worked ourselves out of adversity and the country wasn't afraid to make these investments. >> mayor gray, what's your first and most important issue for the voters and citizens of kentucky and if elected as the united states senator, how would you handle that issue? >> jobs, jobs, and jobs. we are not growing our economy at the rate it should. just this month we grew at 2.9%, that's better but we are not where we can be for the middle class to get a leg up in life. the middle class is the backbone of america. we've got struggles across the state. we have got struggles in eastern kentucky, we've got struggles in western kentucky, we have struggles in coal country. i know a lot about this because i spent my lifetime, a career in the private sector and growing a business that today employs thousands, has employed thousands over time. has grown through the factories that we have built, more than 20,000 people a day go through the doors or the plants built by

construction, i know about recruiting companies in plants. that's exactly what i would do in eastern kentucky and western kentucky. we have to diversify the economy. >> if you were asked to serve on a u.s. senate, create jobs, steady committee targeted for and about kentucky jobs, give me one recommendation that you would mick to put people to work in eastern and western kentucky? >> i would work to put another toyota in eastern kentucky and one in western kentucky. i was there before toyota came to kentucky. i was in japan. i spent more than -- i quit counting after i had been to japan more than 35 times. that's just an example. there are plenty of opportunities for us but we have to focus on kentucky rather than focus on running for president. now, the senator has focused on running for president for the last five years and not focused on kentucky and the challenges that we have right here in kentucky. >> senator paul, comment on that as well as on the job's program that you -- if you were on the same work study committee in the

u.s. senate targeted kentucky what would you do? >> the biggest impediment that we have is debt burden and regulatory burden and tax burden. when you travel to eastern kentucky they understand why they lost jobs, it's because of barack obama and hillary clinton, hillary clinton has said, you know what, she's going to continue to put coal miners out of business. it makes it very difficult for western kentucky or eastern kentucky to convince people that he's for them when he's for the regulations that have been killing their jobs. so you have to repeal the regulatory war, the regulatory war on coal, on the family farm, we have talked about farm rulations. waters of the u.s. we can't keep federalizing everything but there's also a tax burden. we have the highest corporate income tax in the world. 35%. if we want to thrive and keep our companies from taking jobs overseas, i would lower that.

below 15% but i would vote for any kind of bipartisan movement to lower the corporate income tax and so to compete, you to compete on the things to doing business. taxes are a big cost and regulation are a big cost and to the entire economy the debt is a big cost. >> well, i want to comment on what senator paul said about bipartisan because he says that a bunch of time but the senator named him the sixth most partisan senator out of the last 20 years, the sixth most partisan senator. now it's really hard to get people to go along with you when you're an obstructionist. it's health hard to get people to focus on what's essential which is, yes, creating jobs. i've done it all of my life. i've demonstrated it, performance and experience is what counts. >> senator. >> i would like to correct the record a little bit on that. if you look at my record, you'll actually find extraordinary partnerships that i've had with people across the aisle. i've worked with ron on privacy

issues, half a dozen bills, we are working on a letter to the president right now. i have worked with corey booker on criminal justice reform. i have worked with barbara boxer on repatriot and i just finished working with progressive democrat from massachusetts on trying to help the drug problem, trying to allow doctors to see more people to step them down and get them off of heroin. so i think what you'll see is i worked with harry reid on voter registration. when i believe in something, i don't let parties stand in the way at all and i have a strong record of working with people on the other side. >> senator paul, dismantle the nation's intelligence is dangerous, his word. the commercial on national security and defense quotes donald trump saying rand paul is a disaster on military and defense, he quotes john mccain assaying you simply do not have the understanding of the threats of the united states national

security and even new jersey republican governor chris christie said what ran paul has done the make this country weaker is a terrible thing. how do you respond to ad and accusations? >> one of the most important rights was the fourth amendment and it is really the right to be left alone. justice brandies said the most cherished right among civilized men and women is the right to be left alone. our founding fathers were word about the government coming in without a warrant. police can't come to your house. they have to call an independent person who is supposed to be removed from the scene. this is the same as looking at your phone records. let's say the example of the boston bombers, i think we should have done more to the look at the records. the fbi was tipped off and did inadequate job and didn't do deep enough dive on their records but at the same time i don't want to look at everybody in boston's record.

i think you do have a right to privacy in your records unless there's probable cause and unless we individualized the search washington and the great thing about search warrants and separating the power, the police power is it prevents police who might be bigoted in any way on race, color, creed, gender, you name it, it prevents some of that bigotry from happening if you have checks and balances in the system, but if you simply say, oh, my goodness, we must do anything, i'm willing to trade my liberty for security, that's a real problem, franklin recognized this even from the very beginning, if you trade liberty for security, you may wind up with neither. so no, i think you can have security and continue to defend the constitution and we take an oath, i took it seriously to defend the constitution and i treat that as a very serious promise. >> mayor gray you said in one of your commercials you will do what it takes to defeat terrorists. what is it that you will do? >> well, one thing you don't do

is what senator paul did in his first budget proposal which was to cut defense spending by $150 million or 30%. now you notice he did not respond to your question about what these other colleagues of his within his own party had said about his record. he didn't respond because he knows they are accurate. he recommended reducing the military budget by $150 million. now, when he started running for president he changed. three years later he changed and he decided oh to then add to the military budget. terrorism is a threat and it takes money and it takes funds to fight these threats. at home and abroad. and when we pull foreign aid which he has suggested from allies that also compromises our defend. it compromises our ability to defend our country abroad and then at home. we will not have economic security and opportunity if we don't have a safe america.

