i want to remind you of another quote from wayne gretzky. he said that you can never score if you do not shoot. the goal is in front of us and it is time for americans to shoot the pot. thank you for your leadership on energy and thank you for building a better america. [applause] >> thank you secretary for those remarks. he is really a very true friend of the building trades and he demonstrates that to us every day. the building trades look forward to many years of close collaboration with you, dr. chu. brothers and sisters, that

concludes today's session. please take a look at the workshop schedule for this afternoon. you'll have the opportunity to get in-depth information about many of the issues that we heard about this morning. the 2010 legislative conference is now in recess until 9:00 a.m. sharp tomorrow. thank you. >> the arizona: assigned an immigration bill that was criticized hours earlier by president obama as misguided. if there is reason to suspect that someone is in the country

illegally, they can be questioned. senator john mccain, who is facing a primary challenge this year has threatened to filibuster any legislation that does not secure borders first. tonight, a debate between the three democratic candidates for arkansas' senate seat. live coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. after that, a debate between the five republican candidates for indiana's senate seat. candidates include john hostetler and others. but tv is live this weekend from

the l.a. times festival box. -- a festival of books. coverage starts saturday and sunday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. all the authors and panel discussions all weekend on c- span2. get the whole schedule at booktv.org. >> we have to get this right because if we do not, we could stifle innovation and we could stifle our economy and we could cause more harm than good. >> as the senate moves closer to a vote, a tightening regulations on wall street, see everything unfold at the c-span video library. every program since 1987 is now online. >> this year's c-span

studentcam competition ask students to send in a 5 minute video. here is one of the second place winners. >> i feel that the competition is not the strength of the nation. we come from many different backgrounds and we are male and female and black and white. unlike every other nation on earth, we are more than a tribe. >> in many ways, it is the right to speak your mind, freely. the right to free speech and the right to petition is so much a part of america that it is hard to imagine not having these rights.

our concept of these rights change from time to time and new challenges are always on the horizon. >> the first amendment is essential to our american way of life. it guarantees freedoms. it -- many people feel that freedom of speech is more than just the strength of a nation. >> i think that the constitution is our nation. i think it is what we are all about. >> i think that the constitution forms a fundamental framework for providing freedoms in terms of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press and also a really solid framework for how to go about changing our government. >> the first amendment

guarantees five basic rights, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press and others. >> we are granted the freedom to speak and publish our ideas and we are guaranteed equal access to speech venues such as parks and if you have extracurricular clubs, you have certain rights. we not only have the right to speak, but we have the right to access forums where we might be able to access other speech. >> newspapers, magazines and even blogs rely on freedom of speech. c-span relies totally on the

first amendment in order to operate. without these rights, c-span could not even be in existence. we often exercise our rights and some people feel that we take them for granted. >> it is hard for us to imagine what society would have been like without this. on the other hand, it is one of those things that when it is challenged, americans feel strongly about it and they get very angry. they do not take it for granted at all. they really treasure it as a core of their national values. >> the first amendment is one of those remarkable things in american history. it has been around since the

birth of the constitution. generations have have the first amendment and enjoy what it provides. if you walked out on the street and you pull out a pad of paper, i would challenge you to jot down 5 members and reset the 5 -- 5 members and worries site 5 -- and recited the five freedoms. >> the first amendment is the strength of our country, but some people think we face difficulties because of it. >> there is always a risk when you take -- when you give people that much freedom. i think it is a risk worth taking.

you open up the government to criticism. politicians do not always like that. there are times when the freedoms that we have may slow down the machinery a little bit in terms of getting anything substantive done. but in the end, i think that that is ok. we have to make sure that the people are involved in the conversation. we open ourselves up to criticism, but i think that is a critical part of social change. >> it is a balancing act. freedom has risks because being free means that people will engage in a speech that we do not like. >> what is it important to know

about these rights? >> it is good for anybody to know their rights. you are not able to do this without knowing what is allowed. >> i think that the bill of rights has a certain sacred quality. it defines who we want to the. i think it is really important to understand the bill of rights. >> it is interesting to hear your comment about thinking of an america without the first amendment. >> it is clear that freedom of speech is part of our nation. it leads us to innovation and new concepts and can access through an information and media.

