>> i call this hearing to order and this is the subcommittee on emerging threats. today we will be discussing an emerging threat to europe which is an area that we are focused on, but it is a merginging threat to the world. i'm going to handle things differently and ask my or permit my ranking member if he would move forward with his opening statement first and i will have mine as the chairman of the committee. and have statements as well. i yield to mr. keating. >> thank you for holding this

important and timely hearing. i'm pleased that you are able to join us i have a long history in massachusetts and so happy to see his legacy move on to his niece. today's hearing is relevant given the proximity to the conflict zone, social networking and the internet and the premier recruitment cools for terrorist gangs expanding far into europe and the united states. these are cheap and ineffective even for isil who has plentiful resources. they focus on various assets of

the recruitment and communication strategy. this is what we must attack. of course we need the cooperation of the transatlantic and regional partners. the national counter terrorism center estimates that as of this month, as many as 12,000 individuals have travelled to syria since 2011 to support the armed militants there. this includes well over 1,000 citizens and more than 100 americans. other estimates from the allies overseas expect these numbers to be higher. they are a prom ter for what may come. we must work closely to find ways for information sharing and communication. the fbi and other agencies are working with domestic and international foreign fighters traveling through the mideast.

as such, interagency cooperation and information sharing will be put to a test as agencies seek to coordinate across international boundaries. i for one will continue to be a strong advocate for local law enforcement and utilizing the force multiplier effect. it is as i mentioned earlier the mind set and the recruitment who come to the nation to join the gangs and go on to rape, kill, and divide thousand fist not millions. as a transatlantic community, they determine the causes and devising appropriate counter measures. the heritage and the cultural history of the mideast will be important to helping young people define their true

identity. instead of seeking to destroy that history. i think it's important to reassess the partners. how all the countries that have been affected and impacted by foreign fighters in this phenomenon of doing what they can do, the recruitment and financing, are they protecting those in their population and region from being coerced from the activities? a true partner in countering radicalism would not only do what they could do to curtail them, but have zero tolerance to go unchecked at home as well. these are important questions when evaluating. i am more prone to the groups than we are.

radicalization in the rural and urban settings, wealthy and poor and among all education levels. in the hmong run, courses of action we pursue are not only targeting terrorist groups, but the polarizing policies that often leave this societal division. this must include both genders for not only arms, but women who play a role in the stabilization and organization within society and isil as well as other groups. muslim women are growing up with closed environments and this will have an effect on future generations. the subject is of utmost concern to our own national security and i look forward to hearing each witness's perspectives on the timely issue. i yield back. >> this morning's hearing is on

the emerging threat of islamist foreign fighters in syria and iraq. in 2011, the syrian people rose up in revolt against their government. syria has been torn apart. it is in open civil war. the terrorist groups including al qaeda have taken full advantage of the chaos. as many as 15,000 foreign fighters have entered from around 80 different countries to take up arms in the fight.

they hold passports from european countries. many have joined isil, a heinous, brutal, anti-western terrorist organization. it has grown to contest in syria and iraq. in isil, we face a group that controls land and has proven the abilities on the battlefield. it is one of the richest groups in the world. a profit from criminal activity and ex-portion and black market oil sales and the easy capture or you might say gift of vast amounts of american military equipment that we had generously provided iraq. this is a mega million operation

on their part. it is a nightmare to think about the kind of attacks isil could pull off given financial resources and safe havens and access to so many recruits with western passports. the filmed beheading of james foley and david haynes tells us all that we need to know, that's all we need to know about the intentions of this terrorist organization. the terrorists are holding the knife. let us remember them in the besiding videos spoke with a british accent. that indicates the security challenge we face. we have begun to see the threat

of terrorism emanating from syria. this week a naturalized american citizen was indied for attempting to provide support to isil in new york state. dozens of people have been arrested just this week. and in the balkans to plots that aid isil and conduct terrorist attacks in the west. the word terrorist attacks in the west perhaps is a little too soft. maybe we should understand what a terrorist attack in the west means are the bodies of the brutal tearing apart of the bodies of women and children and people who want to live their lives and this group of other human beings for whatever reason they have will murder our fellow

citizens and people who live in the western countries perhaps as we will hear from the motive we are talking about here. perhaps out of the huge section of the globe. in may, a muslim terrorist who helped french citizenship and travelled to syria shot and killed four people. though the victims were honest and oerd marry people. it could be related to any of us. during our discussions, i helped learn about why isil's bloody message of hate and violence attracts far too many of european muslims. what are the viable options in this situation to prevent

terrorists from returning home? what attracts them and how can we prevent them from coming back to the home countries and conduct this murder in our societies? how can we better work with the allies? how can we work with the european allies to defend ourselves against this shared threat. i think we would do well to learn from europe's em immigration experience as we talk about reforming our own laws. it's a question of how different people can fit together in a free society. we have a lot to cover. so with that, i turn to my

ranking members. i yield to the judge. >> isis as you have said is a threat that we need to understand has to be reckoned with. i fear the west and the united states under estimates them. unlike the terrorist groups, they set up governance in northern iraq and syria. they tax the people and they govern the community. they have oil and money. they are determined fighters and as you said, they have a lot of american equipment already. the united states has flied equipment to the iraqis and tried to train them. that's isis and northern iraq. a lot of them believes they threw down small alarms and ammo and took off running. not so. here's an m 1 tank that the

iraqi government was given by the united states. confronted with isis, they bailed and now isis controls one tank belonging to the american citizen. here's the operate after at that pointering several humvees. at the bottom to me is the most alarming. these are four humvees, american made, given to the iraqi troops to fight isis and they were a band onned and this is on an isis truck headed to syria. i think we under estimate who these people are. they are coming back to launch attacks and they held the first trial of the german born jihadists. affiliated with isis at the jewish museum.

david cameron said there have been at least six planned terrorist attacks in isis. the australians have found out that come from countries and many of them are able to travel to the u.s. we have to work with them to track jihadists and this is a group to be reckoned with. they are a threat to all civilized peoples. they cannot be allowed to return home to continue their jihad. i have introduced hr 5406. this bill calls for u.s. passports who are fighters for any terrorist organization who are helping to support them in any way.

they are benedict arnolds and not welcome in the u.s. with that i yield back. >> witnesses, i appreciate you being here. this is an important topic. in drew of what's going on, radical groups are growing around the world. it would be wise for us to address this before it gets worse. we heard reports in this country of things happening. you have to think about the boston marathon bombing. this is unacceptable. in lieu of what's going on, we talked about isil coming over here and they said we were coming to america. we have to pay attention and not allow that to happen. i think they have to be dealt with. we need to do more here to

secure our borders. i would like to see inside from you. not just the southwest border, but all of them. in addition to the passports that have western passports and we introduced a bill that is a terrorist nationality act. that will strip citizenship away from people that have no one affiliation with terrorist groups or picked up arms against citizens or military. i look forward to hearing suggestions on what we can do to make the country safer and with that i yield back to you. >> thank you very much. we have two great witnesses and we plan to have a great discussion with you after your testimony. first is thomas jocelyn, a senior fellow with a foundation for defense and democracies and senior editor, of course.

a publication that tracks the issues. he is an expert on al qaeda and related groups around the world. he writes and contributes to the weekly standard and makes guest appearances on television and radio. he appeared before other foreign affairs committee hearings. we are pleased to welcome him to the subcommittee. also we have with us miss fe rar, she is the fisher family fellow at the kennedy school of government a pointed in 2009. that's the first ever special representative to the muslim communities by secretary of state clinton. she worked in that capacity to engage with muslim communities

around the world on behalf of the united states government. for her achievement, she was awarded the distinguished honor in 2013. in the u.s. agency with international development and european and euro asian affairs. she worked as the kbreej yonnal initiatives for the security council. i appreciate the witnesses and the first role here from how about we go with -- >> good morning and thank you for inviting me here today.