>> to defeat terrorism you would -- >> i would encouraging our intelligence community, i would encouraging our defense investment in defense. that means smart, intelligent investments. i've learned from toyota, the toyota production system teaches you continuous improvement. this is what we should apply to every spending in government. >> under what circumstances should the u.s. send troops into the middle east conflicts and there are many today? >> there are hot beds and tender books everywhere, bill, we have to be careful but sending advisers, committing ourselves to advisers like we have in iraq, going into mosul today, that's a prudent and wise investment that america must make in order for us to be safe at home. >> i think the biggest thing that separates us on national security is that you know he's endorsed hillary clinton and her foreign policy and her national

security ideas, but you know, i think she's a danger to the country. i think hillary clinton's lack of defense in benghazi is inexcusable and shows terrible judgment and she should never be commander in chief and the philosophy of my opponent is a really bad mistake because she for six months kept pulling the security out even though colonel wood and the security team said we want to stay. the embassador was pleading for help and i asked her this directly in the committee, why did you do this, did you read the capables -- cables begging for help and she didn't have time to read the cables from embassadors. i put together three different budgets since i've been in office because when i ran for office i said, you know what, what makes me mad about republicans and democrats is they talk about balancing the budget but no one puts a pencil to paper and says this is how you balance the budget. i did and the interesting thing i found is that you don't have

to cut military spending. if you look at each of my budgets over a five-year period, military spending grows, what happened to people caught in the liberal hillary clinton world is they say, oh, hillary clinton wanted to add a trillion dollars and you're only going to add 500 billion so you cut it 500 billion when in reality they're talking about cuts and proposed increases. i give priority to the military. in fact, in the budgets after the sequester actually added more military spending, tried to give the pentagon the freedom to allow the money to be moved around in the pentagon so it can be more effectively spent. in my mind there's no more important expenditure than national security. one of the few things under the constitution we must do but the difference is we just shouldn't pile on debt. >> the claim that you did cut is false? >> false.

somebody else proposed not me. if you look at the absolute numbers for all of my budgets over a 5-year period military spending grew in all the budgets i proposed. >> last comment on this. >> he said he was against it before he was for it. he even his colleagues in the senate have said that he would do more to destroy and compromise america's intelligence network than anyone. now, there's something else that should be noted here and important to do it now. senator paul has mentioned hillary clinton three times now that tells you that he's still obsessed about the presidential campaign he's still thinking about the presidential campaign, he's not thinking about kentuckians an kentuckians needs and challenges and problems, that's what i'm committed to. he's not even agreed that he will serve a full term. i made a pledge, i will serve a full term and i will ask him now, will you serve a full term in the u.s. senate if you're elected? >> you know the funny thing

about hypocrisy is people come up with these things and it's like, well, mayor, are you going to serve a full term as mayor, you are the one running for two offices if anyone is distracted it's you. you have an enormous hole and you've been there eight years, you're talking about something that doesn't exist. and here you are running for two offices, why don't you take a pledge to do your job as mayor. you have a lot of stuff to do. you could keep busy for eight years. >> well, you did run for president and for the senate, you made it law, you created a law that would allow you to move to senate and for the -- >> a hypocrite would be somebody that cite sizing someone while doing the exact same thing. [inaudible] >> i actually have performed in my job. you talk about budgets, i met a budget. i had a deficit, i made six years of surpluses out of it. i had a pension reform. 300million underfunded pension.

i fixed it. i had health insurance, $40 million when we were costing 40 million and we were budgeting 20 million. we were losing 20 million. i fixed it. you have had 134 bills and none of them have passed. >> actually i have 490 bills and i'm proud of that. i've introduced more legislation than any other senator. i've had 40 votes on the floor, more than any senator of my class in 2010 and we've been very active. i can tell you in the last six months three things that we got passed. we've got the expanded doctor role in treating the heroin epidemic past, we were able to stop, you know, a million dollar tax on all the cities around lake cumberland. so also made 96% of my votes. many people who ran for president and missed half of the votes.

