i mentioned earlier for years schools all across the state had to buy their health insurance from just one company. that meant tens of millions of dollars spent on health insurance plans instead of putting that money directly into the classroom. that's changed bawd of our reforms. on top of that, a young woman in the milwaukee school system was named one of the most outstanding teachers of the year. exactly the kind of teacher that you would want anywhere across the state. a couple months after that announcement was being laid off long before i was governor, but because of cuts made in the past. under the old collective bargaining, the last one hired was the first one fired. the last one in was the first one out. the mayor and his allies want to restore that system, replacing seniority and tenure. i want a system that says merit should drive this. put the best and the brightest

in our classrooms. even the survey conducted by the teachers' union said this is why they wanted to hide that information from the public showing that the responses were more positive this year than anytime over the past ten years. >> i can't think of an organization where you take $1.6 billion out of their budget. in the state of wisconsin, that's exactly what scott walker did. $1.6 billion taken out of k-12 in the state. it didn't end there. technical schools took a 30% cut. university system took a $315 million cut. we have to invest in the our kids. i've got four kids as well. i want my kids to be able to get an education in this state and not come out of college in buckets's debt. that's what i want. but to not invest in education is pennywise and pound foolish. all you have to do is look at minnesota. a much higher per capita income than this state and one of the main reasons is more of their residents have graduated from college or technical school.

and what did scott walker try to do? again, the divide and conquer strategy. pit the universities against each other. you name them. and what would have been the result of that? it would have driven up tuition costs for students at the university of wisconsin-madison, and more students would have come from out of state. i want our flagship university to be a place where our students can attend and not to be a place where dollars are going to be the main goal so we can get students from out of state. >> our next question is from erin davison, directed first at mayor barrett. >> well over a million people, one in five residents rely on some sort of medical assistants paid for by the state. while the programs offer a safety net for people with disabilities, children and low-income families they are costly. how can the state rein in costs for people who won't otherwise have access to health care?

>> we have to use, if people have jobs, we want to make sure they have health care, because we don't want people to be forced to quit their job because they don't have the health care. and we don't want situations where mothers who don't have health insurance are forced to go to emergency rooms. because if you're a mother with a sick 8-month-old and your baby's running a temperature of 104 and you don't have a primary care physician, i want you to go to the emergency room, if you love your baby, but that's the most expensive and inefficient way to deliver health care. it almost seems like a -- an ironic tradition, but as a member of congress, i worked on a bipartisan basis to get badger care approved. badger care was approved on a bipartisan basis so people working could get health care. i think we have to continue to invest in badger care and there were people whom their badge of

care under scott walker and attempted to cut seniors from getting prescription drugs. a rare bipartisan occurrence because it was put back in the budget on a bipartisan basis so seniors would not lose prescription coverage and only when the federal government threatened action he decided to take action on family care. to be that one to trust to have the governor say he wants to restore family care, but then we find out he said it because the federal government had threatened the state. that's a problem. >> governor walker? >> first off, you make an investment. we put $1.2 billion more in medicaid than was there in the past. in fact, i invested more money in medicaid, the program that funds badge of care than other governor in history. compare us around the country, illinois failed to make the tough decisions we made over the past year and they're now cutting something like $2.7 billion from medicaid. we added money. we added more money than any governor in the country. but we put in place reforms to make sure it was sustainable, to

provide a safety net for the elderly and family care. continue to add people with physical or development disabilities as part of family care and center provided a basic safety net under badge of care. you can't do that without investment and without putting in reforms. you're on badger care and your employer has health insurance. we'll ask you to take it from your employer instead of relying on the taxpayers. if you're someone in your early 20s and you can get health insurance under your parents, we're going to ask you to get it there instead of going into the taxpayer base. the sorts of things that ensure, ensure that medicaid and the program is funded around the state like badger care and family care are there for generations to come. we really don't know what the year will do. it's been 44 days since he was first asked, if this is about undoing the past year and a half what would you do? he hasn't told voters.

