scott walker started this political civil war. i will end this civil war. >> governor walker. >> bob, to answer your questions it's about reforms. that's the way it started out. we don't hear about it largely because our reforms are working. that's great news not only for homeowners, for small business owners but particularly for people on fixed incomes, senior citizens and working families. our state has $154 million surplus. for the first time we've put two consecutive years with money in

the rainy day fund. best of all in 2011 wisconsin gained jobs. the mayor and his allies talk about a job number that was based on a sample of 3.5% of employers. our numbers are based on a survey of 160,000 employers. that's more than 96% of employers in the state of wisconsin who are required by law to submit that information. they showed that last year wisconsin gained jobs since i've taken afs we've had more than 30,000 new jobs in the state. i understand why things have shifted. if you look at my record and compare that with our opponent the mayor of milwaukee in the last eight years taxes and fees have gone up. sadly milwaukee is one of the poorest big cities in the country. the unemployment rate is 28% in the city of milwaukee. in contrast people want to go forward. they want to move on. they don't want to rehash the same debate we had which is what the mayor talked about in the primary. they want to move on and move forward and i'm the candidate to do that. >> follow up for both of you, should the recall election laws in this state be changed?

>> 30 seconds a piece. >> i think scott walker is probably the best expert on that. he became county executive of milwaukee county following a recall. and he assigned recall petitions as my understanding against senator fine gold, against senator cole not for criminal misbehavior but because he disagreed with political decisions. the decisions he made led to this recall. >> absolutely the law should be changed. i think democrats, republicans alike realize that spending $16, $17 million on another election is just a horrible waste of money. but it's the law right now. at some point in the future after this is all said and done, we'll move on as a state. you'll see democrats and republicans not only in the legislature, but voters across the state that want to see a change. i think that's something important. but today we have a chance to debate the future. i'm going to spend tonight talking about the future. >> our second question is from

erin davison directed first at governor walker. >> change in public employee collective bargaining law last year is one of the reasons we're here tonight. governor walker if you had to do it all over again, would you seek the sapg changes many the same way and do you plan more collective bargaining law changes. mayor barrett if you disagree with the changes some of which you used to your advantage in the city of milwaukee budgeting process, would you seek to undo those changes and if so, how would you go about it? >> that's a great question. i get asked that a lot on the campaign trail. looking back, i'd change how we did things. people say this all over the state, they like the results, they just wish we'd done it different. if i had a chance to do it again. if i had gone out early january and february and made the case across wisconsin and explained what was happening back then. before the reforms school district across the state were spending tens of millions more than they needed to because under collective bargaining they were forced to buy their health insurance from one company. i talked to small business owner

today he talked about working with school districts all across southwestern wisconsin and literally the money that they've saved is money that's gone right back into the classroom. if i told people that was what was at stake back then, i think most people, most tax payers would have said governor you need to fix it. if i talked about under the old collective bargaining system you had abuses in overtime where the city of madison where a bus driver was able to make $150,000 because of overtime abuse i think most tax payers would have said you need to fix it. my problem was i fixed it and then i talked about it. most politicians spend all their time talking about it, but never fix it. in the future we're going to talk about it and fix it. the product is the most important thing, but the process itself is very important. that's why i spent the last year working on education reform. we're going to continue to build off the base where we bring stake holders in and create a good product and a good process.

>> scott, you started this by saying that you're going to drop the bomb and that you were going to go first after the public employees. and that you will use divide and conquer as your strategy to go after the workers. i think of great leaders and what do they do in a time of crisis? they try to bring their people together. you succeeded in dividing the state. this is really about workers' rights not just about public employees.

it's about the middle class and whether people who work in the middle class have rights. i am concerned about those rights. i'm concerned that those rights have been taken away and i think it's an attack on the middle class. there's a reason he hasn't said he would veto a right to work bill. the reason is is because he wouldn't. >> our next question is from paul directed first at mayor barrett. >> you've both touched on this. i think you both recognize that job creation is one of the biggest if not the biggest issues in this race. but lately how we count jobs lost or created has become equally important and controversial. you're both working from different sets of numbers and with the short run up to this race voters are in effect being asked to place their bets. my question for you is with so many livelihoods and families at

stake all across wisconsin why should voters bet on you? >> mayor barrett. >> let me explain the numbers i'm using. i'm using the numbers that scott walker embraced last year. i'm using the numbers used by every state. by the federal government, by the media. those are the numbers that showed under scott walker more jobs in the country than 2011. scott realized he had a problem. he had a problem because he could not run for this election knowing that the people of this state would know that we lost the most jobs of any state many the country. so he brought his key political appointees together and said we need to have a different measurement. and so they brought a measurement out 20 days before this election. 20 days before this election and the tv commercials running four hours later saying let's use this set of numbers instead. nose numbers have never been verified. he knows they couldn't be