finally, it frees us to do whatever we want to do. >> to see all the winning entries, visit studentcam.org. >> today, arizona gov. jim brewer signed legislation. up next, a senate hearing on efforts to police the u.s.- mexico border. we will hear about the virtual program that uses detection technology to catch illegal immigrants. this hearing last about an hour. but i think everybody for being here. this is the third hearing our committee has held in the wake of the stunning increase in violence caused by the mexican drug cartels. in fact by coincidence it was a year ago today our committee

held each field hearing in arizona with some of the same witnesses who are on the second panel. iowa regret to say in the year that has passed the situation has continued to deteriorate. since 2006, more than 22,700 people have been murdered in mexico by marco terrorist in the ongoing war between the cartel's and the government to get that number comes from the mexican government study. it is a multiple 22,700 of the number of americans killed in the war in iraq and afghanistan since 2001. the murders unfortunately have been steadily escalating. 9,645 in 2009, an increase of 50 per cent over the already unprecedented level in 2008 and three times the 200837 killed in

2007 mexican president felipe called verdone's first year in office. these statistics are of grave and a great concern to the united states has the hard to mexico. and it's strong and courageous president. i admire his unwavering commitment to rid his country of the plague of marco tener was on. in the past year the mexican government has arrested or killed literally scores of leading cartel figures including arturo known as the boss of bosses in december. but as cartel leaders are taken out, the violence seems to increase as they spike among themselves for the remaining pieces of marcos' trade. the obvious fact is we've got to do everything in our power to

support the southern neighbors than the historic battle they are currently waging against the cartels, and we've got to be vigilant on the american side of the border because there are deeply troubling signs that the cartel's and other smuggling groups are becoming more willing to bring their violence across the border and inflicted on american citizens. in the past month alone as you know, three separate incidents have drawn our attention, concern and anger. pregnant u.s. consulate employee, her husband and mexican husband of another consulate employees were gunned down in juarez as they left a children's party. he was consul at was attacked with an eye eda coming in improvised explosive device. there's a term we normally hear

used with regard to the terrorist attacks against us on our allies and iraq and afghanistan. and of course a well-known and much respected and beloved of rancher in arizona was murdered on his own property. all of this follows the murder of an off-duty border patrol agent last year so the bottom line before the committee today is what can the federal, state and local governments do to gather to control violence in mexico on the border between the u.s. and mexico and violence and other illegal behavior that will flow over the border into the country? it brings me briefly to a highlight focus of this hearing which is our effort to use technology to control the border. when the virtual fence or sdi net project was first launched, we are told that it would be

extended across our entire southwest border buy nearly 2,000 miles by early fiscal year 2009. well, is now of course april april 2010, almost four years after this sdi net began and $770 million has been spent directly and we are still waiting on the testing of the first 23-mile stretch of sdi net which is in the tucson sector. that's it. by any measure, sb donner net has been a failure. a classic example of a program grossly oversold and badly under delivered. win es benign net first started u.s. customs and border protection seem to have effectively told them away and do what you can do as quickly as you can without goals and

expectations the the underestimated the complexity of building the system i believe and the border patrol agents themselves, the people who would be relaunching on and implementing the system every day were not in my opinion adequately consulted on with their actable needs were. i am also troubled the program office responsible for spi net is heavily dependent on contractors weakening as the cdp's organics capability to manage the program and ensure capability bigot and of course the structure of the sdi net contract with single contractors means cbp does not get the benefits of competition for individual tasks undertaken for the sdi net program. from the beginning of this benign at cbp reports to congress requested to find that mystical point where the parallel lines finally meet.

it's always just over the horizon that you never actually get their. we've got to get there. our communities that visited the tucson sector over the recess and once again the word we are almost there. i don't think the committee members will believe we are almost there until we are there and we can see so with our own eyes. i'm pleased secateurs napolitano border blanka over an internal review of the sdi net program which will consider its long-term viability in determining whether there are technological alternatives to providing better border control. i welcome cbp commissioner alan bersin today. it's unfortunate to comes along to get into office is not accountable for any of the deily that i just described and but now has the responsibility of course and i look forward to his testimony and questioning that will follow. we are also honored to have a second panel of witnesses from

arizona to bring our committee firsthand from the local perspective on this crisis which is a homeland security crisis. i am honored to be joined as ranking member today by senator john mccain of arizona. he has an obvious interest in this crisis because it is so disproportionately affecting the people of arizona. he has been a persistent advocate for a border security and urgent action to deal with the violence pouring of the border into the u.s. and i'm proud to call him now for an opening set. >> thank you, mr. chairman and again, thank you for holding this hearing. you and your ranking member susan collins this is an important hearing. as you mentioned was exactly one year rego today that we have a hearing in phoenix and was at that time we called for the dispatch 3,000 national guard

troops to the border and unfortunately and as our witnesses will testify we are seeing increasing in violence the situation is not improved we are seeing serious spillover violence that affect americans living near the border. mr. chairman, i have a couple of three articles of like included in the record. one of them is entitled the corridor drug trafficking victimized residence that destroy the environment along the southern arizona mexico border. the border area home invasion is forced residents to take action, chico and the monkey how many times will a border collie o.d. and his accomplished captured and released by law enforcement would you believe 35, these are all very interesting articles that i put hope all of my colleagues would take the time to read so they could understand how serious and uncontrolled the