mr. chairman and members on europe, eurasia and the threats to europe. it is my honor and pleasure to be here for this important and timely hearing. i am a senior fellow at the kennedy school of government at harvard. my opinions in my written and verbal testimony are my own. i have come before you to talk about the threat of foreign fighters returning to europe and what the united states could and should be doing about it. as a political appointee in the george w. bush and obama administrations, i spent a decade working on the impact of extremist ideologies and millennials especially in europe. i saw the processes by which they prey on young muslims, tear apart and threaten stability worldwide. in january, i left government with the intention of writing a book to explain what i had seen and what we can do to win the war against extremism.

i firmly believe we can win. i'm a proud american. they serve with passion and determination to keep us from harm. i have been honored to work with and for them. i know the president our presidents have for all faiths. both administrations have stated that the heinous acts of terrorists do not represent the religion of islam. my interest is not kip tal. i served in the administration and left to go to law school and there i focused on national security and was awarded a great to travel during a delicate and unstable time. i began to understand the power of ideologies and i the impact on an older culture and a

heritage and way of life. i stayed after graduate school and felt i needed to serve after 9/11. they were trying to define my religion. i could not sit back and watch. for more than a decade since, i worked on the issue of extremist ideology impact on muslims. during my tenure, the cartoon crisis broke out. something that happened in copenhagen could have an effect on the life in kabul. they asked me to serve as a senior adviser to focus on seniors in europe and how they engaged with muslims. our country never had that position and ambassador freed understood that we reach out to

muslims in europe and analyzed the impact on them of extremist narratives. for two years, i traveled across europe and met with the muslim communities getting to know what wash communities and between generations chlt to push back, we had the ideologies posed by extremists. they were within muz him communities and by partnering with and supporting them, helped them to have greater influence among young muslims. several of these cve initiatives such as sisters against extremism continue to operate independent of the u.s. government. the most vital fact from thousands of conversations i had across europe was that luz mihm youth were having an identity

crisis and they were searching for answers. extremist narratives were filling the vacuum and governments were ill equipped to deal with it. a similar dynamic continues to unfold before our eyes and whatever more violent and crewsome implications. according to isil or others to persuade someone to join the army, they must be able to appeal to a young person. i top the make five points realitied to foreign fighters and their threat and what america could be doing to fight back. both men and women are at risk today. just yesterday we saw in a new report that an austrian teenage girl is now pregnant. the essence represents a change in the landscape. second, policy makers should be concerned not just with individual who is leave their home countries to fight in the

middle east or elsewhere, but the ideology that continues to spread among those left behind. third, european civilization does not construct national identities in a uniform way. as a resultry must be local and nuanced in the policy of approaches. fourth, we can win the ideological war. by investing in soft power. fifth, free borders in europe don't represent the whole story. free ideas bounce around online, keeping the cycle of hatred turning and free ideas that could feed a cycle of peace and respect for others. we have coordinated and dramatically change the patterns of discourse within the communities. with positive consequences for europe, the united states, and allies.

this is the greatest threat of our time. the generation is massive, global, and tij cally connected. it is time to address the threat head on and stop the recruitment from happening. if we behave smartly, proactively and creatively. thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you. >> thank you very much. that was very thoughtful testimony and i'm sure we will have serious questions for you. now to the next witness and senior fellow at the foundation. you may it's mr.? >> it's mr. thank you for having me here to talk about this issue. we have been tracking the issue of fighters going back to late 2011 and early 2012. it's stunning that we have more

foreign fighters in syria than afghanistan. that's really an incredible med rick when you think about it. this creates all sorts of challenges. we are right to be going to the west. most will be remaining in the fight and some of them will be disillusioned. for those, they can be partners of counter messaging. dispel the mythology that they are a grandiose quest and become our messengers in the west to tell people that going off to fit is not as great as they make it sound out to be. as the numbers increase, there two main problems.

you can have this act of violence where we don't know if he was under direction of of a senior terrorist or not, but it's a threat that you can have someone who is known as a psychopath going back to europe and you are identifying those who traveled throughout europe. as a risk, they were able to move around freely up until the day of terror. the second level of threat is more nuanced. if you think back to pre9/11 in afghanistan, between 10 and 20,000 recruits, what al qaeda was doing is they were trying to identify the most talented and dedicated recruits. that gave us the hamburg trial from germany and afghanistan. they were identified as being

committed and skilled and someone who can train up to the buildings. those recruits travelled to afghanistan wanted to go to chechnya. they were not recruited originally to fly planes in the u.s. as a talent level increases, the professional terrorists who i'm worried about are sifting through the pile. u.s. officials say that it doesn't pose a threat to the homeland. the consensus seems to be that they are not able to get the cash. i would challenge that. these threats evolve very, very quickly. they went from a regional national insurgency to a direct

threat within a matter of nine months. there is a lot we don't know. we didn't know that khalid shaikh mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11 was an al qaeda operative. it worries me what we don't know. because we don't think they have the ability to attack right now doesn't mean we won't be able to. i will say this. everybody is concerned about isil across two nation states. i have a slightly differently view. and the european officials are very worried about planning against us. they had an official branch of

al qaeda. they are coming from multiple directions. you have skilled operatives who were dispatched by the head of al qaeda to syria and they are carefully sorting through the pile to figure out who they can use. that's the near term concern. against the insurgency, they are very popular amongst the rebels. yesterday i think it was a vote with training the rebels. they are not isil. they are opposed to isil and assad. this is a complicated game we have to worry about. i don't hear a lot of

discussion. that doesn't mean i oppose it, but we have to be careful about how we do it. finally back to your point, there was a suicide bomber this year from up in america. he actually had one of those things that worries me. he managed to travel in florida. he was being indoctrinated. they decided not to try to use them against the west. you can bet they learned how he got in and out of the country and try to use that in the future. that's how they should think about that. thank you.

we have a chance to answer questions as well. >> thank you for your testimony. we are seeing the continuation of inception of the ideology. that's clear from both of your testimonies. i want to focus on a shared commitment from the administration to strengthen women's rights globally. women and their families in society such as iraq. part of that is flourishing within families. the chairman and myself held a hearing on the importance of women and battling violent extremism. and you mentioned in terms of violence. women are the first educators of

their children. they are in a unique position to spot signs of radicalization and extremism. they are in a position to deal with it. we have to empower women to recognize this and recognize the signs as to how to deal with this. can you comment on the sisters against violence and extremism and the effort to try to use women more effectively and mothers more effectively in the fight against extremism. park thank you very much for the question. i talked a lot about the ideology and where it stems and i don't need to explain how important family is. as a young person grows up, this question of identity confusion and asking questions, they are experiencing something that no other generation experienced.

in that context, i said the numbers are massive. 1/4 of the planet is muslim. 1.6 billion people. 62% is under 30. they have grown up looking at their life in a different way. everybody has an identity crisis. it doesn't matter what religion you are. something specific is happening to a generation that has grown up in the context of 9/11 asking questions that their parents and grandparents doesn't ask. the answer is that they always go to, they are not traditional necessarily. they very a lot of these questions for them. the reason why women are important is for two reasons. one as you said, the managers

are the child's first teachers. they are seeing things and beginning to see changes happening. if you are looking at the processes and you talk to the parents, they have seen signs and mothers talk about things they can seen. they influence the ecosystem in the home. very, very important. there is another piece of this. it's how you ease women to mobilize perspective globally and connect those things. that's where we look at models that work and are inspired by regular people. government is not saying something. in the bush administration, we look at mothers against drunk driving and said how do we build this? we began to think about what would happen if we build a network of like minded women.