he doesn't have a plan. a few talking points is not plan. we have a plan. lay it on the table, invest the money in medicaid. we will in the future. >> one last question from paul, directed first to the governor. >> governor, this is a bit of an understatement over the past year and a half there's been ideological warfare to say the least going on in the state capitol. hard democrats on the right. hard republicans on the right. hard democrats on the left and -- many would say that the state is polarized at this point. so our question is, what would you do to bring unity back to the state of wisconsin? what can you do? >> one of the biggest things is moving past the june 5th elections because we have a real choice here. voters need to understand, get past june 5th, get back to focusing on job reform and education and a broad consensus around the state, we can move the state forward. going back and rehashing the same debate we had last year as my opponent wants to do is not the way to move forward. i want to build off the foundation of a process we've changed. i talked earlier about improving the process as well as getting

good variety. we started with dr. tony abers, ideological wouldn't necessarily be in line with us but we have shared interests. me and my two kids, the superintendent, and worked on improved reading scores for elementary kids. educator effectiveness and our staffs put together one of the most comprehensive group of stakeholders from across the state where when it came to school and school district accountability. there's much more work to be done together on that and i think that process gives us a great foundation whether on education or assortment of other issues where we can build off that and really bring the state together in the future. i think the public doesn't have to say he's talking about it. he's done it for almost a year. the reason people don't know about it is because it's working. it hasn't been a contribution. we've brought together a good number of people. we can do it again when it comes to jobs and budgets and other things in the future. >> mayor barrett? >> the first thing you have to do is establish trust.

and you don't establish trust when 20 days before an election you try a whole new set of employment numbers. people see right through it. and you don't establish trust when you know you have a deficit and instead of dealing with that deficit honestly you take out the credit card and say, i want to make myself look good politically, so our kids will pay $156 million more in interest. that doesn't establish trust. i was elected in 2004 as mayor. it was a deeply, deeply divided election. i reached out to people who did not support me. i did not try to punish my political enemies. because if you're mayor or governor, you have to be the executive for the entire jurisdiction. scott won with 52%. you would have thought he won with 92%. the first step he took, punish his enemies. that's easy to do. it's easy to punish your enemies, but it doesn't bring people together. the job of an executive is to

try to work to get things done. and it can't be -- it's my way or the highway. it's my way or the highway. it can be just and ideological litmus test and we don't care what the practical results are. i want to work with people. and my style has never been that i make myself look big by making someone else look small. when i try to push people into a corner politically. that's the type of executive that we need. >> now each candidate will have the opportunity to ask one question of the other, and i ask you to keep your response, because of time, to 45 seconds. governor walker, you may question mayor barrett first. and then have the opportunity respond. >> actually, more time to ask a question. i'm going to skip like i did two years ago. i think the voters don't want to hear us bickering. they want to hear us answer questions. with that i'll defer. >> then i'm take more time. scott you probably think i'm going to ask you a question about the john doe criminal

investigation and why you won't tell the people of the state who's paying your legal defense fees or why you refuse to turn over those e-mail, but that's a question that's been asked, and i think the public might want an answer to that. i'm equally concerned though, recently an investigative report that talked about your traveling and talked and your schedule. and it had days and days filled with personal time. and this investigative process went on to find that many times you were caught out of state giving political speeches or fund-raising events, and you've refused to tell the public what your schedule has been as it pertains to fund-raising and political events outside the state. prior to this election, will you disclose to the people of this state your out-of-state travel for fund-raising and political purposes? >> i think it's real simple. to the people, for example in green bay who six times in the last 11 days have seen me in