border situation is. as you mentioned just last month americans were killed on the mexican side of the border, a third generation arizona rancher was found dead on his property and the mexico border reportedly shot by a when you enter the country legally. interesting last week it was reported in the la times that more than 22,000 deaths in mexico and the past three years have occurred in mexico as a result of the drug violence with the cartel's. 22,000 mexican citizens and the violence is increasing and in feeding the everyday life and peace of mind of our citizens in the border region. some believe they're listening wall was land where there is little or no consequence for the violence violation of their land property and well-being. the president's most recent budget unfortunately seeks to

cut 181 border patrol agents inexplicable. inexplicable. this comes after the border patrol agents already declined from 2,009 to fiscal year 2010. los all of the premises known today the border patrol tucson sector accounts for almost 50% of all illegal immigrant apprehensions' across the country specifically in fiscal year 29 the border patrol in the tucson sector apprehended two injured 41,453 and officials to read the size of the population of reno nevada. and we will hear from our witnesses who are not apprehended some say three times, some say five times. but that number is astonishing. the tucson border accounts for 50% of all of the marijuana procedures in the nation.

in fiscal year to doesn't mind the border patrol seized more than 1.3 million pounds of marijuana in the tucson sector alone. the first time in the border patrol sector had ever seized more than 1 million pounds of marijuana in one fiscal year. additionally 90% of the cocaine used in the united states comes from mexico and much of it smuggled through through the highway. it's these reasons and fiscal year 2000 negative 73% are all the district of the criminal filings involve either immigration or drug charges. as you know, mr. chairman, yesterday senator connolly and i released a ten-point border security action plan that calls for 3,000 national guard troops to be sent to patrol the terrorism and the mexico border, 3,000 additional border patrol agents through the border, 24 now read a surveillance by creditor unmanned aerial vehicles construction of a fence

that truly towards the entries among other issues. i hope the hearing today will highlight the outstanding work that our state and local officials are performing to provide for the safety of americans despite the inability of the federal government to secure the southwest border from the flow of drugs, money laundering and illegal immigration. we will hear from our second panel, the major from arizona and the sheriff larry dever who deals with fees' on a day-to-day basis including our u.s. attorney who has increased the number of prosecutions i am happy to say. finally, mr. chairman, on the sdi and that it is a disgraceful failure. at least $800 million so far has been wasted. think of how that money could have been spent to try to improve our border security. there's been a lack of oversight

and lack of accountability and by most reports that this virtual cents which is already consumed hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money has been complete failure. i will look forward to hearing from honorable allan bersin along with border security issues and again, thank you for holding this hearing. >> thank you, senator mccain. commissioner bersin i'm glad to welcome you for your first appearances you assumed the responsibilities of this critically important office and we look forward to working with you as the oversight committee for the department of homeland security and we invite your testimony at this time. >> thank you, mr. sherman could -- good morning. senator pryor, senator burris, i appreciate this opportunity to return to testify before the senate i had many years earlier

years of the 1990's and which i watched the border from my home and a place i worked in san diego and as i've come back during the past year by a understand we face many of the same problems but we have more opportunities because of the resources and the support that about congress and particularly this committee has provided customs and border protection. i take the range that the cbp with honor and pride and by understand i am accountable to the people and to this committee. the committee indicated that it was to hear from me on three subjects the status of border security efforts, and that is our number one priority to protect the american people and border communities from violence to assure public safety and assure security on the border. secondly, the committee wishes to hear about the status of efforts in support of the government in mexico as the chairman noted there has been a

historic reversal in terms of president paul -- calderone's efforts and i will be happy to report on the cdp, dhs and other elements of the was the front provided to president calderone. the third is to review the three of the action of the border security to go back over with the original theory was with regard to personnel and infrastructure and technology with specific reference to sdi net, its current status and future prospects. a year ago actively beginning in the last quarter of 2008 the american people became aware of something that it has started with the power of president calderon in 2006. we discovered and a hit the front pages the kind of violence that is not escalated to the

point where senator mccain and the chairman noted more than 20,000, an estimated 22,000 mexicans have died as the cartel takes on and as the mexican government for the first time in its history takes on mexican organized crime. in march 2000 by secretary napolitano, no stranger to the border, announced the southwest border initiative that had three basic goals. one was to see the violence that was occurring in mexico would not spillover into the same form and same frequency as seem devastating impact and that it was having in northern mexico. the second was to reduce the movement of contraband and illegal crossings across all border on the southwest. and third was to support mexico in its campaign to crack down on cartels for technical assistance to intelligence sharing and to support on either side of the