and sitters against violent extremism is an incredible woman in via and gave her a grand to get this off the ground. it's an independent organization and has chapters all over the world. they moenlized and built to push back and talk about things and put the lessons she has learned on the table. that's one piece of the complexity with women and extremism. the other is what's happening. that's the other piece. >> i think that was my second question. >> okay. >> in my to the special communities, one of the most impressive things was not just minorities living in europe, but this was happening to the muslim

majority countries as well. from malaysia to argentina with luz limits matters to us it is being filled and that doesn't leave women out of the picture. these are connected with the their finger on their smart phones. what did i see as a special representative? i began to see a change in the way this generation of young women thought about themselves. you should to stop the stem of radicalization and understand what's happening in the home. the other point is we are beginning to see women getting radicalized. >> there was an irony here. this places them at anything but

the high end of power. you are seeing i till and the other groups use women not necessarily as soldiers, but you are seeing them used in the social networking and the average age is 25 years old. if you can continue, that was the second point i wanted to make. that age group is raising their children a success way. they are thinking about their in society. either you will be open and engaged or retreat and come back in. you are looking at points across the board. they are listening to how they see themselves. it doesn't take a lot of

imagination. and you think of what comes down the pike, it's scary. >> that's the point that even in the boston marathon bombing, it's clear i yield back. >> thank you for your questioning. that was for you. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for your testimony. i think you are right on. we are seeing this happening. you were saying most of the radicals don't come back. we go back to 9/11 and there were only 19 people and i think it was $500,000 and they were

able to change quickly. now that we have the organizations, what i have seen and correct me if i'm wrong, the escalation in the radical groups coalescing into a stronger force, well organized and well funded. they are on the black market. we are going to see more and more of that and in this meeting room here about six months ago, we had a group that was representing somalians that had come to the united states. minnesota is where they were from. i asked them why they came to minnesota. i was born in minnesota and it's a great state, but too cold for me. why would the somalians choose minnesota? they said for education and jobs. when i asked them what

percentage of the male population were employed, he said it was very low. high unemployment and what percentage graduated from high school. he said very low. i went into how many are practicing muslims and he said yes. do they follow the u.s. constitutional? he said we go with constitutional law and then i asked if they were assimilating and becoming americans and ad t adapting our ideologies. he said we are having a hard time with that. we are growing that type of thing we are seeing now. you brought out the concern from florida and becoming radical jihads. we have to have a way and this goes back to the bigger problem.

we all have to do it right to bring the people over here. going back to the isil threat, removing the passports from the people, one of the questions i have, if you remove the passports -- i lot of my train of thought here. how can the u.s. help them defend themselves from the threat of these returning foreign fighters. they have a western passport and they come back. i think they started to take the passports away. >> they have a number of restrictions they can put in place. >> with that, i will yield back.

these the uneducated people or lower classes and can't get jobs or are they like bin laden who are very well educated and not necessarily just the product of schools, but instead people who know the choices and made the choice and their religion is better than everybody else's? >> it cuts across the boundaries and it's not easy to typify. you look at the answer or the suicide hijack pilots on 9/11, highly educated and come from good families. bin laden came from a good family. you find this over and over again. it's the strength of the ideology that binds together any

socioeconomic factors. >> before we move on, that is it is vitally important that we do not lump in the category of terrorists otherwise we are doing what the terrorists want us to do which is create the western world and all muslims and thus expand the danger. we should reach out again and this is -- you were talking about the identity crisis. do you think this is a threat to have the overreach and push muslims into the camp and do you

see that again? >> do you think to look at the process, what's happening in the communities and what government and communities can do. how the strengths and weaknesses have played out over the course of 13 years. you asked who are these people. one of the things i was talking about is the nuanced approach to understand the distinction within we are talking about europe. which generation are we talking about? which are we talking about? how are they looking at the particular issues you are looking at. how governments are looking at the threat, there is a wide range of reactions to this

growing problem. when you are looking forward at the distant opportunities for recruitment, we have to start with the family and the communities and we have to make sure that the communities are getting information about what we learned about how it happened and we are looking deep at all of these issues and not separating the immediate. the world faced many challenges from murderous groups over the history of the planet. muslim extremism or perhaps i know a lot of them are likely even with the word islam associated with radicalism, but a lot of them are having trouble. we want to be respectful, but we can't help but notice the people who were murdering people are doing so in the name of their

faith. it pulls on them. obviously they are identifying the islamic faith as the motivator that is motivating them to do that. 50 years ago and 60 years ago, the world was threatened by these nazis who had no muslim connection at all who were basically from a christian country and japanese militarism which had their own -- you could identify the religion that they were part of that glorified

them. you could see the direct line. to be fair about it, i don't think that our greatest generation spent time trying to psycho analyze why people became nazis or why people of japan backed up their militarist wing. i think we want to understand these muslim people who are involved with the terrorist elements respecting that most are not that way, but the job now is not a long-term analyst, but would murder our families.

maybe they can respond to that. >> in terms of the threat, you nicely pointed out two ideological examples. our country took it seriously and we invested everything with both hard and soft power to defeat the threat. we have not done that now. >> i don't think that we put any effort into it until after we defeat and disarmed them. that's when we had an impact. we are in the batsds mode of this fight. maybe afterwards, we can -- that's why we have to support the efforts as best we can. and unite as a country against this. i happened to believe we all

agree that yes, our european friends are now going bear the brunt, but we are just the very next step away from there and our families are families are going to be at stake. mr. joscelyn. >> i don't think it's necessarily an either/or. i agree with you we need to defeat them militarily. i think the jihad ideology need successes to recruit so they need to be defeated ideologically. let's take a step back for a second. what's gone on here, i find as someone who studied bin laden very carefully, we still don't understand what they're all about. 9/11, these terrorist attack, they weren't an end in and of themselves. they were trying to spark a political muslim world. according to al qaeda's theory of the world, muslims no longer

were waging jihad like supposed to. and they needed to revive the jihadi spirit across the muslim world. this becomes very much an ideological battle. because if you look at what they're trying to do, ayman was a great student of the chinese game "go." where you convert pieces around the world and you redeploy them. that's a revolutionary thinking how to convert muslims to the cause which is what al qaeda has been about. they've had setbacks because violence has kid their fellow muslims. this is a strategic ability, isil, if you look at their body count, right now, it's a lot of muslims throughout syria and iraq and only a few westerners. you talk about beat heading videos of james foley and steven

soleloff, i can tell you i've watched videos of them getting killed. we need to figure out who the allies are. we have a lot of muslim allies. we have to identify them as such in this clear context. >> i think that is -- you made a really -- well, both of you made very good points today. the idea keeping in mind there have been more muslims murdered by the people that threaten us today. than have anglos or european-background people. although obviously, we are concerned about the safety of our families. that's -- and that's our job here, to ultimately be concerned about our families. hopefully, other fellow americans, and i hope that we challenge -- all of us challenge them, to step up and back them up. in their communities when they take a stand against these -- these type of extremists that

would murder their fellow human beings. i was shocked when several organizations that i read some flyers from them, suggesting from -- some of the muslim organizations in the united states were suggesting that their people not cooperate with the fbi. i know, mr. keating, i don't know if you've seen that or not. but i certainly saw a couple of handouts, indicating, i won't name the group because maybe it's unfair to that group. maybe that only reflected one or two people in the group who took advantage of the situation. but we've challenged our fellow americans who are muslims to join us and help us when win this battle. and because, as we're learning today, it is a -- what's happening in syria, is going to be a wave that hits us here in the united states.

and it's already beginning to be felt in europe. let me ask, mr. joscelyn about the shared threat that we have with our european allies. but do we not also share this threat, i mention this in my opening statement -- do we thought share this threat with russia? and should we not cooperate with russia? mr. keating and i actually went to moscow and met with their intelligence operatives. and got a briefing on those people who are involved with the bombing in boston marathon. >> well, i'll preface this by saying there are a lot of ways in which our interests with russia are not obviously of divergent interests across the board, i would say. but to your point, when you study who's in syria right now, the chechan jihadists in syria, these are not freedom fighters.

they're hostile to us. they're very much on either isil's side or al qaeda's side in syria. in fact, this hearing is happening because of isil's military gains on the ground and iraq and syria. one of top military commanders inñsyria is chechan. he's actually the one who gave them their military victories in eastern syria which is open up the pathway into iraq. so the chechan jihadists i would say skilled and often time tacticians in this fight. they are a throat russia. they are a threat to our interests. so in that sense there say common threat there. we were talk be the radicalization of women. the dhetsian black widows who have committed terrorist attacks in moscow. these are the women of the fallen jihadists who go on to become suicide bombers in their operations there. so there is that common bond in

that one sense in terms of the threats of chechen jihadists. >> would you like to add to that? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i also wanted to say, you made a very good point of having the liberty to push back against the ideology of extreme lifts. what you've seen in the last 13 years since 9/11 is the increase of voices pushing back coming back from the communities. you you're seeing network, you're seeing networks of former extremists about that built to push back. that needs to be ramped up. those are the voices that matter. those are the crennel voices. and to your point about russia and the black widow example that my colleague has just raised, to me that is a great illustration of, you know, the worst case scenario. what we oulgt to be looking at is not the tip of the iceberg, what is actually percolating, what is actually happening to get them there. and that's where we have to stand and cut the radicalization process. you don't have recruits, you will not have armies.