i made 96% of my votes. some have said, i'm the hardest working senator up there and i think it's probably true. >> you're watching kentucky tonight where candidates, what are your stances on the growing student debt crisis and how do you plan to fix it, mayor gray? >> i think it's a shame. more than 40 million people in the country today that have student debts, average of $30,000 per person and that's a shame. at minimum, at minimum, those with these loans should be able to refinance them at a minimum. you know, an education is the framework for the rest of your life. it provides a framework. now i have run into people across, young people across the state. one woman in louisville not that long ago, a month ago said she had gotten a master's degree,

still hasn't gotten a job, though, she has a six-figure debt. younger people in other locations across the state -- >> is there a role for the federal government in the debt crisis that they -- face so many students? >> we need to get our arms around and we need to recognize that we have to work on problems like this. and get through this gridlock and get through the dysfunction that is represented so much in washington that despite what senator paul has just described as the reaching out across the aisle, that's not his history. and it is my history. i've worked with republicans and democrats to get problems solved in lexington. >> senator paul on the debt sighs -- crisis, what should government do to get involved in state university or private school? >> one of the things that we have done in reaching across the aisle is come up with a bill to allow students to detuct not only the principal but the

interest. many people were excluded because of their parents' income or their income, they can only do it over a certain period of time. we would expand the eligibility for those who can deduct principal and interest on student loans. we would expand the ability to deduct it not just for a couple of years but entire career. you have a 50,000-dollar student debt but make $35,000 a year you don't have the income to deduct 50,000 a year or two. you may need ten years, 20 years to deduct it. my bill will do that. the other side of the equation, everybody talks about trying to help students pay for it, we also ought to look at the price. prices come down when there's competition. president obama who may opponent has endorsed, he has had a war on private colleges. we have many private colleges in kentucky and they tell me that

president obama's war on them is difficult. they are suing them every day. they are putting new road blocks, they put road blocks in the way of private schools that they don't put in the way of public schools. president obama closed down the accreditation agency the other day and then really here is the kicker, some of president obama's administration retired and bought one of the universities after they drove the price down to almost nothing, then they bought it. they are making money. we have a lot of good private colleges in kentucky, that's part of the answer to have more colleges to drive prices down. >> the question from steve edward in todd county, he asks, we had a response on you from student debt, steve for the incumbent, what haven't you accomplished in the last six years that and for you major

what have you accomplished that your incumbent failed to establish? >> debt is an enemy of the country and we need to keep working on that, there are bipartisan fault in republicans and democrats still wanting to spend too much money. another responsibility we were given under the constitution is to only go to war when there's a declaration of war by congress. hillary clinton who my opponent has endorsed, she took us to war in libya, i call it hillary's war in libya because she did it on her own. she advocating toppling assad. they want to do it wily-nilly with unilateral presidential authority and that's not a good way to go to war and also leads to things that have unforward consequences, so for example, in wanting to eliminate gadhafi in libya, we now have isis

controlling a third of the territory. in pushing back assad, isis has been released from the vacuum. $6million of fighter or more. they sent ten of them to war and i sort of tragically said to people, what kind of president sends 10 people to war? they were captured in 15 minutes. that doesn't happen if a country votes and becomes unified republican and democrat to fight a war. we have done that after 9/11 we were unified as a country. after pearl harbor we were unified as a country. one thing we need to do better and i will force votes on, is whether continue sending arms to country that are allowing arms to go to isis. hillary clinton was aware according to podesta emails arms were going from u.s. to saudi arabia to isis and she did nothing about it. that's one more thing why we should never ever let her go

10 miles from the white house. >> senator paul talks a lot about balancing the budget and he never got it done. he never came close to it, really. even though today is at 50% level than when ronald reagan was president. i had actually balanced the budget for six years and created five years of surpluses, i would work on doing it an getting it done. i would at the very beginning sponsor national legislation for infrastructure. it's essential that we put our infrastructure at the top of the list. we are 20 -- by 2020 we will be a trillion dollars behind. the national society of civil engineers has given us a d plus ranking, so that's got to be done and what it will do is it stimulate the economy in every dimension. that's been proven over and

over. >> a couple of follow-ups on that one first and then we will go back to the declaration of war. again, infrastructure crumbling, how would you pay for it, is there a plan that you would use -- >> i said that we would work with the private sector, public-private partnerships and we would provide tax credits where appropriate to private companies who are investing in infrastructure, but the federal government must also make an investment. this notion that you can shrink yourself to greatness does not work. you've got to look at -- that would be the last thing that you would look at, but it is essential that we get our arms around this problem and work together to find the solutions and that's not happening. senator paul has been a part of that problem. >> and on the declaration of war that he's asking for in many of the areas in conflict -- >> i would agree agree with senator paul that congress has that authority and is appropriate that the congress

engage in that authority. >> all right, let me move onto another issue that you're all too familiar with, unfortunately the scourge of the opioid academic that has spread across the nation and well enfrenched in kentucky, it's a complicated issue with many facets. unfortunately again is available to only a few. gentlemen, give me one program that has worked in the state of kentucky and give me one that you think you -- we would need to do that might require more funding in fighting the opioid disease, one program that you've seen that has worked and one that you would like to institute that would more than likely require more funding, senator paul? >> we have visited several places to help overcome