verified. as a result of that if we were to believe his numbers, the bureau of labor statistics would have had the largest discrepancy it has ever had. the largest mistake ever. it's clear what's going on. he can't defend his record on jobs so they trot out these numbers that are not used for this fashion ordinarily and they put tens of millions of dollars behind them in commercials trying to convince the people of the state that we created jobs when in fact the state has lost jobs. >> the answer is simple, the facts are the facts. the reforms are putting more people to work. the numbers that the mayor's hanging his hat on our numbers are based on 3.5% of the employers in this state. that's why you have a quarterly review of those and you talk to nearly every employer in the state of wisconsin in this case almost 160,000 employers respond. that's 96% versus 3.5%. those numbers showed in 2011 wisconsin gained 23,321.

those are numbers that come directly by law are required to come from the employers from the state of wisconsin. those are numbers that are submitted and were required to be submitted on may 16th of 2012. that's what the law requires. now i think the reason why there's all the tension about the process is because that's the disconnect from the attacks that i've been around for month after month by our opponent. largely because if you look at the con strast we've seen our employment rate go down to 6.7% the lowest since 2008 in the state of wisconsin. 30,000 new jobs created since i took over. in the city of milwaukee unemployment has gone up 28%. it is now one of the poorest cities in the entire country. unemployment is above 10%. i said time and time again we don't want wisconsin to become milwaukee. we want to help milwaukee become more like the good things we've done in the state of wisconsin. that's what we're going to do moving the state forward. >> may i respond? >> yes.

wait, no. >> i thought there was time for a 30 second rebuttal. >> no. that's in direct questioning. our next question is from bob directed first at governor walker. >> most of the last budget debate was focused on the spending side of the ledger cutting spending to bring the budget in balance. we'd like to talk about the other side right now the revenue side, taxes, tax increases, tax cuts and specifically how you define a talk increase if a tax credit or a deduction gets removed is that a tax increase? what about previous spending cuts if they get restored is that a tax increase or things like licensing fees increased paper work filing fees if those get increased is that concerned a tax increase? i'd like to know first of all your definition of a tax increase and looking ahead to the next budget if you plan any of those? >> well overall what we've done is lowered the overall tax burden in the state of wisconsin's budget.

the most important we did was putting caps on property taxes. it's a difference that i've had on myself and the mayor, but the other democrats who are running who raised real concerns about that, i want to keep caps in place to keep property taxes down. for the first time in 12 years property tax on a median valued home went down that's after from 1998 to last year property taxes in the state went up on average about 43%. that's bad for homeowners. particularly bad for small businesses. bad for senior citizens or fixed incomes. it's bad for wokking families and others. that more than any tax out there is the biggest issue. on top of that we put in place tax incentives for tax creation. i was at a forum today and they benefit from our taxes. they're putting more beam back to work drvn by the change in attitude in the state of wisconsin we're putting more money back in their hands so they can invest in capital and innovation and putting people to work in the state of wisconsin. that's not just a definition of

a tax decrease. it's a definition of what it takes to get the state working again. that's a fum difference between the two. i don't believe that more government is the answer. i believe that getting government out of the way and being good partners is the answer not adding more of a burden on our small businesses and particularly on our farmers and manufacturers. that's not the way to go, i want to move our state forward. >> mayor barrett. >> this time trying to pit people against the city of milwaukee. as scott well knows during the people that he was county executive unemployment went up in milwaukee county 34%. i agree that revenues are an

issue here. and scott has not called the increase that seniors pay because of the steps he took to limb the homestead tax credit, a tax increase. it hits seniors in is the state. he also said we're running a budget surplus right now. you know how that budget surplus came about, if it is in fact there, because he used a credit card. he used the credit card and pushed over $500 million of debt on to our children and our grandchildren. they're going to have to pay more than $150 million in interest so he can look good politically. that's not a trustworthy action. >> our next question from erin davison directed first at mayor barrett. >> a recent survey claimed that

about half of all the money raised in this campaign will come from out of the state of wisconsin when previous averages were 7% and 10%. what is the rational for that and how does this impact the influence of wisconsin voters? >> i think that's a question you probably want to ask scott. if you look at our most recent report 99% of my contributions came from individuals. 91% of those contributions came from people who contributed less than $100. 85% of them came from people who live in the state of wisconsin. this is something that people in this state get. there is something wrong when a sitting governor raises 60% to 70% of miss most recent campaign contributions from people who don't live in the state from a billionaire in texas, from developers in missouri. do you think for one second those people care about what's happening in superior or