their community, to the people i saw in southwest wisconsin, grand county, talked to people in iowa, richland county, lafayette county and others, and the people i just saw the other day in oshkosh, chippewa falls, i think they know where i'm at. they know where my interests are. i'm focused on the people of wisconsin. i've stood up and take on special interests. that's why they poured money in since last year. brought money and bodies into the state of wisconsin because i did something that hadn't been done before. i stood up and took on the powerful special interests in the state and local level when the past dictated to taxpayers what they would do. instead i put the power back into the taxpayers and every day will continue to the do that near wisconsin. >> respond in 30 seconds or less. >> he didn't answer the question. it's imperative that the people

know why their governor was not here and what he was doing outside of the state raising money. but i think we have his answer. >> okay. i'd say for the 30 seconds back, actions speak louder than words. people see me. people see me across the state fighting to help the people of the state and the government create jobs. seen me standing up to take on special interests to put power back in the hands of taxpayers. that's why today i talked to local officials in southwestern wisconsin finally, thankfully, someone's given us the power to act at the local level on behalf of local taxpayers instead of someone else dictating to us what was going to happen. >> that concludes the question and answer part of our debate. each candidate will have the opportunity make a 1.5 minute closing statement. mayor barrett, your statement. >> again, thank you all for watching tonight. i want to make something clear. i have no desire to be the rock star for the far right in this nation. and i have no desire to be the rock star of the far left in this nation. what i do have a desire is to be rock solid and do everything i can to create jobs in the state of wisconsin. because that's what's we need

right now. and we need a governor who will stand up to the special interests, and i will do that. scott walker gave billions of dollars in tax cuts to corporations and the wealthiest people in the state. and he asks seniors to sacrifice. i've said no to my friends. scott's talked a lot about the unions tonight. the large public unions. let's face it. i wasn't their first choice and certainly not the first choice of the people on the far right, and why is that? because i've said no to my friends and to people who oppose me politically. that's the test of leadership. it's easy to say yes to people who give you millions of dollars. it's easy to say no to political opponents. the real test of leadership is whether you can say no to people who are your friends. scott walker has never asked for shared sacrifice. he's asked for others to make sacrifice.

as governor, i will focus on jobs, healing this state, ending his civil war. and doing everything we can to move this state forward. that's why i ask you for your vote on june 5th. thank you very much. >> governor? >> john, thank you and the broadcasters association. to the panel, bob, erin and paul. and the mayor for joining me. particularly to all of you across the state of wisconsin. earlier this week i stopped at a manufacturer in oshkosh, and after to talking to people working there around the factory i met somebody particularly interesting. a guy by the name of chris came up to me and told me the story how he voted for my opponent two years ago. now he and his parents raised democrats are actually voting for me in the election. the reason was simple. impressed somebody had the courage to take on tough issues facing our state, helping us move the state forward. i often chuckle when i hear the word courage. it's amazing to me this is the

only profession out there that you're called courageous just by keeping your word. what we're doing is moving the state forward, and the courage i get doesn't come from those in politic. it comes from the people i meet every day. moms and dads across the state just like those who work hard in factories and farms and small businesses in schools and clinics across this great state. people i have the honor of meeting just about every day. people who are moms and dads, who have the courage to go to their workplaces and work hard -- not just to earn a paycheck. not just to put food on the table or clothes on the back of our kids. they work hard each and every day just like we do, to have our kids have a better life than we do. we ultimately want our kids to grow up in a better home, a better community and most importantly in a better state than the one we inherited. that's why i ask for your vote on june 5th to move wisconsin forward. that concludes this evening's debate. we thank the candidates, governor scott walker and mayor

thomas barrett. our panel. on behalf of the radio and television broadcasters we urge you to vote on june 5th. thank you for listening. and watching. good night. you hear of the national press club, waiting for the start of a freestate foundation forum about international proposals to transfer control of the internet over to the united nations. among some of the new regulatory proposals, the u.n. would gain control over cyber security, data privacy and the web's address system. we'll hear from fcc commissioner robert mcdowell, who has expressed opposition to the plan and the idea has also received criticisms from both sides of the aisle in congress. the household holds a hearing o this subject tomorrow. the event is about to get under way in about half an hour, 12:15. until then, we'll bring you a