border the operations that were taking place south of the border. significant resources were deployed at the border in terms of personnel, in terms of technology, non-intrusive inspection technology and x-ray machines, in terms of intelligence analysts and in terms of redirected stone garden funds. the chairman, mr. mccain, noted support and partnership with our state's local with aaa partners as absolutely essential in the federal strategy on border security. the result of the southwest border initiative resolve significant increases in illegal crossings that while this is attributable in some material part of the economy and recession that we've experienced within the north american and worldwide it also reflected heightened enforcement posture by the increased border patrol agents that fought the total level of agent strength to 20,000 border patrol agents to

come an increase of 100% since 2004. and increase i should say of 7.5 to eight times what it was my last work at the border patrol in the 1990's. the statistics with regard to seizures of contraband and narcotics are set forth in the written testimony and i will leave the staff and the senate to refer to that estimate for the specific statistics. with regard to the violence situation, we have two reports. one that is cautious in its one that is cautious in its optimism recognition that vigilance is required and a second of that is not optimistic that reflects the kind of tragedy we saw in the killing of the rancher and arizona. the kind of violence that we have seen in mexico from the shu doubts in the plaza, the 200

days death toll in juarez that have been converted that city into the most dangerous city in the western hemisphere we have not seen that kind of violence in the united states in terms of massive impact. we are geared to prevent that and detour the impact from coming across our border. that is not to say, senators, that we have not seen significant and disturbing trend is of increased violence attributable to organized crime activity based in mexico. we have and we do not and we take free seriously. the murder of rancher was the most recent incident in which an american citizen on our side of the border was the victim of organized criminal violence based in mexico. secateurs napolitano to production in responding to that

murder. additional border patrol agents deployed in the douglas station area of the tucson sector was no immediate dispatch of air and marine and to help track suspected murderous and we have reason to believe they moved into mexico the investigation continues. not only with the sheriff in the cochise county but also federal and state investigators and we are working with mexican colleagues and secretary of knowledge, wanted me to ensure this committee that she is committed to seeing that this murder is apprehended and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. we also see and it is disturbing the killing of american citizens and people connected to the consulate in juarez. the committee asks whether that

or the use of an ied, an explosive device against the consulate in florida represents a change in the cartel's approach to targeting or challenging u.s. law enforcement and u.s. personnel abroad. senator, that increase continues and we take that threat seriously and would constitute a change in the way the cartels have operated with respect to u.s. law enforcement officials or u.s. officials stationed abroad. last, in terms of the relationship with mexico, i can tell you from having returned to the border that indeed the future is not what it used to be with regard to mexico. whereas the border used to be a place for u.s. law enforcement stopped and where sovereignty is still respected the fact of the matter is cooperative relationships with mexico are at

a level and depth that we've never seen before. of this stems from president calderon's recognition of the extent to which organized crime has changed mexican politics and society but also results from the recognition by president obama and secretary napolitano and colleagues in the cabinet that we share a code responsibility with the situation on the u.s.-mexico border. but in fact the cycle of drugs coming north and guns and cash and south are part of one organized vicious cycle of crime and criminality that we have a joint responsibility to confront. and i am pleased to report to you, mr. chairman and senators will, we have confronted in cooperative ways not seen before. let me give you three examples. when is the extent to which we

at cbp focus on southbound movement of cash and guns. we've created an outbound division and field operations office. we've dedicated the resources. we've instituted the checks that look not only at people and things, cargo and goods coming north, but people and things going south. the result of that in concert with immigration customs enforcement has been at unprecedented levels of seizure of both cash and also of weapons. we've also seen for the first time in the history of u.s.-mexican border the dispatch and the deployment of the police in mexico in the area to coordinate with the u.s. border patrol. this creation of a communication north and south of the border colts out great promise and indicates something that would have been unthinkable even five years ago.

at last on the prosecution can't, we see our prosecutors mr. bruck will be able to describe this with specificity cooperating with the pt or the mexican prosecution force to share prosecution's authorities or responsibilities to see to it that lawbreakers are punished whether in american courts or now certain cases mexican ports. last, with regard to the personnel the infrastructure and technology we have increased customs and border protection to where we are now. we've 20,000 border patrol agents and 24,000 field offices. we also have build the infrastructure congress asked us to do with regard to the fencing across the u.s.-mexican border on the advice of border patrol in the professionals who live and work their we have met and all material respects the obligations placed on the