>> i can't -- to be fair, i cannot understand why a religious extremist group that would -- appears on its surface to be so anti- -- the freedom of women, and so oppressive in terms of saying that women have to wear a garment and hide themselves and look out of a little slit or can't drive cars, haven't can regular jobs, i do not -- i can't comprehend how there would be women joining the ranks of people like -- who held those beliefs, in order to try to create a society based on those standards. >> mr. chairman, there's lots of reasons why the women are joining the fight. and i know that there's not just one or two that are prominent. there are many. some of which include wanting -- some of them married. people who are there and want to be part of that ecosystem. someone who raised children so

they're creating the next army. some do it because they're ideological -- they're so invested in the ideology of building a so-called caliphate, that they want to be part of this and they want to live there. there are many reasons why. but they're sense of belonging in terms whereof they are, if you look at the teenage girls in austria who ran away from home to join chechen jihadis, this is an illustration of the kinds of things happening. how is it possible that two young girls who are in an open and free environment chose to do that. how did they get radicalized? what were they looking at online that moved them in that direction? and the last thing i'd say is, the other role that women are playing are the enticement role. so if you have someone on the other end of a youtube video or chat room that is eager to bring another woman aboard and in her

voice, bringing them in, it's very persuasive. >> we obviously face a major challenge, not just with democrats and republicans uniting, the face of foreign challenge, but also people of various religious faiths including the muslim community and christian community and jewish community here in the united states and elsewhere. we need to have some unity behind this to help save mankind from this senseless murder of innocent people. and when you talk about people being terrorists, their purpose is to terrorize. and that means to win the battle through terrorizing a population to letting them achieve their goal through that terror. we americans are not -- we americans are not going to be terrorized into giving up our rights and our freedom and our ability to be part of the world.

and i don't -- i think we need to stand with our european allies in this. and especially our allies in the muslim world, who are being killed and murdered at a much higher rate. closing statement from mr. keating, there are mr. yoho >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think what is interesting with this hearing, among many things is how we were dealing with how this radicalization curse. t occurs. the stemming of it, how it's nurtured. i think we don't put enough emphasis on it. we're going to have to. ke can't just do it here in the u.s. we have to do it in europe. and we have to do it certainly through the mideast. i look at the examples of what they're doing and how sophisticated they are doing things. they're actually making great efforts, whether it's isil or other radicalized groups associated with al qaeda. they're destroying muslim history in many senses.

not just orally. but actually, through the destruction of artifacts. and the destruction of antiquities, and they're profiting from the sale of those, to help fuel their cause, but in the process, they're destroying -- they're creating a new narrative of their own that is not historical. is not traditional. it's not religious. so we touched on that, as we go forward, i think that's something we should put greater emphasis on. and i want to thank our two witnesses for touching on those thing today in their testimony. >> thank you, mr. keating. and mr. yoho. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you both, as we were talking about and i'm sure you've read the book by samuel huntington, "the clash of two civilizati

civilizations." how much of the growth come from the west ideals and freedoms versus the western foreign fellows are they connected in your opinion? >> i'll say the ideology is deeply anti-western. and a lot of times they view our foreign policy through a very conspiratorial lens which doesn't reflect reality. next on the conflict in the 1990s, osama bin laden was able to rationalize the critique of foreign policy because we didn't deliver arms quick enough. it's really my view of being anti-western than foreign policy. >> miss -- is it pandith, right? the girls were they -- >> austria. >> i misspoke. i believe they were born there, i can double-check for you and get back to that point. >> what i see, the lone wolf

starting to develop that this country like al mohammed brown who had supposedly murdered four american men in the name of jihad against the west. and we just don't want to see that over here, so i look forward to dealing with you in the future. >> my pleasure. >> to help design policies that will prevent this. thank you both, have a great weekend. >> i want to thank the witnes s witnesseses. thank my fellow colleagues. the american people need to know that we are taking this very seriously. and that there is a threat that say merging threat with this battle of raging in syria, it will impact on our society and our safety. we've got to pay attention to it. what the people in europe are now beginning to experience, those people coming back from this conflict. we will experience as well, the

wave will hit us. and it's -- what we do about it we have to use our heads but we have to be courageous, and again, we need to make sure that all americans, including muslim americans, are recruited in this effort. so i want to thank the witnesses. and this hearing is adjourned.

attorney general eric holder is resigning. he's been attorney general since the start of president barack obama's first term. holder is the first black attorney general and the fourth longest person to hold the job. he plans to remain at the justice department until his successor is in place. some reaction to the resignation, pat leahy says under his leadership, the department has had remarkable success in convicting terrorists

and disrupting threats to national security while upholding the department's mission of keeping our communities safe. house government reform committee chair darrell issa said, by need lls injects politics into law enforcement our system has erodes. and bob goodlatte says, i welcome the news that eric holder will step down as attorney general. mr. holder has consistently played partisan politics with many of the important issues facing the justice department. what's your reaction to the resignation of attorney general holder? you can join the conversation at facebook.com slash c-span and on twitter. >> this weekend on the c-span networks, friday night, valueses voter summit. ted cruz and kentucky senator rand paul. and saturday night at 8:00 p.m.

eastern, a national town hall on the critical and historic impact of voting. and sunday evening at 8:00 on q & a, "washington post" columnist sally quinn. friday night on c-span2 just before 10:00, daniel green and william mullen talk about their experiences in iraq, isis and the use of force. and saturday, after words, market richtle. and sunday, 178. eastern, brooklyn book festival. friday at 8:00, american history tv on c-span3, former presidents and advisers talk about the relationship with the commander in chief and how he makes important decisions. and 159d night, 10:00 p.m. eastern, jonathan white on the role of the union army. sunday afternoon, 8:00 p.m.,

author annette dunlap explores the evolution of first ladies' fashion. let us know about the programs you're watching. call 202-626-3400. e-mailing us at commen comments @c-span.org. joins conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. iowa republican governor terry branstad and his democratic challenger jack hatch took part in a debate in burlington, iowa, saturday. cook political report has this race as likely republican. this is just under an hour. good evening, and welcome to burlington iowa, i'm with kwqc, tonight marks the second in the debate, we're happy to bring it to you with our partners burlington hawkeye newspaper and the greater burlington

partnership. for the next hour, republican governor terry branstad and jack hatch, his democratic challenger, will answer questions from our panelists. danielle mccarthy and the managing editor of the hawkeye, dale alison. we'll be getting questions from you, our viewers and readers, and twitter and facebook live. use the #iowagovernordebate. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome our candidates republican governor terry branstad and democratic state senator jack hatch. [ applause ] the overall theme, if you will, tonight is on the economy, from jobs to job creation to infrastructure. our first topic will be on jobs.

