every other authority has the resources they need to keep us safe. that's congress' job. >> your response on the subject of keeping america safe at home from acts of terror? >> there is no question we have a serious problem in our country a poll that was published last year showed 47% of americans are

fearful they will be the victim or a loved one will be the victim of terrorist activity. for years, the administration has been getting our military. i believe the world will see peace when we are a beacon of strength. when you are getting the military as the administration has, it makes it very difficult for the united states to be a beacon of strength. we have to make sure we are providing the resources for our military. when it comes to boots on the ground, there are certain values and things that need to happen before i will agree to put boots on the ground. congress has to be involved. we have to make sure we have a clear mission as to what were going to do and how we think we are going to come out. we had to make sure there's a threat to american life, not just american interests. we have to have a way out.

if i had another one it would be to make sure they have all the tools they need in order to combat and reach their mission. those are the things i would do to have before having boots on the ground. >> you made very broad statements of general support, but let me ask you specifically, why are you the best person to represent the fourth district when it comes to making the safer for acts of terrorism on our home sure. >> this is maybe one of the most serious decision, i will never lose sight of the fact that those are our our sons and daughters. i never use the expression boots on the ground. those are your brothers and sisters and your sons and daughters in your children who are going into harm's way. i have seen that, i'm the best

person because i will make sure to wait those decisions as the most important and never lose site of the fact that these are our people, our sons and daughters. >> i can tell you i have made sure in the house that i support every bill that comes. not only are we supposed to keep the promises every day, we are supposed to keep the promise to their family. i have voted to increase funding and make sure our men and women have the tools they need. i have voted every time against the president when he wanted to guide our military. there isn't a vet out there in utah that understands the work that we have done that doesn't understand that we have been promilitary. >> i said we would turn our attention to the economy are

very personal reaction. let's go into our audience at salt lake community college. >> good evening, my question is nearly 12% of you tall lives in poverty. what measure do you support to reduce income inequality and food insecurity such as increasing the federal minimum wage, expanding child nutrition programs and boosting benefits. >> you have a 92nd opportunity. >> this is an area we have worked across the aisle. i'm the only republican member in the congressional black caucus and i have been able to host members of the other side of the aisle here. we can talk about what we've done here in utah to lift poverty. the way they do it doesn't actually hurt. there is generational poverty and situational poverty. sometimes one perpetuates the

other. we give our local agencies the tool they need to take care of poverty. they know these individuals personally. there are those we work within the state making sure we give them the tools. in terms of minimum wage, with the department of labor has been doing in terms of the over time rule, the knee-jerk reaction is to create more regulation. band up hurting those they seek to protect. when you raise that wage, it's very difficult for an employer who says i have a set amount of money, what am i going to do with that. often someone gets fired. often people end up losing their job. we should be doing what we do is innovative and bring down the unemployment rate so we can

naturally ring up the minimum wage. >> your 92nd opportunity to address several key issues. >> i appreciate your question. this is why am running. i looked around. [inaudible] that's for those people that i am running for. the jobs that were lost in the recession paid 22% more than the jobs that have been created. what that tells us is the americans are working harder than other and they're not doing as well. this is why i am running for congress. this is the biggest reason. i want to make sure they can make the right choices from them i hope i get the chance to work on this in congress. it's deregulation and it's making sure we have a lower

corporate tax rate. no one should have an incentive to ship jobs overseas. it's rebuilding and this is why i'm running. i think that's the defining issue of our time. i have an opponent, congresswoman love who has voted 98% of the time with her party. i will tell you no party is. [inaudible] i am proud of my job plan and i hope you give me a chance to put it into place. >> in rebuttal, i want you each to specifically to the spine to a question. one of the concerns was raising the federal minimum wage. you both talked about in print,

but let me print the direct question. do you support an increase to the federal minimum wage? wire why not. >> i answered answered the question. i believe artificially raising it on the federal side is the wrong thing to do. the way that we create jobs is by innovation. the way we create jobs is by market principles and deregulating. i'm glad that my opponent agrees with me because i am part of the article one project that is deregulating congress. we have to make sure that we are bringing down the unemployment rate so naturally we can bring up the wages. >> you have a 452nd opportunity as well.