department of homeland security with regard to the fence. last mr. chairman the senators with regard to the sdi net as you know secretary napolitano came into our office because of her experience as the governor of arizona she understood the promise of the virtual fence with brown's fell to san diego had not delivered and wasn't anywhere near being able to deliver. as a result as you know she ordered a midterm assessment and ordered some immediate steps with regard to the funds under the american recovery and reinvestment act to be had with the secretary order and has taken place was a reallocation of funds under to see to it that we would not continue to spend on the block one technology but rather to use those funds to purchase and deploy technology at the border but it had been

trusted and tried by a were border patrol agents and field officers and that has been done with regard to the $50 million i will be pleased to answer the committee's questions with regard to the specific allegations among the variety of devices that have been long used on the u.s.-mexican border and have proven their value. the secretary also started a science based assessment that is under way that will look at sector by sector across the u.s.-mexican border what mix of technology will best serve agents on the ground and communities of the border and i would say that while the news regarding the the wholesale integration at the border while the level has proven to be beyond the capacity of the contractors and capacity of cdp to date there are elements in the block one technology that we would urge this country and its

staff to work with us to see whether eight actually functions in a way that can be integrated with a placement and deployment of technology across the border so that in fact sdi net technology if not the sdi net system as originally envisioned but actually have a place as we move forward. mr. chairman, thank you for the opportunity to look forward to responding to yours and the committee's questions. >> thanks for a much, commissioner bersin. we will have time for each of the senators on this round. let me begin my questioning, commissioner, at the end and when you for the benefit of those in the room and those who may be watching or listening to contrast to things you said the are of interest to the committee. the first is in your estimation and you are fairly new at cbp,

the government, the federal government has met its obligations, met all of its obligations he said with regard to the defense and along the border. contrast that if you will with what everyone including yourself i gather views as the failure of the sdi net virtual fence system. >> mr. chairman, the infrastructure, the offense is an element of infrastructure. but we did beginning back in the clinton administration with regard to the old landing and then carried forward in the resources provided by congress as the fence of approximately 700 miles just about 670 miles to be more precise was built, very much more governed by differential and terrain and circumstances and the fury was

to provide the border patrol agents with an opportunity depending on the different terrain to be about to respond to incursions'. >> what area is that generally? >> it's been effective with regard to the different kind fencing that has been done support siggerud the points of entry you will see pedestrian fences, 15 or greater that what will keep people from scaling the fence and moving into a town or city which they can then planted to the population and escapes from apprehension. out in the middle of the desert different kind of infrastructures are required largely to prevent the movement of vehicles across the flat terrain. i think what we've seen as a successful and implementation of the differential of location of infrastructure. >> a contrast with the cspi net, that was intended as a backup or to cover the whole border in a kind of virtual cents? >> it is a system that was to

give a combination of video and through the radar and ability to detect incursions' on the screen and to identify the kind of incursions', the kind of person, the kind of car, the number of people, and the technology also happened to mention and in fact one while the assessment is still going on it has shown some promise in being able to do precisely that. what has not worked is the total integration of technology from each of the areas along the border into an overall system that would permit a central monitoring and control. the technology integration at the very broadest level has been the complete failure the committee described. >> that is a helpful clarification. so now let me ask you this. i presume you wouldn't say the combination of fencing and virtual sense of spi net

whatever parts that are working are stopping the flow of illegal immigrants from mexico to the united states today. >> no, it's not sealed the border such that there is no evil movement. specs there continues to be a movement in and out as it were. about me ask this to you have any relevant statistics, this is a hard thing to do i know because of all of the vagaries of making judgments like this since we are talking about is essentially on the is legal behavior. as the mcginn terms of the number success because the number of portnow? there has been some feeling that maybe has gone down because the economy is worse here. >> the statistics set forth mr. chairman and the testimony indicated in fiscal year 2009 we saw and encountered at the points of entry 224,000

municipal aliens at the port of entry and we apprehended more than 556,000 between the points of entry. approximately in total 580,000 illegal or attempted illegal crossings. in fiscal year to date we've seen 113,000 aliens of the points of entry and 245,000 at the -- between the points of entry somewhat greater but basically the same level. .. did i infer that you think as a

total system, it will never go in effect and the best we can do is take pieces of a technology and use them well? >> that is one of the options on the table. large-scale technology integration -- i was out speaking to employees in the office of information technology today. i remembered that the first trial i had in federal court in the 1970's was about the baltimore traffic control system in which there was an integration of the technology in the traffic lights in the city of baltimore. the expectation is you could move based on traffic flow, you could direct the cars in the city. it was a horrible integration failure. that would be a piece of cake today. erratically, at some point, you couldn't have that kind of sophisticated technological integration of that fbi not originally project date.