in this, we will talk about job creation, tax incentive like those used to build the fertilizer plant that's being built right now not far from here and minimum wage. but we begin with jobs. job creation and sustainment is always a big political promise and point of contention among candidates running for office. danielle mccarthy begins our discussion on jobs specifically with a question for senator hatch. >> senator hatch, 4.4% iowa's unemployment rate is even lower than the national average. what can you do to make iowa's jobs climate even better and we'll get to the governor's record on jobs in a moment but we want to hear about your plan first. >> absolutely. we're very fortunate in this state as in every state to have a recovery after a devastating 2008, 2009 recession. and every state is increasing their employment record. we're glad that iowa's had the most jobs it's ever had before

but so do all the other states in this country. unemployment is going low. and that's as well an accomplishment for all of us. but what we need in the next governor must lead iowa to the next generation of jobs. ìáhp &hc% economic opportunity. we have to do something different. build the economy from the community up. not from the top down. my plan is to have an economic development authority, not one to cover the whole regionally, four of them so each district will be able to match the state's priorities with national priorities funded by our congress pearns, and also the local communities who have spent so much time and effort like davintin and burlington. who knows jobs best? the local authorities, the city

councils, they know where the jobs are. they know what they have to do to get those jobs to become a reality in their community. state government is going to be able to provide refreshing new dollars. instead of one agency getting it, these disburse to four economic development authorities with their own board of directors appointed by the government and sit for three years. they will create the opportunities and identify the match between our state investment and the local priorities. >> senator, thank you. governor branstad, 45 seconds for rebuttal. >> well, first of all, obviously, my opponents doesn't know what's going none illinois because they have the second highest unemployment in the nation. while iowa's unemployment rate has dropped by nearly 30%. and here in southeast iowa by nearly 40%. illinois is mired in debt and has the second highest unemployment in the nation. i'm really proud that we've created over 150,000 jobs in the last 3 years and 8 months.

we've gone from the highest unemployment in 25 years to having a record number of people employed. that didn't happen by accident. we've got a great economic development authority that partners with the locals. the fertilizer plant happened because the people in leed county partnered with the state and made that possible. i'm proud that we see those great jobs in iowa. >> and we'll be talking more about the fertilizer plant in just a moment. do you care to rebut for 30 seconds. >> yes, it's important for us to understand these numbers. the governor talks about the 150,000 new jobs he's created. but you know, even a fifth grader knows you have to subtract what you've lost. over 80,000 jobs were lost in the economy giving a net gain of 75,000 or 80,000. that's how we identify jobs. in the private sector, we know that government can't create jobs. businesses do. and we know that governors don't create small businesses. entrepreneurs do. we're going to create a base of

enfratrepreneurs in the state t will meet the demands and needs in the community. >> thank you, is that right. we'll try to keep as close as we can. i'll give a reminder as to the length of the time it's hard to keep track of from back here but we'll do our best. the second question on the subject of jobs, dave. >> yes, governor, i want to go a little more into detail about your 2010 creating 200,000 jobs in five years and increasing iowans' personal income by 25%. the governor has accused you of cooking the books on this. can you tell us where we are now, and now you're talking about those promises? >> people think where we were, the unemployment rate in southeast iowa was the highest

in the entire state. and we had an unemployment rate in iowa well over 6%. we've reduced that by over 30% state wide, nearly 40% here. i was just last week down at the fertilizer plant. there are 1900 construction jobs there. they're going to add another 400. the permanent jobs are now going to be 240. but there's also another industry right here in burlington, shear foods is going to be investing $35 million and adding 80 some jobs. so we're work every day to bring more good jobs to the state of iowa. i'm proud of the fact we work in partnership with the local governments and with the local economic development people and the economic development authority debbie durham has done a good job. i think it would be a big mistake to divide the state in four regions. you wouldn't have as much resources when you have a great opportunity like this. i'm really proud of what we have

accomplished but we're not done. we're going to continue to focus on how to prepare the workforce. the lieutenant governor and i hear from business all the time. we have good job, and we can't find people with the right skills. that's where skilled iowa and investments in engineering and math for our students prepare them for our jobs. i'm proud of the fact that today, the unemployment tax rate is iowa is going down again in january for the fourth year in a row. this also makes iowa more competitive for business and jobs. in missouri, they're still in debt to the federal government in the unemployment tax fund. >> governor, thank you. senator, 45 seconds. >> thank you. it is clear that the top down approach that governor branstad has been following where des moines picks winners and loser is the wrong approach to use when recovering from a recession. our proposal is from the community up. our proposal is to ensure that local communities, stakeholders, city council, boards of

supervisors have a chance to identify and empower their communities to get engaged and to value their own dollars and to be able to have an opportunity to leverage local dollars with state dollars. i think it's wrong to be able to say it's only going to be des moines that's going to make those decisions. that's the wrong direction. we're going to have a direction of going from the community up. >> now, let's move to the big topic that the both of you have alluded to regarding tax incentives. we know that ax incentives are used more and more for job creation and jegenerating reven. the plant being built here, some saying the $100 million in tax breaks used to land this deal and to build a plant was too much. for the first question here regarding tax incentives for the

governor. dale allison, whose staff has done a considerable job of reporting on this subject. >> governor, with regard to the negotiations to land the plant, property owners in the immediate vicinity aren't quite -- don't share your enthusiasm with it. negotiations were done out of the purview of the general public. not only was property negotiated but a payment in lieu of taxing and other considerations including water rights. once the deal was announced iowa fertilizer upped it's demand for water from 480 million gallons annually, to 3.3 billion gallons. how is this good public policy for everyday working iowans, how do you address the charge that this deal was crammed down the residents of weaver? >> well, first of all, it was negotiated by the people of leed county, the elected world of

supervisors. and they provide incentives but the thing you have to remember is the net result is the school district and lee county is going to get net plus of $2.9 million every year. and the state of iowa is also going to gain revenue. if it were not located here, we wouldn't get those additional tax revenues. and we wouldn't have the 1900 construction jobs, the 400 more that are going to be added. nor would we have the permanent jobs. nor would farmers benefit from the $740 million reduction in nitrogen fertilizer cost. that is very significant because that is the biggest cost of raising corn today is nitrogen. and the biggest cost is all the transportation costs to bring it overseas to this corn-producing area in the midwest. so this was a good deal.

in fact, the sight selection magazine read by economic developers around the world said this was the second best economic development deal in the entire world last year. we're very proud of it. and the ceo of the company recently said they're just getting warpe ewarmed up. when they complete this, they're looking at expanding it. there were ten fertilizer plants being looked at in this country, two of them are in iowa. and we're proud they're being built here where the corn is produced. >> senator hatch, 45 second. >> thank you, let me be clear, i'm in favor of fertilizer plants that will help expand the cultural base and the jobs it's created. what i'm critical of is the deal that the governor negotiated. it was a reckless deal. it was a bad deal. it was a terrible deal. but he was able to engage $110 million of state money to create 165 jobs.