sturgeon bay or stevens point or sharon? no. they don't. this is all part of this idealogical civil war. he wants this state to be the prototype for the tea party nationally. that's why he's such a rock star. the conservatives love him. the right wing loves him because he's doing exactly what they want him to do. he's not doing what the people in wisconsin want them to do. but he is pleasing these billionaires. and there is something wrong. there is something wrong when you have a sitting governor who's raised 60 ternt to 70% of his money from out of state. >> governor walker. >> well you look at where it all started last february, march we saw millions of dollars poured into the state of wisconsin from out of state special interests tried to attack our reforms. they brought thes of people into the state of wisconsin that continued the supreme court race. it continued spending tens of millions of dollars trying to

take out six republican state senators in the recall elections and we've seen it throughout the recall process itself. we wouldn't have to raise or spend a penny in this election if it weren't for the out of state special interests and we continue. we saw reports of more money coming in from the democratic governors association and pouring into the greater wisconsin committee a front group for all the union money. what you've seen are many people from across the state and from across the country saying here's a governor willing to take on the special interest and do something that's unique. put the power back in the hands of the hard working tax payers. that's what we did. that's why there's so much interest in washington. they understand there's a lot of disearning democrats who are governors and mayors all across the country who are looking closely saying maybe it's time we take on the special interests as well. that's the difference in this election.

76 person of our donations come from people giving us $50 or less. whether it's someone in wi with or down the way in rockford, they understand finally someone's willing to stand up and take on the special interests. >> our next question is from paul directed first at john walker -- governor walker. >> governor, three of your former aides have been charged as part of an investigation in milwaukee county. one has pled guilty to doing campaign work on public time. 12 people have been granted immunity as cooperating witnesses. you've said you're not a target in this investigation. what responsibility do you bear for activities that took place in your office and in the county office. mr. mayor you said that the governor needs to come clean with what he knows implying that he knows something or that these done something wrong.

do you have any information about that implication? if not, is it responsible to heard and suggest as much unless we've heard from prosecutors. >> governor walker. >> first off, let me be clear, i've had a high level all the way back to my early days as a kid when i earned the rank of eagle scout and showed that. i will continue to have high integrity long after this process is completed. the facts clearly show that anytime it was brought to our attention that someone violated our policy against using taxpayer resources for political purposes. we took swift action. those are the facts. the other interesting thing for a lot of people tuning in tonight is to know this investigation started because my office asked for it nearly two years ago. we have concerns about someone who is involved with a veteran related program and we asked the

district attorney to look into it. that's why we haven't been a target of this. there's nothing new here. the reason our mayor and opponents wanted to spend so much time on this is they wanted to distract attention because they're desperate. the reforms are thing they don't talk about anymore. that's the reason why they're focussing on this. >> scott walker is the only governor in this country with a criminal defense fund. he's paid over $100,000 in criminal defense fees to a lawyer who specializes in federal prosecutions and a different lawyer who specializes in state prosecutions. you're correct. his key aides have been charged.

it involved a network in his office, in his executive office 25 feet about the distance from each other where from each pore pap secret computer system. fund-raising, campaigning. when he found out he ordered an investigation? no. he sent one e-mail and said we can't afford to have anymore stories. his concerns were about public relations. not about criminal investigations. i've asked for two things. i've asked for him to clear the record. to shoppe us the e-mails that he sent to that criminal enterprise, if you will. that secret system. that secret computer system in his office. that would clear the whole thing up. i didn't make allegations. i want to clear the air. i also asked that he tells us who's paying his criminal defense fund? the people in the state have a right to know who is paying his criminal defense system.

that doesn't raise any charges against him. but that's what we have a right to know and that's what i've asked. >> our next question is from bob dohr directed first at mayor barrett. >> last year a large con tingant's senate democrats left the state to prevent that body from voting and getting a quorum to vote on the budget bill. now that that precedent has been set it could happen frp lawmakers from either party and my question is, first of all, what's your view of the practice, and, secondly, if elected governor, how would you deal with it, if it happens, or how prevent it if you don't want it to happen? >> this all goes to leadership and how you deal with people. and i think scott himself acknowledged he did not deal with the introduction of this bill in the way that was probably the best. i think that's maybe the understatement of the year. but my view has always been that you seek to work with people. that you seek to explain to them what's going on. soap that you don't face

these -- these huge civil wars, and they're divisive. again, he said that that was his plan. his plan was to divide and conquer. that's not how you get things done. i've balanced eight budgets as the mayor of this city. and i've done so by working with people, and that doesn't mean you're always going to agree or that you're always going to have pleasant conversations. you might have sharp exchanges, but the job of an executive is to set the tone for the organization. whether it's how people act in their office in terms of criminal activity, or in terms of how you act with your legislature, and what his decision was, was to drop the bomb. again, that's his phrase. that's not my phrase. that's his phrase. to drop the bomb. and he was upset that people acted in a negative way. do i think that's something we want to see repeated? of course i don't. of course, i don't think anybody in the state, even the people who left don't want to see that repeated. tragically, one of the things we've learned and learned it the hard way is that you have to have an executive that's willing