>> i've been in the private sector my whole life and in the real world helping business create jobs. i've been a business attorney for 25 years. sometimes the government needs to get on the way and other times they need to support. i've mentioned some of those opportunities i think they can bring about. i've seen the business perspective where i know business is unduly impacted by regulation but it is a two-way. it makes it harder to hire but it increases the demand in the economy. there's a lot of evidence to back up what mitt romney said. that's what i want to do. >> back to our student body, this is a representative. your? the economy? >> my question is, tuition costs

have dramatically increased in the past ten years. often two or three times the rate of inflation. the location remains the best hope for many low income americans. what would you do to either increase word-of-mouth or year-round financial award. >> you of the first 92nd opportunity. >> let me speak generally about education and get a little more specific. i do think of my father and my mother when i it comes to education. i mention my dad coming out of utah, he was really poor. he had a very loving family but they had no ability to help him get on in life. it was the teachers in utah that saw in him something special and invested in him and helped him get on his way in life. i strongly believe in public education and education as a pathway, the number one pathway to help people. this is something they ought to

be able to work together. let's grow the economy and enable them to take care their self and their family. this is the most critical issue for me in terms of job growth and building our economy. it's also the most critical issue in getting congress working again. >> i think also my mother who is a fifth-grade teacher in rose park. she put her heart and soul in that job and used her salary to buy classroom supplies. she took a fifth-grade class all the way to d.c., that's how much he cared. i think we've got a teacher retention problem, we lose, my job is to get every. [inaudible] that's the number one pathway to get people out of poverty and being full-fledged participants in our private enterprise system which is our great strength. we just need to help everybody to make sure they are fully able

to participate in the economy. >> your 92nd opportunity. >> first of all, i want you to know that i thought about this and this has been a concern for mine. i understand what students are going through. college tuition was $20000 when i was there. at the age of 35, i paid back all my student loans. think about this. today at the same school, college education is $44000 a year. how long is it going to take a student graduating today to pay that off. the problem that we have and we have this unlimited flow going into higher education, it's causing the rate of higher education to rise more than the rate of inflation. i want you to no, education is a

great equalizer and families a stabilizer. we had to do everything we can to put money back in the hands of the people and put money into her college education so schools can compete for those title iv funding's. what i have done is introduce three bills which is the know before you go act so we have the matrix of how many much it cost, how many people have graduated and if there are jobs waiting for them. we can bring down the cost of higher education so you are not paying back the federal government. >> i heard some differences between these two. thank you for the question. it's a very important one. there are things that can be

done to bring down the cost of higher education. if we can lend to banks zero percent, student loans should be 0%. we ought ought to be able to do that. we should go after the private school and load up the debts on kids and don't let them have any opportunity to pay that off ever an idea came out of taylorsville here where they made their senior year of high school their first year of community college at no expense to the student. there are great ideas out there. there are no shortage of good idea to make college affordable. there are people who are looking out for themselves. a reminder that these aren't just for ornamental purposes. the time has expired. i'm going to give you 45 seconds

to respond on the subject on education. >> there's a clear difference between my opponent and i. this is your choice. there is a monopoly right now and they are the only ones providing these loans but i think we should be able to open up these markets. they should be able to compete for the title funding and the institutions should be held accountable. they have to have some sort of skin in the game to make sure students are graduating are able to get a job when they graduate. it's also important to realize that four-year colleges is not the only option out there. we have skills training, there is online training, there's accreditation that our states can work with. we want to open up the option to give people as many options as possible. >> representative, you will have the first response. do you believe there is conclusive scientific evidence

that human activity substantially contributes to climate change? was understand the subject and what is the appropriate role for federal government and congress on environmental issues. >> the first town hall meeting was in west jordan in the number one issue, we had residents come from all over climate change is one of their biggest issues. we got a lot of our local groups involved in what we do is focus on solution. we talk about innovative technology so we can make sure were taking vehicles off the road. we talk about educating on the climate. i will tell you right now,

colleagues on my side of the aisle refused to recognize there might be a problem you can tell there's a problem with air quality. we need to focus on the solutions. i don't we should do it at the expense of coal were our other energy producers. this is a false choice when you say you have to have one of the others. the solution can be found right here in the fourth district. i think we can get all of the players involved and find a solution. i think it would be important to be good stewards of the land we live on. that's why clear path is endorsing. i support clean energy. i support all of the above. we have to do everything we can to make sure we are getting people involved in talking about these issues. >> your 92nd opportunity. >> i appreciate you warning about those red, yellow and green lights and it reminds me