that is actual to 700,000 -- $700,000 per job. let me give you a balance. governor in the manufacturing plant gave money to build wind blades that equals $7,000 per job, $7,000 per job, $700,000 per job -- there's an imbalance. that's what we're up against. that was a bad deal. that is what is causing the problems. just think, just imagine, what this area could do if we were able to balance those two businesses and allow us to spread the investment from the state to more businesses into more areas than just lee county. >> governor, 30 seconds. >> well you can't be against the incentives and for the jobs. without the incentives we wouldn't have gotten the job. debbie durham is a very skilled

negotiator. for 15 years she did a great june up in sioux city. that's why i asked her to be the head of the economic development authority. she worked with the local people here and actually it looks like this is going to continue to grow beyond what was initially planned. and the net revenue gain. we didn't write out a check, we're getting a credit against taxes in future years. frankly, the state is going to gain the school district and lee county gain substantially. this was a great deal. >> we will continue on the subject for the next two questions. danielle, a question for senator hatch. >> senator hatch, if you're elected, what's your plan to make sure any business that does receive a state tax incentive is held accountable for job creation, contributing to the overall economy? and also, you can also explain how you have used tax inscientii

in your own private situations? >> absolutely. this is another good area, an example, in which governor branstad did not use any of those three guidance or principles for negotiating a deal. the citizens of iowa want to know what's going on. you've got to be open. you've got to be transparent. and that's how you ken sure that negotiations with a company will be honored in the deal. forestcom is already changing the deal. it's going to hurt our economy, our local folks, our water, and the entire ability of us to share other tax credits. now, the governor has been very critical of my business. and the des moines register spent over six weeks investigating his claims with a conflict of interest and now i'm spending so much state money and not getting anything back in return. that's really kind of

disturbing. my wife and i, sonya roberts, opened up our entire business. no privately held company would allow this to happen. but the outrageous claims by the governor that we were doing something wrong prompted us to do that. and what did they find? that we followed the rules. there was no conflict of interest. and k.c. also had a fact check just on thursday night. what did they find? that the governor's claims of our misuse of tax credits was false. that we did things right, that we're an appropriate company and we're a good company. it's strange that a republican governor would be blaming a businessman for having a good business. that's just wrong. >> senator, thank you. governor, 45 seconds. >> well, i trust the people of iowa and i've disclosed 25 years of my taxes. and if he wants to disprove our claim that he has gained substantially and made millions

of dollars at the taxpayers' expense i would challenge senator hatch to release four more years of his taxes. he's only done one, i've done 24. i'm willing to do another four of the previous four, before i came back as governor, if he's willing to do that. i believe that we need to be open and transparent. and i'm telling you, we have been. the people in lead county know that. and we have worked with them and we're very proud of the fact that the state partnered with leed county to bring this great partnership here and good zwrubs southeast iowa. >> senator, 45 seconds here. >> i think what's important to understand in my business with my wife, that we did our tax credits in areas that no other developer would go in. we built affordable housing. and on august 21st, the des moines register wrote an editorial that said our use of tax credits was appropriate. the governor's use of

negotiating orris which is one of the largest egyptian companies in that nation was questionable. so we're providing a public good by providing housing for low-income iowans. he's providing additional profit for one of the most profitable corporations in the world. >> now, we move on to the social media question of the night. johnny writes since the governor brags about the deal of bringing the fertilizer plant to iowa which was a good thing, i'm quoting here, increasing the workforce and putting people to work, how many of those jobs actually went to iowans. most of those who are working around the building say they're outof town contractors bringing their out-of-town workforce with them. >> first of all you it's brought a lot of jobs to the area, many of them have been filled by iowans. and there are others as well. but it's been also great for the

economy here in burlington, ft. madison, the entire area. i'm proud of the fact that we have that. we also this year passed legislation for more opportunity for people to learn while they earn, apprenticeships. and we're working because there's a need for more people in the construction industry. we lost job it's in construction industry, during the premium administration, during the recession. we're now rebuilding that. and we have a great opportunity. we tripled the funding, the state funding for apprenticeships. that way, people don't have to go into debt. they can learn while they earn. i'm proud to say we work with building of construction trades. and we've worked with the contractors and we've got that legislation approved this year. and it's now in the process of being implemented and helping train more people for those jobs in the construction industry like those at the fertilizer plant and others being created

all across the state of iowa. remember, there's jobs up in ft. dodge, there's ones in woodbury county, osage, this isn't the only project but this is the biggest and one of the best. >> as a follow-up to that question, were they're not enough skilled iowans to do these jobs? >> no, there weren't enough. that's why we need apprenticeships to train for jobs. you can talk to the trade people, they'll tell you we desperately need more people with skills to train for those jobs, those are good careers, and we want to have more of them in iowa. >> senator hatch, 45 seconds. >> thank you. we're talking about the possibility over the next four to six years of an economic opportunity explosion in jobs. but we won't do it if we're going to put all of our eggs in the basket of large corporations

and large projects. then you will have an inability to attract workers to do the job in construction. what we're going to focus on is small business. on small business, i want to return to tom vilsack's southeast vision. when he brought in siemens, when he brought in anheuser-busch. when he widened highway 34 and he created and developed the avenue of the saints. that's going to create opportunities in southeast iowa and all over the state. by our ability to focus on develops job opportunities for small businesses in the state. >> let's move on to the topic of minimum wage. danielle has a question for senator hatch. >> senator hatch in your scom n campaign, you talk about growing small business and increasing the minimum wage. many of the small business owners say they're worried about how an increase in the minimum wage would affect their business.

how can you be in favor of both? >> well, you know, a good question, but you're assuming that all small businesses pay below the minimum wage which is wrong. right now 216,000 iowans that get less than the $10.10 that we are proposing. that's not high wage. that allows an individual working 40 hours a week, works by the rules, works hard, works every day to just get above the level of poverty. no iowan should be able to work 40 hours and not get the wages necessary to lift their lives above the level of poverty. that's my value. and that's what i believe in so much, that we had no problem recommending that wage of the minimum wage. and it will lift 216,000 i want wants, possibly 20% of them, off of general assistance. small businesses are not the type of businesses that pay

cheap. small businesses, like my wife and i, paid very well. and they're all over the state. we can't be afraid of that kind of wage. and we know that from other types of proposals, and when we raise the minimum wage before in which the governor signed, there was no outcry from the small businesses that they were losing jobs and losing opportunities. just the opposite. people got that money. they spent it in their communities. they were able to get off of general welfare. and they were not -- they were no longer part of that anti-poverty program. >> governor, 45 seconds. >> well, if the minimum wage was so important, why, when the minimum wage bill was assigned to the committee that senator hatch was on was it killed by the democrats who control that committee? they didn't even bring the bill out of committee. so it shouldn't -- it couldn't have been that big of a priority. as governor, i reserve judgment

until i see where a bill ends up. it's got to pass the house and senate in the same form. in this case, the minimum wage bill did not even -- was not even approved by the democratic-controlled senate let alone the republican house. my focus is trying to bring good jobs, iowans, and to help people get the skills so they can have a living wage and be able to support themselves and their families. we work at that every day. we're focusing on workforce development and economic development and coordinating it. >> senator hatch, if that is the case with the blockage of the legislature, how do we fix this? >> well, you know, harry truman said republicans believe in the minimum wage, as minimum as possible. so when we saw that bill come through, senator courtney, your senator here, was the chair of that subcommittee. there were negotiations all year and during the executive session

whether or not the house would pick it up. the house said no. we went to the governor's office, can you help us governor, dislodge the disagreements in your own caucus? no, he wouldn't. that's not leadership. they had no intention. so the majority leadership said, you know what, is this a political year, we're not going to put our members in the way of being criticized in a political year and then have workers who are trying to lift themselves out of poverty become the political ping-pong ball during the election process. we were very sensitive about that, we could have caused it without a problem. in fact, it was stopped by the republicans and by the governor. >> governor, we'll continue that with this from social media. i worked 45 hours a week in construction with three kids and a wife. we still live paycheck to paycheck. is that right and is there any way that will change?