addiction. at team challenge is they combine abstinence with work and faith. people are addicted to drugs because i think of broken spirit. i think that a religious element, a faith-based element to the cure is imperative but i think also work is important. many people have never worked, they are at home and part of the cure as we get them off drugs, showing them what it's like to get up in the morning, show up for work and stay all day and do a good job, i think both of those are good. one of the things that i got included in the opioid bill was the federal government was limiting how much -- how many patients get in treatment of detoxification and it is devastating. we had more people dying from heroin than car accidents in

kentucky. it's a devastating problem but i was pleased that i was able to work with a democrat from massachusetts and get that included in the bill. president obama agreed with me and i don't often agree with president obama, when i do i'm happy to say so. but in that case, we had a bipartisan coalition that passed this, republicans an democrats and the president ended up signing the bill. >> two programs that you have seen that works and one that you think you would like to institute that might require more funding? >> i see this firsthand as a mayor and in kentucky 1200 deaths from heroin, opioid abuse, overdoses last year. in our city three years ago we saw this coming in 2013 and i created a heroin task force to work and to bring all of our agencies together to try to address and to work to address this issue in a meaningful way. our first responders were given the narcan in order to

administer and that's been helpful. but what we need is more support from the federal government. now fortunately the cara act, comprehensive addiction and recovery act was passed by the congress and senator paul voted for it, but he voted against funding which would help us in the cities across the country, in our states across the country. now, i would like for him to explain why he voted against it, why he voted for the bill and then against the funding, we need these funds, this is a scourge and this is an epidemic as he says more are dying of heroin, opioid deaths, overdoses than are being lost on traffic deaths across the country. so he should explain that. >> you know i voted for cara which was the opioid bill and i'm happy to vote for the appropriation for it, what happened though is what's been happening in the government for

the last 19 years, all the funding was stuck together in one enormous bill 2,000 pages, no one read the bill, no one had any idea what's in it and no reforms made. so the bill that was passed 2,000 pages continues to borrow a million dollars a minute. there's no reforms a really terrible no way to run the government and that's why the deficit is so bad. what we need to pass appropriation bills and cara would have been in appropriation bill which i would have supported but i can't support just more of the same because i ran for office honestly telling people that the debt is a really policemen. i disagree fundamentally and i think the debt is a problem and we have to do something about it and it's going to take people with courage to stand up even against demagogue, people that will demagogue the issue because we have to fix the spending problem and we can't just continue to vote for bills that allow us to -- we are approaching $20 trillion.

we have a debt clock, it is spinning literally out of control and when people say deficits don't matter, we don't need people in office. the deficits do matter. they are really a big problem and -- >> he goes on with the philosophies and theories, i call them wild philosophies and theories. the debt is a percentage of gdp, one of the lowest levels, 1.2%. that's the interest on the debt today. $209billion. yeah, it's a big numbers, it's a big economy. it's clear he has never run a business because if he had -- i grew from a small family business into a business today doing billion dollars in revenues. you don't do that by being casual. you don't do that by not understanding debt and not understanding equity and not understanding rush on investment. we are talking about return on investment for our country and making investments that will give us the opportunity and the next generation opportunity to actually have a better life and a leg up in life and that's what he doesn't get.

>> do you accept explanation -- >> i don't accept. it's just -- it's nonsense. he says he's for it and he votes against it because there's 2,000 pages to it. >> gentlemen, two questions here for -- one question for each of you on the presidential candidates george and frank ford asked senator paul are you supporting donald trump for president and james in louisville, does mr. gray still support hillary clinton after the latest news about her e-mails, mr. mayor gray? >> no, i have been a democrat all of my life and the reason i'm a democrat is because democrats are for the working man and woman, that doesn't mean i'm going to support an endorse every idea of a democrat. i've said that every democratic idea is not a good one, every republican idea is not a bad one. i support the nominee of our party, i am the democratic nominee for the senate and i support the nominee of our party. >> can you give me one good

republican idea because you've used this over the course of the campaign several times. >> actually andy barr had a great idea and that was the bourbon bill he created a couple of years and i believe senator paul voted against it. >> senator paul supporting donald trump for president? >> yes. the reason is that i think it'll be better for kentucky, when you compare them, hillary clinton was quite, you know, explicit in saying that her policies and i presume the mayor will continue to support policies of the power plant regulation, the stream-guidance rules, all of the regulations that have come to us from hillary clinton and barack obama who he supports have killed our jobs. we have lost 15,000 jobs in eastern kentucky. when you travel out there, some of the counties, a third of the people are not working. a third of the people are not working out there and it's sad. it's because of this war on coal and donald trump said he would

repeal the war on coal, on taxes, they want to increase taxes. donald trump says he wants to lower taxes. donald trump says that we should declare war. he doesn't agree with hillary clinton. he doesn't agree with the iraq war. so i think you find that on every front the war on farmers, regulatory war that they champion where they want to federalize all land use and every farm in kentucky would be controlled by the federal government, trump is against that. hillary clinton is for it. .. let me tell you unlike donald trump on this. give somebody else a chance.