of driving with my kids. i say that red light is not just a plate warning. i will try to be more observant. climate change, their strong evidence that humans are contributing to it. the tough issue is what are we going to do about it. i look around the world and i see that's whatever is done is done on a regular basis but i have no desire and would fight any handicap to curb co2 emissions when china or some other country is growing at such a rapid rate that they will raise those immediately. i think it can be done on an international basis and operatively. it's tough issue. my number one issue is making sure families don't have to have three and four jobs just to keep the lights on. i see a great opportunity here

to mash up are two problems. we have a climate change and we have a job issue. we can put those together and ache and opportunity invest in clean energy system all over the world. let's use our resources to invest in education and then we can create good jobs at home. there's multiple reasons to do it. sometimes if you put together, you can see opportunity. >> we are approaching the midpoint of our time and i want to welcome you to this live debate between candidates. we are extending a warm welcome in joining us here tonight. this is served by the utah debate commission. that's a landmark effort in voter information with media joining together with an initiative and statewide offices. tonight's question all in utah

commissioned out.org. we courage you to explore the debates mentioned. we invite your comments. do it all for the website. back to our exchange, sidney cahoon. >> according to a 201616 report by the joint economic committee by the u.s. congress, the united states is not projected to close the gender paid gap for another 40 years. i will be 60 years old by then. >> ask you to be gentle with people in their 60s. you have the first opportunity.

>> i was blessed with a very strong mother. i have very strong mother-in-law who is here, i have a very strong wife and daughter. i strongly believe in making sure we respect women as people and have opportunity to listen to the choices. twenty years ago when i first had been practicing law for a few years, we realized she couldn't finish her training as a pediatrician if i didn't take a couple years off and stay home we had three boys ages 53 and one and i had the chance to take two years off from my law practice and stay home. it was a life altering experience and change my world and the way we look at it. i told you about these parents working three and four jobs and not saving for their retirement.

i have put two years of my life behind the idea that they have every opportunity they want to seek. i will work to close the pay gap and any other issue that will advance the cause. >> you have your 92nd opportunity. >> narrowing the pay gap. okay. sidney, thank you for that question. again, i have an insight in this i am a female in a very male-dominated area. there are times where it's important for us to know that we have a voice out there. we should be out there. women are big part of running the economy. even though i am a member of congress, i am am a mother. i'm utah and i need to make sure i'm providing to my children and teaching them, not to be victims

but make sure they're getting the skills and the education they need. there is quite a few different ideas when people are taking in and try to figure out where the wage gap is. if a woman chooses to go out to the workforce, she should be paid the same amount of money as a male gets paid for the same amount of work. i think there should be opportunities for women to become managers and ceos and some great innovative product that maybe we haven't seen before. those of the great opportunities that we have. i have joined the cte caucus which is the career technical education and promote stem education for young women women. my daughter wants to be a rocket scientist and me, as a congresswoman is my job to provide her all of the opportunities to do just that. >> do we leave it to the good graces of market forces that

will eventually close this gap most efficiently and effectively in the public sector or is there a role for a strict from the federal government ensuring that there is no pay gap between genders. your first 30 seconds. >> law should require, and it does require that there be equal pay for equal work. i think that ought to get enforced. i have tried to say that i believe in that and that i have put my money where my mouth is in terms of trying to support my own wife and family. i hope people. [inaudible] >> do we need for their regulation or is it something that will be addressed to the market? i didn't hear any answers to that so it's hard for me to understand where he stands. i can tell you where i stand on the issue. whenever government gets too involved in one issue, the same thing always happens. qualities go down and prices go up. again, i think the issue that we need to save his allowing for

people to be innovative, create more jobs, jobs, create more opportunity for young women to be able to get in education in all areas of technology so they can compete in this world. >> i mentioned national surveys voter concerns. one theme is a strong widespread distrust of the federal government in general. our federal government is tied in knots with partisan. [inaudible] it's more important to be loyal to the party then problem-solving. i assume you do not self identify as being part of the problem. please help me understand how you view yourself as an antidote to this toxic situation. you have the first 92nd opportunity. >> i'm a mentioned in my opening argument that it's important for us to bring people along with us when i ran for this office i