>> that's the reason we're bringing these jobs at the iowa fertilizer plant pays very well. from the state of iowa, companies like case and g.e. here in burlington provide good wages. companies like cargill and c.j., and the to the dodge area, iowa-homegrown businesses have all been growing and expanding while i've been governor. we're work every day to try to do that. we also want to make sure that people have the skills for those jobs. that's why we started with the help of bill knapp, the skilled iowa program, by the lieutenant governor has led the efforts for s.t.e.m., science, technology, engineering and math. the jobs of the future require science technology, engineering and math, and we want to make sure the workforce of the future

of iowa has those skills. i'm going to continue to work on that every day. i have recently proposed a center for human capital enrichment which would coordinate what we're doing in economic development with our workforce development, so that we have the workforce with the skills for those jobs that can raise those incomes and better provide for their families. and for the economic well-being of our state. >> governor, thank you. senator hatch, in the 45 seconds we have remaining in the first half hour, your reaction to that. >> the governor said he would like to replicate what he's done with orriscon. i'm sorry we can't do that often. and the fact is we need to be able to use what our friend said in his question, as an opportunity to understand that every middle class iowa family is working paycheck to paycheck. they're being taxed too much.

and we may talk about this later but we have proposed a middle class tax cut where every family under $220,000 will get a tax cut. we understand that if you have to live paycheck to paycheck, the state has the responsibility to invest in our communities and our small businesses. not the big undeserving corporations like we have. >> and we will continue regarding taxes, property taxes, income tax, accountability and leadership. much more still to come in the gubernatorial debate. we continue our conversation now with the focus on accountability and leadership. throughout the campaigns we have seen on television and on our various airwaves, radio and newspaper as well. senator hatch has accused the branstad administration of being scandal-ridden with no higher risk illegal buy outs. now is our chance to discuss

this matter in particular. we begin with dale who has a question for senator hatch. >> senator, iowans clearly, like their governor, they keep re-electing him time after time by wider and wider margins. yet, instead of telling i wants how you might leaf tve the stat are you saying that iowans don't get it? >> what i'm saying iowans need to listen. to the problems that this governor has had over the past four years. it is the most scandal-ridden administration history of the state. and beginning with the iowa force development offices that he closed, that the iowa supreme court said was unconstitutional. it was then the iowa juvenile home that he closed, and the district court said, governor, that's unconstitutional. then it was the settlement and

political changes of merit employees. 990 of them were moved over to political positions including the administrative law judge, meaning they no longer had qualifications and could be fired for any reason. under the direction of the governor's office. and then you had the secret settlements to fire employees who had been there forever and hush money to keep them quiet. and the blacklist, do not hires, now a class action suit against the governor of people's names that should not have been on there. firing of top aides. and the gci agency who reported the governor for doing 100 on i-90. he was fired for reporting that. and then when godfried, sued the governor for defamation of character. that is not leadership.

that's not something that iowa wants. that's not something that iowa values have. it should be looked at and there are investigations of the senate and the corresponds to look at how governor branstad has been managing the state. >> governor branstad, 45 seconds. >> well, iowans know me. they know i go every county every year. i have a press conference every week. they know i'm honest, i'm straightforward, i'm transparent. i've released all of my taxes. they know these attacks are false. they are not correct, and the people of iowa know that. and i trust the people of iowa. i have nothing to hide. i'm very proud of the fact when we found out about confidentiality agreements, i signed an executive order to prevent them in the future. senator hatch and his friends in the senate killed that bill which would have made it available to the public to know what's in those personnel records and why people have either been dismissed or not hired. i want honest, open, clean

government. i'm committed and the house passed that by an overwhelming bipartisan margin. the senator and his friends killed it. >> 30 seconds, senator. >> sure. the fact is iowans don't know what's going on. and if you look at his ads that are attacking me, you'd think that i'm the one that's under investigation in the state house. that's not the case. govern governor's ads are false. don't take my word for us des moines register and series of articles understood that i had done nothing wrong and they said i followed the rules. kcrg did a fact check, again, they said nothing is right in his advertisements. that his advertisements were all false, ladies and gentlemen, and governor, i'd like to ask that you take the key from one of your political heroes, ronald reagan. who said, and i keep it to you, you stop lying about me, and i'll stop telling the truth

about you. [ applause ] >> and as an opportunity to also answer that if you choose. government social media question, twitter, why postpone deposition if charges are true? wouldn't you want that information out there? >> first of all, this lawsuit has been filed three years ago. it's been delayed by the plaintiffs many times. we're in the midst of a campaign. i have a very busy schedule. and we have agreed upon the date for the deposition. like i said, we've got nothing to hide -- first of all, i treat everybody with respect and dignity. i don't make these outlandish attacks. everything that's in our ad has been documented. it is true that he killed the bill that would have reduced the fees for the kind of tax credits that he gets. it is also true that he's made millions of dollars off of tax credits. he may complain about the tax

credits that have had good jobs in southeast iowa but he has no complaints about that. nor will he release the tax returns to show the people of iowa how much money he made and what kind of tax breaks he got. >> senator hatch, let's talk about this because this is a lot of information for the voters to go through. one side having one big issue, another bringing up other issues. let's talk about whether the politics in play regarding some of the lawsuits against the governor right now. and some of of the accusations you face. >> sure. fact is, i'm only repeating -- not accusations -- but lawsuits, investigations. even the state auditor said that the governor had mishandled the investigation of the secret settlements. that there were more secret settlements even after the governor and his staff said there weren't. if you're going to be a leader, you need to be a governor who's

going to be open and transparent. and it's just unacceptable that the governor stands in front of us and says that he's open and transparent and he has nothing to hide when that's all they've been doing is hiding. and not just an attack of a candidate. but the accusations come from legitimate sources of the legislature. the state auditor's office, from the courts and from individuals who have taken the time to sue him personally and his office. these are not the actions of a governor who can lead. >> governor, would you care for 30 seconds. >> well, this is iowa, not illinois. most of the former governors in illinois are in prison. i'm back in office because the people of iowa trust me, they know me, they know i'm honest. [ applause ] and i have been totally open and transparent. and i have a press conference every week. and i take the tough questions from the press.

and anybody can file a lawsuit, but i can tell you, we worked with the auditor. there was one agreement that was agreed upon before i signed the executive order and was signed later. and when it was discovered that was the case, it was changed. they eliminated the confidentiality clause in that. that has been enforced. i will continue to enforce it. but we wanted to extend it to local government it's and to the legislature and the house passed with an overwhelming bipartisan vote. and my opponents and his friends in the senate killed it because they don't want the public to know the truth about what's in those confidential files on employee personnel. i think the people of iowa deserve to know that. because it's their tax money that's paying it. >> and as i give you 30 seconds on this because i think is this such an important issue i will remind our audience please do not applaud until the end of the

debate so we can continue to move forward. senator hatch. >> gary and the audience, it's important for everybody to understand that these accusations can go back and forth. it's not something we've made up. the governor has spent millions of dollars attacking me on tv on accusations that are not true. and he's expanding his search to find something more. i'm very proud of my company with my wife. we've spent a lot of time being successful. and the fact is, we did not kill a bill that would lower the amount that developers could receive. in actuality, if you read "the des moines register" story, governor, you would see what they said is that my developer fee was actually less than 10%. it was 9.2%. and that bill had no support with anybody else. and it wasn't dead. it wasn't taken up. this is the kind of leadership you'd expect from a governor of

illinois, not the governor of iowa. >> this also a subject matter that can be intertwined with the following questions. so let's move to property taxes now. for a question for governor branstad from dale. >> sure. governor, last week, we published a story looking at property tax reform and how it looks to be working against smaller low growth communities. in fact,a1,g in the story, the e was accused of institutionalizing devaluation. apartment complexes for example had been taxed at 100% of their value on their way to being taxed like residential rates. retail and industrial properties are also headed lower. somebody must pay for the cost of government. if taxes are being lowered for the upper values, the burden must fall on someone. do you know how this is going to shake out? do you know -- how this will work out for slow-growth communities like burlington

which are kind of more the rule rather than the exception? and how can you assure ordinary iowans that they won't be asked to shoulder an even bigger burden? >> well, thank you for asking that question because this has been a problem that has faced the state of iowa for 30 years. multiple residential properties should have never been taxed as commercial. and that is being corrected. that was actually something that senate democrats wanted. i wanted to provide permanent tax relief for commercial and industrial property. and the agreement we reached between the house, the senate and the governor does all of that. and by getting the state's financial house in order, putting together a five-year projected budget. and the state providing the money to replace the commercial and industrial property tax is going to provide tax relief, to businesses, small and large, across the state of iowa, in communities of all sizes. it will especially help