he's had six-year to try to fix things and these do nothing. he is not created a first in chopper people in coal country. he's also created a war on coal miners. these against the coal miners protection act which would give coal miners, which would give them and fulfill the promise made to them in 1947, retired coal miners. it would give them their pension, provide pension benefits and their health benefits. i know a man named frankie from webster county. frankie is 70, ma retired coal miner and just last week he got a notice in the mail. he got a notice that he was going to lose his health insurance at the end of december. this is a bill in congress today i can't get out of the finance committee of the senate. senator paul has said he's against it because it's not perfect. he's always leading perfect it in the way of doing to. this is a big problem. it's a big problem for our country when you this kind of spirit and attitude that perfect is going to get in the way of good.

>> why did you come out against that bill? >> on for the concept. where there's excess money and the reclamation fund, about 2 billion, i'm for using that to help with the coal miners pension. however, yet to look at what is the tensions and and will that fix the ultimate problem or will we be back a year later still tried to patch up this problem? that pensions are bankrupt because hillary clinton and barack obama's war on coal that my opponents supports. i think is if you're not going to end of the regulatory war on coal how will you ever sure of the pensions that companies have to survive? if you at 10,000 workers paying pension and 10,000 retirees you might be up to take give them. what if you go from 10,000 workers to 1000 workers or zero? the war on coal. what i've advocated for and i think there is a leverage to do this, i'm all for the bill of what i want to attach to it is regulatory relief and that's

what being a legislator is about, trying to make a bill such a would fix the problem and not just be window dressing. i want to fix the problem and that is coal companies have to make more money, succeed and vastly more workers employed by been paying into the pension for a to succeed and only way is in the radio to were on coal. went to convince democrats because we have one democrat double the width is of any of the regulatory reform. there are no other democrats will vote for any reform and actually a problem. >> senator paul declared called it a he said it's a dirty form of energy. i believe coal is a part of our energy future. and i believe that we should support the miners in this act. he's against it. he said he is against it. he's coding in a lot of different ways it is not sufficient for everybody but he's not going to support it for those who the promises have been made.

everybody in coal country should know this and should recognize this. >> you are watching kentucky tonight. senator rand paul and mayor jim kenney our industry for questions and this question from carol and in lancaster to you, senator paul. will you allow the supreme court nominee to proceed under a hillary clinton presidencpresidenc y? that would be cared merit who was nominated and is not been acted on -- merrit garrick sped were having a great constitutional debate. a profound constitutional debate in our country and it is over whether not the president can act unilaterally to write law. montesquieu was one of the philosopher our founding fathers look to any said we need executive begins to legislate a form of tyranny will into. that's what's happening. we have a president who thinks he is king and thinks he can write the law. he did this in immigration. he change the law without the authority or a sense of

congress. the court finally said recently that he went too far. on the power plant or utility regulations that are killing the coal industry he also wrote that without our permission. we never vote on it. the arbiter of whether '90s acting constitutionally will be the supreme court. it's going to be very difficult for me to vote for a candidate who's coming forward saying that they want to abuse the constitution, abuse the people to allow power to gravitate to the presidency that's unconstitutional. so i can't imagine voting for a clinton nominee and less you were t to appoint somebody that actually were some who believe in the separation of powers as the founders wrote into the constitution. >> i'm very practical about things. senator paul quote french philosophers instead of answering the question. the question was real clear. would he vote for the nominee? would he take up the nomination. the constitution is pretty clear on this.

that the president makes the nomination and the senate then takes up the nomination through an advice and consent process. real clear on it. i think the senate should have done its job and i its job and that ed nawotka didn't do its job. i think most people in america don't understand that except it's another illustration of the gridlock and the dysfunction in our system. it's very practical. it looks very practical to most people in the destiny. >> if hillary clinton is successful next tuesday, would you support the nominee during her term in office that she would bring before the senate? >> i will support any nominee that pledges to uphold the separation of powers doctrine of the constitution. so that's a question i will have to i will interview, haven't come to an office for private discussion but have to believe in the constitution. my oath is to defend the constitution. if she should appoint someone who believes in the separation of powers, that the president

doesn't get to write the laws, i will consider them. but that she was the problem that we have this fundamental philosophical difference in our country between one party who believes in excess power, ma gravitating to the presidency, that the president can do anything and those of us who believe in the constitutional restraints that allow for checks and balances. some people call a gridlock. basically checks and balances are debate and they're trying to get unanimity or try to get consensus to move things forward instead of just saying we can't, president obama said this. he said congress will do what i want so i've got my phone, i will do what i wanted. that is of the words of an autocrat. not the words of somebody that we should be aspiring to return to office. >> the murder rate in kentucky two largest cities has increased over this past year. what measures do you support that would make it more difficult for dangerous people to get guns in kentucky?