promised i would bring people along with us. david scott a democrat in the united states house of representatives has endorsed our campaign. we have been able to go, heaven knows how long that's been, but we reached across party line and we said forget what the party says let's work on these issues. we been able to do that. in terms of more important to stay loyal to a party, i believe i did pretty independent in making sure i stuck with my district when i didn't just go along with my party nominee. it's important for us to make sure we are doing absolutely everything we can to bring people along with us. i get to talk about utah and values every day in washington. i tell them what we are doing great in the state in the hopes that we could get people that really care about their community to come along and we been able to do that. :

you know, we got a broken system, a system that won't work on any problems that want you it will not give the in energy policy. it will not go to work on the president using armed forces around the world. the commerce one even debate what to do in syria. we have ample trouble. we've got problems that need solving. we need to have a congress that works again. i have put out an important aspects program that i hope to give me the chance to go to work on. first of all, it requires congress to begin five days a

week. right now they were two and half days a week. they should be in washington five days a week, working together to solve the problem. we should do away with luxury travel. we should do away with the self-promotional use of taxpayer dollars to fund mass mailers. there's a lot of stuff we can do to get congress working again. i hope i get a chance to do it because of the defining problem of our time. i have seen a better way. i have seen times and people got elected to congress and relate the election ended and they went to work to solve problems. this is how you run your family. you don't steamroll people appear you don't probe what other people appear to work together. this is how you run the workplace. this is how we need to run the government. we need to get back to work solving problems together. >> representative, what attorney do you want to extend? >> absolutely. there are things i really want to talk about because they've been brought up so it's important for me to bring this up.

first of all, some people believe the work -- the most important work done is in washington. i can tell you the most important work i do is right here in the district wherein sitting across with other families that have issues, that are working through whether saddam problem are getting benefits and shows so security or being able to get their citizenship here legally. those are the people i represent. the most important work i do is right here in it's important to come home and remember who it is i represent and that is utah. not be in washington and stay there and forget why represent. the other thing i want to mention is the whole idea of the self-promoting is dishonest. those papers agree that it was dishonest and they rarely if re. this is a benefit that mr. owens is using for his own purpose. he's using this benefit or his

own purpose. he understands that this is part of an entire -- >> you are in extended time. >> i want to bring back the fact he didn't mention this is part of a big budget comment that we've actually staked $110,000 in the budget. we've actually decided to stay low on our employees to make sure we spend time communicating. as a new member of congress, it's important for people to know who we are. that's how we been able to tell mr. johnson received the medal he's received. he's being dishonest and i think we need to make sure that is recognized. >> in the context of time management, you get one minute to respond. >> congress has plenty of time to be home in the district. they get every fourth week off, multiple resources. they should be in washington

doing business in figuring out the problems of this country that are getting solved. they ought to work five days a week again. i would do away with those mailers. no paper has said it's incorrect to my opponent has used $300,000 of taxpayer dollars for self-promotional mail. that is almost three times as much as every other member of congress from utah put together. that's a waste of money. my son sam got his first full-time job recently and he comes to me with his pay stub in a sense dad, what are these deductions? they are taking half of my paycheck. i know you know that disappointment. i've seen it myself. tax dollars are sacred and that is a horrible waste of money and i would stop at as soon as they get to washington. >> will turn back tourists are not incident began. the next question will be coming from conor holt. connor is interested in what comes after his college education. >> so when i graduate with a degree in business in two years, i want to work a full-time job.

many young americans are underemployed or stuck in part-time jobs in what is your plan to help grow the economy? >> you the first 92nd opportunity. >> i told you how important i think this is. i appreciate that question. i strongly believe education is the number one pathway forward. we have got to invest in our people. i've been in the private sector my whole life. i've seen how business creates jobs. sometimes government needs to get out of the way. other times there's things to do to level the playing field. it doesn't bother me the kids flipping burger is not only with the ceo of the company is. what does bother me and everybody in and everybody in the service at that kid never has that job. so let's invest in people appear but make sure they've got every chance at the american dream. the american dream is that you got a shot at getting wealthy. i've got nothing against anybody getting wealthy, that the american dream is about how all

of us, whether an everyday person can get a house in a safe neighborhood, send their kids to a good school and look forward to retirement with indignity. this is number one priority for me. education is the biggest fire. i've mentioned deregulation. i've mentioned doing away with lowering corporate tax rate and all the loopholes so the loopholes that no one's gotten a senate to shift a job overseas. fair trade agreement is another thing we can work on. this is job one and i will get work on it. >> representative love. >> i want to make sure i get back to one more thing and then i will answer a question very quickly. where you are being dishonest is the house that and actually scrutinizes every piece of doubt that we send out. it is signed by a republican and a democrat to make sure that it is not political in nature. i also mentioned that he did have a problem actually communicated more than the rest of the delegation.