a racial or the secretary concludes a maker through based on the price that we've received is that the wholesale education is not a goal that is part echo weather would produce the kind of project results that we would want to see. >> okay, let me ask you a final question, which is, in some sense you get a response, but i want to clarify for myself anyway. whether the murders that the council, whether the killing of rancher mr. krantz, whether other attacks on u.s. citizens indicate a change in tack ticks by the mexican drug cartels, which are generally in the past avoided direct attacks on the united states. a judge that the use of the improvised device, which is essentially a bomb. anything energy-saving you are

not sure. should we worry that both cbp personnel, american citizens and others on the side of the border will be -- and american interests and location and mexico will be subject to more violent attacks by the drug cartels? >> mr. chairman, the answer to the second question, should we be concerned? absolutely, and we need to take the possibility very seriously. at the same time, in response to the first question, we're not sure if we continue to investigate. so for example, while operating a premise might be that mr. krantz had been killed by someone connected with the smuggling outfit. we have yet to the investigation continues to establish that in fact. their hypotheses and certainly we need to take seriously the threat that the incident to

reference to war is versus the radio represent a change in policy. we have not seen the killing of an american law enforcement person in mexico since that of an reiko, reyna in the ninth teds. i hesitate to throw the same conclusion anecdotal, but we need to investigate that because the situation in mexico interned for where the violence is coming from, the streaking is coupled with the cartels wars that are going on, make it clear. but we need to take the possibility and the threat very seriously and we do. >> i trust our cooperative relationship with basic and government authorities and law investment include sharing of intelligence so one of the resources we would have in determining whether the cartels had taken a turn and decided no to target americans on either side of the border. would we learn that from a cooperative relationship.

tonight that's correct, mr. chairman. the information sharing is at a level that we've never experienced before. at the same time, given the weaknesses and mexican law enforcement security apparatus, they understand this as we do, it's very much in a trust verify basis. i suggest the committee may wish a more confidential setting to receive a briefing on exactly what we do know and don't yet know about that threat. >> thank you. thanks, commissioner. senator mccain. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. bersin, i think he can provide you with information with that leash circumstance late in evidence why is it shows there was this murder of rob cramp was done by someone who had entered this country illegally and very likely has to do with drug trafficking. haven't reached a total conclusion, but certainly there

are signs that sheriff deaver will inform us. do you believe that violence has increased or decreased on our border in the last year? >> with regard to the so-called spillover from mexico, the mass violence, we have not seen that. we're prepared for it and we understand the risk, but we have this phenomenally, senator mccain -- >> them in direct you right there. sheriff said to another law enforcement people will tell you there's been significant change in the behavior of the chair traffickers and that is that they're prone to violence. they're prone to trying to cause action in some freeway so they can get away. they have become much more aggressive. their weaponry and sophistication of it and types of it has dramatically increased. would you agree with all that? >> i do agree with all that and that doesn't gainsay the fact way of war is, the most

dangerous city in the western hemisphere next to el paso, which is one of the safest cities in america. that does not deny that everything mailed all-league and law enforcement sherritt dever said. we have a significant violent death caused by organized crime based in mexico. yes, sir. >> would not argue for increased enforcement on the border? >> as a dozen and we've seen subtly increased enforcement, senator mccain. actually, the budget proposal is a reduction in border patrol. sir, respectfully with regard to this year compared to next year, the border patrol, the level of border patrol agents will remain level without a loss in border patrol force. >> so violence is increasing on the border patrol members remain level? >> the use of -- this is not just about border patrol agents along. it's about infrastructure, technology, tactical operations,

cooperate with law enforcement locally in state and across border. >> and infrastructure that was plan on providing us with surveillance all across the u.s.-mexico border is now turned out to be in the assessment of the gao an abysmal failure. so that's why senator kyl and i an agreement with everyone present agency in the state of arizona have done what secretary napolitano asked for when she was governor of the state of arizona to send the national guard to the border until we are sure that we have some kind of control over the border. look, if you've got 241,000 people apprehended, just in the two sunset there of arizona, if you have intercepted a 1.3 million pounds of marijuana and you can cite the statistics

as to how much is apprehended and how many are apprehended and how much gets away, does that not indicate that our border is not under control? >> senator mccain, the threats that we face and not areas are taken seriously. we have deployed oath in march of 09 and are preparing to deploy additional resources to the border. i think -- >> and those resources are? >> the threat is appreciated. the national guard is one option that's under consideration i suspect that the secretary and the will be making that decision in the future. >> well, you just said you're deploying additional resources to the border. what are they? >> was deployed, for example, in response to the murder of mr. krantz, removed agents into the immediate area. >> i'm temporary basis.