>> i have said that i would support the terrorism loophole legislation t that senator paul opposed. and that would provide that terrorists and criminals and those who are severely mentally ill would not have access to guns. and i think that is at a minimum what should be done. yes, i see this really up close. i see this issue up close. i talk to mothers and fathers have lost their children. so as a mayor you don't ever escape it. i would support that legislation. i would support universal background checks. i grew up in a culture like most of us in kentucky, a hunting culture where guns and money was a part of everyday life. so i respect and i endorse the second amendment. and i believe that we should put our arms around this challenge and this problem because it is way, way more than something that we should ignore. that's what it's been done in congress for far too long.

>> i don't think we should ignore the immigration law. there are certain cities and rumors of certain cities that just basically ignore the immigration law. i voted for kate's law which said that any city that chooses not to enforce the immigration law and should be removed from the federal funding i think that's a pretty important thing and i don't think we've gotten much support from across the aisle on this. because i was pretty sad what happened to kate, she was a beautiful young woman out in san francisco who was killed by an illegal immigrant who would been deported five times. so we have to do a better job. once again and that was president obama then look at immigration law and saying we don't really care who comes come when they come. we will open the doors wide open and open borders. that was coming from president obama without any congressional input. when we tried to pass kate moss to see that cities like san francisco, which you can't ignore the law and go to transfer people to other custody, he just can't release

of criminals. that would go a long way towards making our city safer. >> mayor craig mentioned closing the gun show loophole. your comments on that? >> we have background checks and i support background checks. if you look at where the crime is coming from, th investment of time is coming from guns that are but illegally. we have to look into that. we have to police our cities. i think we have to think about whether violent criminals should be being released so recently. one of the things i favored with nonviolent crimes can get somebody nonviolent criminals out of prison so it more space for the violent criminals to stay longer. when they did this in california they're able to find that by releasing some of the nonviolent people that much more room for violent criminals. before they're getting early release but i think we have to look at what we're doing with violent criminals and keeping them separate from public speaking is a phone call

question from allen and louisville, how does each candidate give that raising the minimum wage? >> i am for it. in lexington we actually passed an increase in the minimum wage. and i think it represents the backbone of our economy in so many respects. it represents more than 80 years of history. and regrettably the congress to this is another example where the congress through gridlock and its dysfunction has failed to act. and admit a city like lexington unlike louisville, had act and had to do its job, had to do the job congress should of been doing. by justin is senator paul said s not like it's an increase in the minimum wage, transcendent as against the minimum wage itself. i think that's wrong. i think it denies and it is a denial of so much of the history of our country. a progressive movement of more than 100 years ago that recognize that a minimum wage was essential in a functioning

capitalist environment and society. >> senator? >> the congressional budget office, which is nonpartisan, looks at these issues and tries to figure what would be the consequences of things. if you raised the wage, a government to set wage, above the market wage, whatever the market would said, what you get is unemployment. greater the differential between market wage and the government wage, the greater the unemployment. they predicted if the minimum wage raised to $10 an hour, 500,000 people would lose their job. 98 studies also about a year ago, something we found everyone eventually released unemployment, it's particularly bad in the sense at least unemployment people with all these skills on his chances were some obstacles, so black teenagers have suffered more from raising the minimum wage than almost any other category.

what i would really like is to see minimum budgets way above the minimum wage. this is one of the things that has impressed me. in the last six months i've done about 130 town halls. i've been to industry after industry and the main thing they're telling me thing they're telling become a decent they're paying $6 an hour, they are paying $12 an hour. i think i've been in 20 different industries, they said they're having trouble getting people to work for that. their main problem they say are we need work ethics and people who are drug-free. so there are complicated problems we have in our country but if you raise the wage above the market wage, the people are trying to get started in life are hurt by this. i of three boys, they all worked minimum wage, they've all learned what it's like to deliver pizzas and work as a host in a restaurant or a call center, and, frankly, that's how i grew up working. >> i think it's good for the country to actually let people have access to work and learn to

work at a young age. >> i have to respond to that. i'm a businessman and i've worked through the minimum wage myself. nobody in our company to date makes minimum wage but i can tell you that allowed people do. he's dead wrong on this. he's dead wrong on the it's just like he is dead wrong on pay equity for women. most of the people who earn minimum wage today are women. that's who struggling and that's a suffered. either he's missing it or he is denying it. >> senator, response speak with all of the economist disagree. they all say raising the wage above the market wage leads to unemployment. cbo has 500,000 jobs will be lost. a good way to look at this is let's say minimum wage is $7.25 and you make it 15. if you double it, if mcdonald's has 20th, what do you think happens? do you think they are more people or less? we saw with obamacare. and looked obamacare and they said we will help poor people with obamacare. the rates are going through the

roof and also they said if you work 30 hours, yet to get obamacare which is the cost of doing business. if you work 32 hours, guess what. a lot of people gotten back to 20 hours. cbo undescended obamacare. them of obamacare. they want the government involved. it's set to point to many people lost their jobs because of this. >> is also going to take shelter with him 20 million americans and 400,000 kentuckians. >> let's move on to another issue as we wrap up on the program tonight. according to the most recent kids count report, for the first time ever, for the first time ever whether one in four kids into that live in poverty. be the one recommendation i could tackle that if you are either returned or go to the u.s. senate and have the program would work. mayor gray. >> i think register with education, and the investment would make in education is essential.