to work with people, not try to paint people into a corner or make themselves look big by making someone else look small. >> governor walker? >> well, bob, i recently met a woman in sheboygan who came up to me, introduced herself and said i'm a democrat, and i waited for a second for what was coming out next, but i support you. you sold me. you haven't heard me talk. she said, it's not what you say, it's what you do. she said, i've been looking for someone willing to take on the tough issues. i don't agree with everything you've done or every step you've taken but appreciate the fact someone opt miltly has been willing to take on the tough issues, take on the tough economic crisis in this state. so we've taken on that first tough battle. it's time to move forward. we talked about our job session in the beginning of this past legislative sergs and nearly every one of those items was passed with bipartisan support. did it again in the fall when democrats and republicans joined together with us. look at the bills signed into

law this session, over 96% were bills both democrats and republicans voted for pr you can build off that. not if you replay what you've had over the last time. the mayor want to go back and completely restore collective bargaining. we'll have that battle all over again. in the primary, some of the forums he would get in the ring and fight and fight and fight, if somebody didn't go his way he would target them and take them out. that doesn't sound like somebody willing to move on and move the state forward. we're ready to move on. ready to move forward. we don't want to replay those battles. we think it's time to get this state working again and move forward. >> our next question is from aaron davidson directed first at governor walker. >> talk about mining. earlier this year a cancelling of plans for an iron mine near ashland, wisconsin when miners couldn't pass the mining bill. mining in wisconsin will continue to be a topic of concern. what can we flern our

neighboring state of minnesota about workable mining legislation and how can wisconsin best balance the need to protect our environmental resources we demand for job opportunities available up through the mining industry? >> well, this is a good example of working together. we work with private sector unions. a number of them who were passionate not only about mining but we worked together on restoring the reins on the transportation system and putting more investments into energy and power in the state of wisconsin. they were very active in supporting out of legislation to streamline the process for safe and environmentally sound mine. i crisscrossed the state advocating fors that in northwestern wisconsin because that mine wom have generated some 2,300 jobs, i spent time in caterpillar, the walker forge, no relation to me, or whether it's with places all across the state where you see jobs that would have been created for that mine. we're going to advocate for that. sadly, this is an example of what happens whip the recall

politics. overwhelming support from washington said to those senate democrats, you can't pass this legislation. you can't give the governor a victory. i believe firmly we get passed june 5th, put together a process that not only republicans in the senate but i think a number of democrats can support in moving the state forward and our private sector unions will be a key part of that. >> this piece of legislation is an excellent example of what happens when you've got a governor more interested in traveling around the country giving fund-raising speeches than rourking on a piece of key legislation. it's not just this key piece of legislation. it's the venture capital bill. scott walker said his economic initiatives were passed in jarn. no, they weren't. these were his two key economic developments initiatives and neither one passed. now, why didn't they pass? they didn't pass because you will a governor who's not interested in taking off his jacket and rolling up his sleeves and working with people. i'll tell you what i would have

done. what a does executive would have done on the mining bill. a good executive would have want from environmentalists, native americans and the local government. is there a need for this mine? what can we do to make this work? he never, ever did that. not once. the venture capital is an even better example, because that one he can't blame democrats on, because it was the assembly republicans and the senate republicans who disagreed. can't blame the democrats for that. and he never brought them in. he never rolled up his sleeves and did the hard work that an executive has to do. because he was having too much fun traveling around the country. we have to have a governor who's going to be here and focus on creating jobs in this state rather than advancing their career nationally. >> our next question is from paul, directed first to mayor barrett.

>> mayor barrett in 2006 voters here in wisconsin decided to amend the state constitution effectively banning gay marriage. but it seems to be one of those issues on which public and political opinions are shifting rapidly. as we all know the president came out recently and in support of gay marriage, the naacp shortly wilafter declared marriage a civil right, and national poll out just this week in fact by abc news and "the washington post" showed 63% of americans favor legalization of gay marriage compared with 36% back in 2006 when wisconsin voted. curious whether or not your opinions have also evolved or change the at all since that vote on this issue, and, for instance if a measure legalizing civil unions were to emerge from the civil legislature, how you would reply? >> i would support that. it is an issue where opinions evolved. interesting, because for younger people in particular, i think

that they understand the need to respect relationships. and i do respect them. but i think the issue here goes beyond that, because i think there are other issues that are important to this state where there is a disagreement between scott walker and me, and one of them has to do with equal pay for equal work. and that's an issue, again, where we have a sharp disagreement. because there is a federal law, the lily better law ensuring women will not be paid less for men for the same work. i is a positive authority legislation. support that legislation. passed at the state level. someone who lives in gunn county, iowa county or florence county doesn't have to take their case to a federal court. instead they can take it to a state court. scott walker and his allies repeopled that law. r -- repealed a law. veterans and women paid less,