he did that very well. he communicated with constituents and i'm proud of the fact that i use the budget to communicate as opposed to using the budget to have a massive amount of staff members and i continue to behave fiscally responsible by returning money back to the treasury. to your answer, it's very clear what we need to do when it comes to job creation. there are four pillars. people talk about pillars but first of all job creation to renovation with regulation that is stifling small businesses. it is harder for us to open up small business today than it's ever been in our history. we have to make sure that we are producing energy. we have to be competitive on the global market. three, we have to make sure to simplify the tax code. the tax code makes it easier for people, bigger businesses to get through the loopholes and more difficult for smaller

businesses. for, we have to create liquidity. we have to make sure people get access to credit whether it's buying a car, purchasing a house or being able to start a business. you do those three. you do those four. you'll double to grow the economy in united states of america will be competitive on the global market again. >> we are going to come back a rebuttal time. a good portion of the representatives comment had the opportunity to respond to the economy question. >> is no issue if somebody sending an opposite town meeting. that's not what those mailers for about for one second. as for self-promotional campaign pieces paid for by the taxpayers. my opponent tried to excuse that they say most republicans and democrats do it. that's one of the problems. i would never do something because everybody does it. those are a waste of money and i do away with them. >> representative, you have an additional 30 seconds.

>> there's absolutely no response. this is something he's using to his own benefit to complain because it's got nothing else. i understand it's got a problem so it's okay. >> let me see how you respond to this question. the rear headlines -- you technically cannot because she waved her rebuttal time. you don't get acclaim. i regret that. weekly our headlines are reporting mass shootings in the station. throughout a nation big cities, small towns on community college campuses. in 2015, more than 10,000 americans were fatally shot. more than 25,000 were wounded. those figures do not include the use of firearms. apart from going on social media and print are the victims and their families, what is the role of congress in addressing this issue?

representative love, the first 90 seconds. >> it's important to recognize there are people in their communities that feel they don't have a shot. there are people that do feel like they're being targeted. i think it's important to recognize that. i also believe that the role in any leader would be to unify, not to divide our country. i believe that we are more racially divided today than we have been in seven years. and i think that it's a lack of leadership on the administration side and bring real lack of leadership in washington. as a mayor, what i did when we realize that people were having an adverse type of relationship with our police officers, we decided we were going to get around police officers ignorant community said the people that are forcing the laws you are the neighbors. these are the same people that their children are going to the same school.

they are going to the same church and a creates an environment where the person now is not an enforcer but the person is a community police officer, person who's going to help you in your neighborhood. it's incredibly important that we do everything we can to make sure we're not trying to fix the problem. we have to make sure that kids on the streets of baltimore could on the streets here in salt lake actually have an education. that way they can become police officers in their own community and be able to be role models in their community. >> i've been informed by her timekeeper that we have enough time remaining for your full response to this, mr. owens, but no further time. >> thank you. i want to go back and address one other issue. i think it's important to talk about what a sitting member of congress have been doing for two years. it's perfectly fair to point out taxpayer money and i do that any day of the week.

i certainly haven't been abusing this privilege myself. i certainly never had any taxpayer dollars in the controlled use that way. it's terribly inappropriate as part of the reform i would do if i got back to congress to get congress working again to do away with mass mailers and self-promotion, the luxury travel and make sure congress works again. that is the bedrock of what we're going to be able to do to this country forward because we can make progress on other issues until we reform the way congress operates. now, to the issue of policing. my brother is some unfortunate. i want to make sure every law enforcement officer goes on say to his at night. we need to give them resources to do her job in the reserves is to have the training to stop the conduct that sometimes be seen too often here. but if we train them, if we work together, i am all about solutions and am all about trying to bring people together rather than an us versus them. we can work together to solve

our problems in the united states and i believe that's how we'll go forward. it is just like your family, just like your work place. take account of other people who see things differently. work out your problems and find common ground. at feminist lawyer. i'll take that skill to washington. >> i sincerely wish i had initial time to redirect that question. we've reached the end of our allotted time for the questions of the candidates for now we must move to one minute closing statements. prior to airtime is determined representative mia love would have the first opportunity. >> thank you so much for being here. i have had the opportunity to represent the wonderful fourth district for the past year and a half, almost two years and it has been my honor and my privilege to do that. i've gotten to know you and your families and this is not just about a job to me. you become a neighbors and my friends.