discussion from this morning's washington journal with s.e. cupp. we'll join this live as soon as it starts. we continue our six-day series, spotlight on columnists this morning with s.e. cupp. we kicked things off on saturday with mona cherin. sunday, we had colby king of the washington post. monday, matt lewis with the day caller. and today at the daily news. s.e. cupp from new york, good morning. thanks for being here. >> good morning. thanks for having me. >> here is what you got in the new york daily new this is morning. time to take the lead in syria. diplomacy has only led to more slaughter. what do you think the u.s. should do? >> well, the military analysts i've spoken to and heard from have enumerated a number of different possibilities from

arming the rebels to working more diplomatically with turkey and jordan, our allies in the area and a number of other avenues we could take. clearly, what we're doing right now, allowing kofi annan and the u.n. to enact this, quote, unquote, six-point peace plan simply isn't working. and that's because he does not want peace. he wants to remain in power above all else and will do it at the expense of innocent women and children. for the insurgents, it's clear they don't want peace either. they want him gone. there's nothing peaceful about ousting a dictator. it's not going to make everyone happy. we have to look at our interests in the region. and i feel like we have a moral obligation to put an end to upwards of 13,000 deaths and growing. the most recent example of violence over the weekend.

and then also political. al qaeda is moving in. that's a national security interest, of course. it would also be nice to cut off iran's proxy and make israel feel a little safer by removing assad. we have a lot of interest in making this syria problem better. and you ready tests from mitt romney about what you call the elbow-throwing style that president obama employs and you offer advice like don't complain. don't question authority. scold it. tell us more about how the president employs his strategy and what you think mitt romney should do. >> mitt romney is a nice guy. i think we've all seen that he has a little difficulty playing the bully.

unfortunately, now officially he is the nominee. and business is dirty. you look at the record that the i don't think nice guy politics is really going to work. especially when you look at the record that the president had both as a campaigner and while in office. and his political style, and it has not been -- he's not been a wallflower. he's been something of a bully, and i mean this almost in a positive sense, that he's been aggressive and it's been very effective. if you remember back in his campaigning days when he didn't like some of the things that some conservative journalists were saying about him, he removed them from his plane. when in office, he tried to have fox news cut out of the press pool. luckily the other networks objected. fearing that one day they, too, would be next. scolding the supreme court to their face during the state of the union was a bullying tactic, and a warning shot to future

decisions. health care included, to say, probably don't do that again, unless you want more of my wrath. he -- he even xolscolds his friends. at a meeting with black caucuses, at a dinner, told them toll stop whining. i don't think the president takes kindly to pushback, and mitt romney's going to get a lot of pushback over the next few months, and i think he needs to take the gloves off. >> in addition to being a "new york daily news a" columnist, fm "glenn beck" tv. where do you guess inspiration for your columns and makes you stand out so you're not just part of what everybody else is saying? >> that's a really good question. part of the job is to say something new, interesting,

provoketive or fresh about things that everyone's talking about. there is a lot of noise and competition out there, but honestly, i ask myself fairly mainstream, and i don't mean that ideologically. i just marine thean what i'm wan television what i'm doing i imagine most people are as well. i don't think i have very unique interests. so i have to imagine what whatever's piquing my interest that day or week is probably going to be interesting to other people, too, and then my burden is to take that interesting story and say something interesting about it. and if i feel like i don't have anything new or fresh to add, i simply don't talk about it. i really don't feel the need to be prolific for the sake of number. for the sake of quantity. so i really -- i honestly have the luxury of being able to talk about kind of whatever i want