>> in a deployed basis until the threat level is present an acceptable place. >> i don't see how, frankly, a situation where 241,000 people are apprehended, just in one sec here, and the two sunset there, and a 1.3 million pounds of marijuana are intercepted, that it doesn't argue for stronger measures to be taken. in the short term, do what secretary napolitano asked for when she was governor of arizona, and that is to get the card to the border. either way, i've often cited the goldwater ranges as an example where the marines and border patrol got together because we have a huge problem with illegal coming across and having to shut down mission over the goldwater

ranges. and now it's worked. it was with commercial, off-the-shelf capabilities. so let me get what you just a second about fences. in san diego, as you are very well aware, there's been construction of triple fences and the climb has gone done a great deal in san diego, is that correct? >> that's correct at the crossings in a particular portion of the sector had decreased a medically. yes, sir. >> does not order for double and triple fences and urban areas? >> in the places of infrastructure has always depended, senator mccain, on the professionals on the ground making their recommendations. or as you note in the novalis port of entry you have significant fences and other places in el paso you will have duplicate fences. this is always about a professional judgments about how best to direct the traffic and

to manage the flow. so i think as the secretary has implemented the intent of congress, it's been strictly done on the advice of our border patrol agents and other professionals on the ground. >> well, i do want to get into much detail, but obviously the yuma sector of our border has improved significantly unawares the two sunset or has not. maybe there's a little bit too much autonomy they are and not enough attention to lessons learned. i see that my time has expired, but i just want to say, ministers bersin, i wish you luck in your position. this is an issue of utmost seriousness. sheriff said to amount of shares in arizona will tell you that there has been a sea change in the last couple years and the behavior of the drug and human

smugglers they are more violent come a more provocative, they fight back, they have little or no disregard for the people that are doing the human trafficking and carrying the drugs. they are now using ultralights to bring drugs across their border. we need to uavs that would be airborne 24 hours a day, rather than just during working hours. and people, the citizens of our state are seeing their fundamental rights violated here their property being cost, their wildlife refugees being destroyed. and all of this has been ratcheted up over the last couple of years to a point where we are in a real conflict and there's very little doubt that the cartels are becoming more brutal, more effect kids and better armed and better equipped. and so, it cries out for action

and it seems to me in the short term but that isn't sending the card to the border, which was effective in the past when it was done. it would be the first time. and second of all, it would implement a package of us are along the lines of what senator kyl and i have recommended, which includes interoperability of communications with the local and federal authorities up to and including streamlined -- operations streamlined, which has been effect did in reducing the motivation and numbers of people crossing the border if they know they're going to be incarcerated for a period of time. and i just throw one more number i.q. that is alarming and that is that our law enforcement will tell you that 17% of the people

that they apprehend today illegally crossing our border have committed crimes previously in the united states of america. that alone is enough to concern us as far as the safety and security of our citizens. by thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you thomas under mccain. senator burris. >> your response to that diatribe? [laughter] >> senator mccain as someone who was lived and worked on the border for more than a quarter-century. i appreciate your sense of urgency and i have lived and worked to combat it for many years and i look forward to your supporting the support of this committee to continue to do so ever more effectively. >> thank you. senator burris. >> thank you, mr. chairman. commissioner, i would like to congratulate you and welcome you aboard. i recently had the opportunity to travel to the southwest border and get a close-up look

at the work of dhs and its component agencies are doing down there. we've been fighting a tough battle in a grateful for the men and women who are working to protect our borders and i want to take my hat off to them and not the american people know that that is not an easy provision to be in great having visited there, seen it firsthand. commissioner, i am deeply concerned about fbi not. i am trying to get a clear understanding of your testimony, that you say that it is an overall combination of the various protections, but i want to know who authorized, they're probably no longer there, authorize this particular contract. and by the way, my people are here and i'm not going to start for interior the people in my

state. i don't want bowling or any other country taking advantage of the taxpayer dollars. if they spent all of this money and they haven't got a system that worked, i want to know why your wii continuing to do it? my notes say that we spent over $1.2 billion on a system that is not working. can you clarify some of that for me, commissioner? >> senator burris, not that this is good news, but the number of the expenditures slightly over 700 million. >> it's not a billion to? >> that's the only good news is that is not a billion two. the problem is the original conception has not been delivered upon the requirement that had been set for that not been met with regard to an integrated system. and secretary napolitano having recognized that has taken the steps that i described votes in

the written testimony and briefly in response to the chairman's question to both redeployed 50 million that have been added to the spi that coffers if you will to other technologies including thermal imaging devices and mobile surveillance systems that actually have demonstrated utility. what the secretary is also ordered and is in the process the dean accomplished is an assessment of what are the next steps with regard to spi nights. i suggest i think there'll be an assessment of the one portion on the border in tucson, where the system has been placed here at >> hardly commissioner, this is supposed to cover it over 700 miles. we did 23 and are a geo has only earned another 20 miles and we spent $700 million -- are we