i want you to know that i believe we still live in the greatest country on earth. it's certainly worth fighting for and certainly worth saving than we should never let anyone tell us any different. you know, we are going to be able to have an opportunity here to make sure that nancy pelosi does not become the speaker of the house. an opportunity to lament to a republican congress so we can be a check and balance to whoever is the president. an opportunity to look within instead of without. it's important for us to be able to vote. i need all of you to get out about. i ask for your vote. please join me in making sure that we provide this country with great opportunity. >> or final one minute opportunity. >> thank you all for coming tonight. i want to give a special thanks to my family most of the members of which are here tonight. they have sacrificed a lot to make this run possible. i appreciate that.

want to thank the voters of the fourth congressional district. encourage your dreams and aspirations. and they've seen better times than i want to say they're coming back. you know, every time i've gone into a voting booth i've gotten tears in my eyes. they welled up in my eyes every single time. think about all the people in the history of the world. that is such a basic right. i think about all the people who shed their blood to bring an upgrade. i hope you although. you get your mailboxes this week and remember those people who haven't had that thank you very much. >> my thanks to republican representative and democratic candidate doug collins. special appreciation to the administration and the salt lake community college for their support and also as the utah debate as scott allen thomas wright and executive director

for their efforts to ensure public debate in this federal election cycle. they are prominent in his long list of people in the united states who've labored to bring to light the concept of commonly carry public debates to inform the voting process. whether you intend to vote by mail or in person, and election day is tuesday, november 8th. if you have questions, please contact your office. in salt lake city, i'm can avoid. good evening. [applause]

>> next, and the relationships between health care policy and measures of economic prosperity

such as wages, labor force participation in national economic growth. white house council of economic ricers chair jay said furman and other officials lead off. >> good morning. this is your 102nd warning. on behalf of demarcated center at george washington university, i want to welcome you to this important session of the rising health care costs on economic mobility. my name is bill beach, vice president for policy research and on behalf of the scholars and the staff, again, welcome to this great event.

it is not unfair to our times to suggest that we live in the era of help care policy. there's little else that i've heard about the past 20 years. every time i turn around as character policies which is fine. few issues have dominated the past 25 years quite like this national health care policy debate we have been having and it's clearly true of the past eight years. this policy debate largely has centered on coverage issues and that concern continues to appear in the national health care discussion as i began by what is happening in the presidential contest right now. at this time, deposed aca world analysts are focusing on new on unintended affairs firm restructuring of insurance marketplaces to the economic effects of rising health care costs. this last topic is that the subject of our program today.

half the growth in health care costs affected the economic welfare of the assured in uninsured americans. this increase in cross off that they merely extended coverage. as the rising cost of health care insurance affected the distribution of earnings in the united states. these will be the question among many others that we will be discussing in two panels here later this morning. to get us going, we are extremely pleased to have witnessed a person who has been common in non-health care, economic policy in this town for a long time and i refer of course to robert samuelson, a gentleman who probably doesn't need much introduction and encourage me to only say one sentence about him this morning but i'll say three. as all of you know, robert

samuelson writes for the washing post or mail-in business and economic issues and has been associated with the post since 1977. he began work at the newspaper as he left and came back. he's been known for commentary on this whole issue is. as well as general economic commentary. robert samuelson received a bachelor's degree from harvard university has written several books and now please join me in welcoming robert samuelson to the podium. [applause] >> i appreciate a short introduction. i hope your code by harvard background against me. the chief economic correspondent

for "newsweek" wayward member of years quite nearby which i call all bad ideas started harvard. before i start, let me clear up a couple of other common misconceptions. although i write about economics i am not an economist. i'm basically a newspaper reporter who was booted upstairs to write a column. second, although i have the famous name in economics citizen, and no relationship that i know of to one of the great beating economists of the last half of the 20 century. i am told however that he did have a son named robert jay samuelson. if so, it's not me. now let me get down to business. today's conference is actually quite simple. can we govern the health care set their organic govern itself?