and only what i want to talk about, which is really nice. >> let's go to the phones. the numbers to call. 2027-737-0001. republicans, 202-737-0002. and independents -- mike from jacksonville, florida. go ahead, mike. >> caller: i have a question. if the united states has an uprising from the inside, by a group works they be the same as -- >> you're marking a comparison to syria. is that correct? >> caller: yes. we had a group in this country that rose up against the government, would we be -- feel the same way about a foreign nature fighting against our government? we need to be real careful of stepping on the government in an

election. >> sure. i'm not arguing for interventionism across the board, caller, but we have strategic trechts over there. syria's harbored terrorists that directly attacked this country and other western nantions for years and there's implicit and existential danger both to the united states, israel and neighboring countries with increased instability in the region. al qaeda included. so i think an insurgent group within the united states presented that kind of existential threat to the rest of the world and syria and al qaeda do i think we would expect from international action. >> brian, republican in michigan. good morning. >> caller: hi, good morning. thank you. i think the biggest question ought to be asked of the american people and certainly the president, if america wishes to remain a sovereign nation for

basically eternity? i think that's a question that needs to be asked of all americans. if we wish to call our own shots, because the course we're on, seems we're undermining that ability to do that. case in point would be, do we respect mexico's sovereignty as a nation? and why are we allowing their best and brightest to come here and work? certainly mexico needs these people far more than we do. no matter what the argument is. mexico needs hard working, intelligent people that are proud of their country and want to stay there and make it. they have natural resources. they could make themselves a better nation. so what do you think, in line for their futures, 30, 40 years from now? >> well, i think you're getting into the immigration question, and america's always had a strong, open immigration policy as long as its legal. we welcome immigrants from all over the world. we always have, and i think we always should. i think republicans who advocate

for legal immigration are trying to staunch a floob yproblem tha might be alluding to, but our obligation to other nations is to welcome citizens who feel like they don't have opportunities in their home countries, and i know that a lot of mexicans right now feel like they don't have opportunities with increased violence and a worsening economy. they feel like their opportunities are lessening and it's our obligation to provide those opportunities here as long as they take the legal measures to move here within our legal system. >> south carolina. on our independent line talking with s.e. cupp. hi, robert. >> caller: yes, good morning. enjoy c-span and your program. i'd like to ask a question ab t

about -- say i'm calling as an independent, because i think the country's at an impasse towards its policy, basically, is my concern and yes, i'd like to see term limits and financial reform. -- restored. but i'd really like to ask a question about the fumer efutu country in the long term. do you think rather than the united states of america, the middle being independent. left and right, and divide the country evenly and so we would wouldn't have to do so much bickering and arguinarguing? >> divide the country geographically in three sections based and political meanings? >> caller: yes, exactly. >> what do you think about his triamerica idea and also glass deal? i. think we tried segregation and i think most of us agreed it

didn't work out so well. so segregation along political lines i don't think is a particularly productive plan for the future either. in fact, just to comment a little more on that, i think that the polarization of the country that we're seeing right now is a good thing, and i think it's indicative that a lot of these issues we care about immensely. we are incredibly passionate about the things we are talking about and fighting about right now and i think you're seeing that trickle into the zeitgeist and into our dialogue and media narratives and into our political campaigns. if we didn't care, i'd be really worried. if the narrative were muted and watered down and we all sort of collectively shrugged our shoulders, i'd be really worried for the future. the fact that we disagree not the problem. the problem is that we're not coming to meaningful solutions or that we're coming to solutions too slowly. for the economy. and for unemployment.

but i have confidence we'll get there eventually. as for term limits, i'm opposed. as much as i'd love to get a number of our representatives out of office, i think that should be up to the people and not arbitrary timelines. that really would only humpt the great -- humpt the great politicians, if there are any that we have in office who might be doing a great job for their communities, and who might be really well liked, and really productive and really effective. and then politely asked to leave after two years or four years. so i -- i think our system as messy as it is, i think actually works pretty well. >> s.e. cupp, author of the book "losing our religion: the liberal attack on christianity." why you're wrong about the right. maria is a democrat joining us from riverside, californi