slow-growth communities and rural communities because the property tax credit is significant. it also benefits for economic development, commercial development, in our state as well. and the state is providing the money to replace the local property taxes. and i insisted that we put that money in a standing appropriation so that the legislature couldn't renege on that commitment. >> senator hatch, 45 seconds. >> well, the commercial industrial property tax that has passed as the governor said with his insistence did nothing for residential property tax receivers. and his priority was to reduce corporate taxes, not residential. if it wasn't for the senate democrats who he has so openly criticized now that provision of allowing commercial property tax for small businesses in property

depressed areas would never have seen the light of day. so we came to a conclusion. i think there's going to be issues in the future about how the state will be able to fund all of those property tax release, but it didn't help the middle class. it did not help the residential property tax owners and it certainly gave a boon to the out-of-state tax leaders taking money out of this state. >> governor, would you care to respond. >> i would point out that this was passed with bipartisan support in both houses of the iowa legislature. it was long overdue. our commercial property taxes were the third highest behind minute minute and illinois. we don't want to be there, this is going to make a difference and it's going to be the most significant property tax cut in iowa history. and it's going to be phased in over a period of time. and we street sources to do it. and i've protected it because

we've cut the size and cost of government so we can afford to fund the education, leadership bill that we passed and property tax relief. >> senator hatch, you'll probably get a chance to respond to that next question from danie regarding property taxes still. >> senator hatch, your campaign website said your proposed income tax would cost the state an estimated $300 million a year over the next couple of years. now at a time when we need to fund our schools and infrastructure needs, vital and immediate investment, why would that be the best use of that money? >> the best use of that money, for middle class iowans, you're right. it's the best use for that money. iowans in the middle class working every day, 40 hours, 50 hours a week need a break. middle class iowans need that kind of help. we are the sixth-highest state with dual income families.

we are a low-wage state. and we are a state that values children. so in our property tax relief, we identified -- families that had dual incomes, and we gave them a thousand dollar tax credit. because we value the productivity of this state. and we also value the children. as i think governor branstad and anyone with say, they need our protection. we gave them a $40 tax credit. they're valued more than that. under my proposal, it's a $500 tax credit. it provides us with a very strong middle class tax cut that will help the people that need it the most. not these corporations. people need that. >> go ahead -- >> to answer your question on the budget, it is a priority. the budget is a priority. someone once said, you could

tell me all you want about your values, but show me your budget. then i'll tell you what your values are. this would be a high priority of our administration. >> do you believe that the legislature would pass such a plan and why? >> well, i think the legislature will engage in this discussion. i can't guarantee anything, but i know that the democratic caucus in the house and senate believe very proudly and very clearly that middle classes have got to get a break. that middle class iowans can't be left out in the cold. they were under the governor's commercial property tax relief. that's the largest property tax relief in history. but it wasn't for the residential taxpayers, it was for the corporate taxpayers. i want to give residential, middle america, the middle class equal to the tax break he gave to the corporations of the state. >> thank you, senator. governor, your response.

>> first of all, eliminating federal deductibility will raise taxes for low income people too. if your income varies from year to year, you won't be able to deduct your federal taxes. the property tax relief isn't just corporations. it's to all commercial and industrial property, including all the main street businesses in burlington and fort madison all over iowa. and people have gotten those tax bills. and they see there's real, significant tax relief for individual iowans who own commercial property. i have heard from them. thank you, we have got some real tax relief. and i'm proud that we did that. and that's going to continue next year. and we to want to continue in the future. if you spend that money on another program, then we won't be able to do that, and the education money that's committed also for teacher leadership. >> 30 seconds, senator.

>> being a governor -- governor manes that you set priorities and that you lead. the governor just said, he wanted to provide the commercial property -- commercial and industrial property tax relief for commercial businesses in the state. i want to provide property tax relief and a middle class tax consult for the residents of this state. for the citizens of this state. for the every day iowans of this state that need a tax cut. my priorities will always be with the middle class. corporations, which we are one, we're good at what we do. we'll figure out a way and we'll be able to continue to provide the jobs that are necessary. but i want middle class iowa to get the support they need. >> with just under ten minutes remaining our debate, let's squeeze another category in if we can regarding gas tax infrastructure, roads, bridges. the question is for the governor

from dale. >> okay. time's going by quickly. governor -- >> time flies when you're having fun, right? >> you're a pay as you go guy. but the state needs money to improve its infrastructure. your administer of the department of transportation says there's not enough money to maintain the network that we have. local coalitions have lobbied you for some time to widen u.s. 61 between burlington and muscatine county. and that's going to be a project even more important with all the truck traffic coming from the fertilizer plant. lawmakers told us in january that there was support for an increase in the gas tax if you would have indicated your support. but without such an indication, nobody was prepared to propose a tax that might get vetoed. during the state fair debate, you said you were working on a transportation funding plan, but were not prepared to reveal it.

why not? why the wait? >> well, first of all, paul trebino put together options and i have been discussing that with legislat legislators, to go to a hybrid system to replace the gas tax partially with an excise tax on fuel. like you have with the sales tax. and also increase fees for heavier loads that go across the state of iowa. i would also complement paul, with the flood in 2011 on the missouri river, he was able to put together a strategy to rebuild all of those roads even though we only had 60 days to do it. we got the federal funds reimbursement to pay for all of that. and we have the two biggest road-buildingd7sejuááhr' histor he's reduced administrative costs by $50 million. i'm working with him, and a bipartisan group of legislators,

as we did back in 1988. and we got a majority of both house and senate, republicans and democrats to agree to do this. and i will lead, but i want to make sure we have a majority of both parties, both caucuses supporting it. >> senator, 30 seconds please. >> you can't lead with legislate irs unless you have a proposal. i've offered a proposal for over two years. 10 cent gas tax, 2 cents a year for the next two years. highway 61-needs four lanes, but highway up in fort dodge to sioux city, there are areas there that need four lanes. and the bridges in this state. we're the second-worst state in bridge repair in the country. we can not have a repair of our county roads and state roads if we don't have revenue. jackson county said they are just now reducing the tonnage of

44 bridges in jackson county from 10 tons to 3. you can get a van with children on that 3-ton bridge, but not an emergency vehicle, you can't get ambulances, you can't get the fire trucks, the farm implements and the combines and trucks that need to pass and provide commerce for our farmers. this is a crisis. and for the governor not to recognize it, to have a task force that he doesn't listen to, waiting for the special interest to nod to him, saying you can do it now, is not the leadership we want. >> senator, thank you -- >> the leader to take the lead. >> it is time to get to the closing statements. the order is determined by the coin flip. senator hatch, you are first. >> thank you. gary, i thank you very much. and for kwqc to be a sponsor, the burlington chamber of commerce and the hawkeye. this is a great opportunity and i commend the two panelists and

yourself for providing us with this opportunity. i also want to acknowledge my life, sonia roberts, and my running mate, monica vernon's in the audience. and a shoutout to my daughter in anchora anchorage, alaska, a weekend anchor. i'm as proud of her as i'm sure your parents are of you. but being governor means we have to lead our state into a new area of economic explosion. i want to return iowa to the tom vilsack iowa where we focused not only on agriculture and insurance, but diversified the economy to finance, information technology and advanced manufacturing. an iowa where we are not picking winners and losers, but create regional authorities where we can rely on local leaders and direct the state's resources to match the priorities of our local and our county leaders.

to do this, we need to reorganize an economic development effort into four regions equal to the congressional districts, establish regional boards of directors and provide leadership locally. and i will announce tonight that my running mate, monica, will take the lead. she's a leader in her community. the local business leaders know what they need. and we'll rely on their advice. we need a community up economic development proposal, not a top down. we need local people picking what they want to invest in, not winners and losers from a board in des moines. thank you very much. >> governor branstad. >> first of all, thank the greater burlington partnership, kwqc, and all of you in the