this is why jobs are so critical and so important. growing our economy at a level where everyone has a chance allows us to grow out of the poverty conditions that are plaguing us. we've got good jobs. this is why i said it's number one. jobs as msm will say this in is not the place to a u.s. senator does have anything to do with jobs. i think that's dead wrong. it's like saying a senator does have anything to do with education or poverty. we have to look and examine all of these issues, carefully, thoughtfully every day, get our arms around them. >> it's under president obama who might have supported and endorsed, it's under hillary clinton 30 years of hillary clinton that his policies have been acted that are leading to this anemic growth. how do we go faster. were growing at about 1% right now. historically we've got out these 3%. when ronald reagan was president

he lowered taxes dramatically and he had one year of 7% growth. we can grow at a much more rapid pace. we have got to be. that's what this is about. it's about what policies are better, raising taxes, raising regulations, or that maybe we should run our government the way you run your own family, that you have to voucher budget. you can't have too much debt. taxes should be low and the regulatory burden needs to be lowered and then the because what's happened is our policies are killing our economy. >> thirty seconds to each. and be no question from hiler of davis county. what has been your biggest regret during your political career? >> probably the time of had to spend away from my kids and my family, and we try very hard as a family to stay together and do as much, but i spent a lot of hours in airports and traveling and so you know, time away from

is the most difficult thing your i've been married for 26 years and we have a family life that we try to keep ou the kids invod in church in sports and athletics. >> we have a lot of ambitious goals. in my time as me without a lot of aspirational goals, and we've achieved a lot of those and that's because we focus on getting our financial house in order. and getting things done in every dimension of our city. other product that. but sometimes a then called a perfectionist and want to get it all done. >> gentlemen, thank you very much for being here on kentucky tonight. two in friday night with bill bright. and begin next monday for kentucky tonight where we will discuss the election. thanks for watching. i'm bill goodman. good evening. >> coming up in just over 10

minutes, a conversation on improving medical care. it's hosted by u.s. news and world report. will have, hospitals and health insurance executives, medical journalists and former senator tom daschle. again that gets underway at 3 p.m. eastern live her here on c-span2. until then from this morning's "washington journal" a look back contin 2000 election and florida recount. >> princeton university, history of public affairs professor and also the author of the book the fierce urgency of now. professor kempton for joining us this morning.his camp during this campaign the donald trump campaign, at some pointthl raised the specter of whatever n with the election of 2000 between george w. bush and al gore. could you paint a picture of not only what's been said about inn context of this campaign but if there's merit to those comparisons?

>> guest: i think they're very different to a 2000 was a election between al gore and george w. bush. and there was a dispute about the count in florida, looking at particular ballots in certain counties. what we saw after the election was a process where the recounts over contested votes thatpr ultimately ended in a supreme court decision, which stopped the recount. that's very different than what we're hearing today. today we've heard from donald trump meaning in last month about the idea of a rigged election, where it's not about contested ballots after the election in certain areas. rather it's about the entire political system. it's about the entire media being stacked against one candidate over the other.al combined with allegations of w voter fraud, without any evidence that happen. ththere are two very different kinds of issues.

i would say that there was some feeling after bush v. gore which wa was in the supreme cout case that ended the recount that the supreme court had acted improperly and stop the process too early. i think there are different. >> host: and so as far as this election more about the people involved, and the actual voting process? >> guest: exactly. although then it was about how to count the votes in terms of the voting process. there were ballots we couldn't see exactly who someone voted for or there were claims the voters were confused because of how the ballot was constructed. today there is a is the of the voting process that's emerged. donald trump has argued that will be a lot of voting fraud in this election which is a kind of argument we've heard from many conservatives for over a decade now, and that's why we have new voter id laws put into place in

many states where they will be fraught. people say they're some and there are not. they will claim to be a dead people, and this is something he is warned about and he's even called on his supporters to go and monitor on election day to make sure that no such fraud takes place. >> host: back in 2000 about the infamous hanging chads and i think that's what you're referring to. now get more of a paper ballot system in place today.st >> guest: right. the 2000 election exposed some of the inadequacies in some ways of how we conduct our voting but it was very archaic. it's still run by local government and what we saw in some places, it was sloppily done. the butterfly ballot dispute in 2000 refocused on some democratic counties in florida where many voters had voted for the reform candidate.