the answer is not at all clear. governing means making choices, usually unpleasant choices and everyone agreed on everything that legislative bodies. we can run this country with the computer because there would be no disagreement to mediate. we do have disagreements in different ways. economists have devised a convenient framework to explain how most material choices get made. they've divided most goods and services into two broad categories. public goods and private goods. private goods are regulated by the market. people vote with their feet in their feet and their pocketbooks. if people don't like old-fashioned newspapers and prefer to get their news from the tablets are smartphones are not get their news at all, newspaper circulation will decline and perhaps one day disappear. i may not necessarily like the results. indeed i don't, but it's the verdict of the market. choices are hated by consumer preferences and incomes.

if you can afford a mercedes come and maybe buy a chevrolet or bicycle. most choices are made this way because most goods and services are private goods. but not all. we also of public goods and services provided by government. much research and development in various types of regulation of the environment, financial market can work safety of pharmaceuticals to name a few obvious examples. how we decide how much, how little of what kind of public goods we want is by political choice in elections that legislative action. if you think government is not spending enough on this or that public good for is overtaxing to spend too much on unneeded public good, you can change the outcome by voting for a new set of public years if this is obviously a messy often contradictory process not nearly as decisive as a marketplace, but it is a process.

we have two well-defined methods of making spending choices you deprive the government. the trouble is health care belongs to neither of these two groups though it shares some characteristics of both. about half our health care is by the government or more accurately paid for by the government. the best examples are medicare and medicaid. and i said, medical care resembles a public good. on the other hand it also resembles a private good and upperclassman of families generally described as having access to more and better medical care than poor people. the suggested health care is a private good that it resembles neither in one crucial sense. there is no obvious way. people regard medical care is a right to be supplied to anyone who needs it when they need it. this attitude stretches back for decades.

a gallup poll in 1938 asked respondents whether the government should be responsible for the medical care people who couldn't afford it. the response of 81% of the public said yes, rates are almost by definition open ended. i do slightly different way of describing her situation. that may just be another way for the work way. in any case, i call health i call health care and ethical good. a dissenting view of most people as a moral matter must be provided for those who are sick, injured or worried they might become so. to which all care is immoral. unlike private goods -- unlike private goods, care should not be distributed according to income and preference. unlike public goods, we should not artificially put a ceiling on health care spending. people should get what they need when they need it and survive and enjoy life. no one should be sold on an operating table the procedure

has not because the hospital is run out of money or is about to pierce the budget ceiling or wall he reimbursed by an insurance company. health care is not the sort of public good. it is an ethical good. this may seem a defense of undesirable approach for an individual, but it's less defense of undesirable for the society as a whole. it has led almost inevitably to a rapid escalation in costs that arguably represent a fair amount of waste because there's no effect to discipline on spending and arguably crowds out other important private and public spending. ..

>> how. >> her without being second-guess by insurance companies or rare cats. -- bureaucrats. likewise the want to pick doctors and hospitals of their choice and not to be dictated to. they don't want the ever rising the in did of living to be reduced even with all health care since both health spending goes to a very small portion of very sick people. the top 10% of health spending cases account 67% of cost. one in accounts for 3% of

cost of 50%. into only have two of these desired out, universal coverage who makes the cost go higher. our minimal certainly wouldn't be higher because there is no reason with those diagnostics or medication. '' we control cost zero of a public backlash and the same is true with the failure to provide universal coverage cow which is obamacare high over coming these difficulties is advances of medical care that is more expensive than the treatment than they replace. and the specialization of medicine that means no one is truly in charge of a

patient's treatment house because of a multitude of ailments and doctors. there probably seems that i mean to apply but we efforts to control the health care system are inevitably futile. those that could be named -- made in the name of greater good whiff complicated to straddle the system or the complex to be obscured because it is not obvious. or to be justified and then don't compromise quality of care. because of ever providers the bureaucrat suggests is

logically downed bond dash bound and it is a frustrating process not you dialed that difficult as i expect this session will confirm. [applause] >> that was the great way to start the morning. >> now local to the podium my colleague who is a research director a program that specializes in the domestic policy or also in health care i know what we would do without him he frequently appears on radio and television and is seen

as an expert in his commentary is will come this morning. as a public trustee of medicare and prior to that was several economic policy capacities with a ph.d. in quantum chemistry from the university of california berkeley. [applause] >> we are very fortunate to have the opportunity to hear from dutch doctors insight on health care policy and its relationship to the experiences to individual americans. it is my pleasure to introduce him today and dr. furman serves as the 28 chairmen of the pren