patrick buchanan, even thoughtr it's pretty clear that's not the most of these voters wanted to vote for. so that gave rise to this. equation over how the ballots were constructed, and we saw television coverage during the recounts of local election officials try to figure out who people voted for, looking through a magnifying glass to see if some have punched a vote or some of the paper on the ballot was still hanging, which is what we call banging chad. did it really what we talked about in terms of the voting process, will be conscientious h fraud and the theft of identity to vote. and again there is no evidence that this exists on any substantial level, but politically it's been a very potent issue and donald trump has used that in addition to his broader claim that the entireein system is rigged against them. >> host: julain zelizer as a guest to talk about the comparisons in the modern day with this election isn't going

back to 2000 examining aspects of that.f if you would ask them questions, you can do so on the phone lines this morning. and again for democrats --gal ra julain zelizer, the legal ramifications of this year's election, what do you expect might happen? i know that speculative at best considering the turnout butpe what's a lease been prepared by both campaigns and other lessons learned as far as the legal process that we can gain from the year 2000? >> guest: both campaigns are preparing for any kind of challenges that might take place in close election contests after election day. one thing we have to remember, 2000 election wasin extraordinarily close. neither candidate was able initially to reach of the electoral college totals and

that's why the 25 votes in florida mattered so much. we are not sure where things are right now. at least a week ago it looked like hillary clinton might havel a pretty substantial lead, in which case the trump campaign ta try to obtain recount in any close states but it was less likely to what we saw in florida. we don't know if the news, in the letter from the fbi the other week will narrow thend election and create a much closer outcome, in which case i think both campaigns would be prepared in some of these battleground states to mobilize for a recount. what we learned, two things from 2000. first, both campaigns today remember 2000 to remember that the republicans under former secretary of state james baker who led the recount effort triggered it not just as a legal

issue but as a political issue. they thought about how to frame the debate in the media. they mobilize supporters to come to florida and they were much more effective than the democrats. many democrats agree. i think the campaign should not only preparing the legal battle for any recount disputes but, their thinking of the politics of a postelection. obviously there's the issue of the courts. for many people after 2000 the courts seem a lot more political, especially the supreme court after it stopped the recount when many people thought they should go on. i think the memory of that will certainly shape the legal debate that might unfold if there was any sort of recount effort. again, if the results are as discrepant as people think they might be, if this hasn't narrowed as much as we are doing in the last few days, then it will be much harder to really conduct the recount challenge. >> host: first call is james

in virginia underlying for democrats. you were on with our guest. co-head. >> caller: good morningf one to c-span. i wanted to give you all in the cool points. i love the program. for your guest compusa in it's actually different with al gore and president bush than it is now because one is being contested in the other one is just saying it's a rigged.te we can use magic all below and see whether it's rigged. the bottom line is, donald trump has said that to the american public on tv when he was joking or not.. he's going to contest it if he does not win. he doesn't say if it's close. he doesn't say if one state was very close or not. he said if he does not win he's going to contest it. that is the issue that we need to be addressing. is there going to be voter fraud? in some instances they are going to try to be, but as you can see, this is my question, if

there is voter fraud in a state that has already caughts individuals for voter fraud, does that substantiate what donald trump is saying that it is widespread voter fraud? >> guest: two important points. on the first point, that's true. it wasn't as if a democrat al gore in 2000 spent the final months of the election arguing that this was not going to be a fair election, and also saying that he wouldn't accept the results if he didn't win. we didn't hear that from al gore.ng about he was talking about social security reform. he was talking about social policy. and then after this all unfolde and the dispute emerged over florida, first the networks are saying the one in florida, and late in the money fox called it for bush which really set off the whole debate.

this is the case today where the republican nominee is talkingg about visiting rigged and this being unfair long before there's any evidence to support that. combined with his claim during the debate that he would on el necessarily concede on election night if it seems that he lost the so there are very different cases and, of course, al gore after the supreme court decision would offer a concession speech. so his demeanor was different after this was resolve. and on voter fraud, there might be some fraud but again with remembered there is very little evidence of systematic voter fraud. there was a terrific study by the brennan center at nyu and that looked at how much this happens. is very, very small, a handful of examples where there's concrete evidence of this. it's really unlikely at this point that that kind of problem

is going to be central after the campaign. the one at issue we don't know about is hacking and computer voting and whether there's any effort to undermine that. but write them again that speculation but it's not based on evidence that on election day that would be able to somehow turn the boat. >> host: texas, republican line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. c-span. i just want to say i love c-span. i've been called in since the early '90s when i was in my 20s, and now i wasn't, i was in my 30s, but anyway, i love c-span and thanks for much for c-span. i'm going to keep on the subject. i never liked bush, okay? bush did some underhanded things when he was governor here. he put in the sports authority built for racetracks, for dog