planning on trying to use those on the other 600 plus miles that we have to go? >> will be the conclusion reached after the assessment the secretary has directed good >> why did we make the investment up front? anything but wayne is still working. don't you have competition than it is a contract year. we would talk to any competition to see if some other company could even do this better and cheaper wire we locked into boheing so deeply in this process? >> the contractual management of both matters that offer big lessons and i hate to appeal myself with the chairman's past or temporary past. i was not present in the creation of this, but i am accountable for it now and responsible for it now. >> can we cancel the contract? >> i am not able to render that legal judgment, but it's a

question -- it's a fair question. >> we did a pilot. i can do a pilot program that cost $700 million quest they were supposed to do a pilot. the pilot evidently is not working and so we're expanding now into doing more and we're not sure that's going to work. and we're going to continue to pay. taxpayers do not have unlimited pockets for boeing or any other company. >> i understand your frustration and anger, senator. >> is that under your purview now to assess what's going on or is that the secretary to assess -- >> on the frontline, the buck stops to me with regard to spi. >> commissioner, can you get in to find out just where the money has gone, where it's going to go in the future?

we don't have unlimited funds to be pouring into something that is not going to work, regardless of who the corporation is. not that it's been hard to get a contract -- there ought to be some kind of investigation into this particular contract. i'm deeply concerned about how could a contract of this magnitude could award it and one tested whether or not it would work. there has to be some follow-up here. i don't know where the gao was in reporting this, but we may have to get into just how this all to base and what were the deliverables that cozily coming out of this contract? because that's just a total abuse of the taxpayers money. now, and parts of san diego but i was then, commissioner, on the border, are there actually triple fencing down there? >> in a small portion of the border, you will find double and

triple fencing in terms of the infrastructure. >> i mean, the single fencing i saw on the border is like a 10 metal to stretch across their site and then of course that's world atrocious dumped over onto the side which we have to clean up your it's just a garbage pit and adult dreams almost to the ocean in which we spend millions of dollars trying to clean up. and our border patrol people say that so we have to do. is there any talk with the maximum government of how we can help work out this -- i mean to see what flows down into that drainage area. >> actually, i know this because i'm a resident of san diego, not because i'm a commissioner of border protection. it was actually the united states hope construct the sewage plan in that tawanna river

valley and if that is amazing to you to you, senator burris and on her visit to to be 10 times worse. so we are getting cooperation -- we're doing the work, but were getting the cooperation cooperation of the mexican government are penalties for using not as they are garbage dump is what it is any help from the mexican? >> yes, we are. >> your time has expired, mr. chairman. >> thanks, mr. burris. we'll show your frustration and anger. the gao has done some work on spi at night and i'm to talk to you about moore but this week i think with the commissioner coming on now and could return it and you to get a direct assessment and take action to either terminate the contract were to take from it what

worked. and senator mccain indicated earlier, it may be that the best in security discontinuing crisis and the continued flow of illegal immigrants to the u.s. is to go back to the old style offensive, double and triple tier layered, unless that's topographical impossible in certain areas. and we're going to move onto the second panel, but i wanted to thank you for her testimony. the bottom line from what we know in which he testified today. the flow of illegal immigrants across the mexican border into the united states remains unacceptably high. hundreds of thousands per year, even at the reduced rate that we see occurring now, that we know that the violence in mexico is just stunning in its scope and

brutality. and we know. and as you said, have reason to be concerned. we know that americans have been targeted more and we have reason to be concerned that it will happen more in the future. look, as you come on, i hope to make this your number one concern and you've got the background to really make a difference here. i urge you to -- the sole operation -- i'm not saying it's easy. if it was easy, we would've solved it long ago. but this thing needs to be shaken up. and from your background, i think you're somebody who can do it. i would also say about i call it, senator mccain and senator kyl, in their program they put forward today including the request for federal troops support temporarily at the border, i hope that she was the administration will give this the respect that i would want you to give if i am a colleague

from connecticut were feeling for federal help for natural disaster that occurred in our state is i don't think most of us in this country can appreciate why people in arizona are living with every day. it's just not acceptable. and it's obvious that the state and local governments can handle it themselves and we together with our allies and partners in mexico have to do a better job. so this is a big talent, but you are a person with the background experience and record. if anybody can, to turn it around. and i just urge you to be as tough and direct and aggressive as you feel you need to be to get this done. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, commissioner. senator mccain, do want to add anything? >> now, except that i hope will examine senator kyl and my's

assessment and give us a response to that. >> thank you are a match and we will. >> thanks, commissioner. we have a boat that's just begun. i'd ask the members of the second panel to please come to the table. in the meantime, here it is in recess. >> arizona gov. jan brewer signed an immigration bill that had been criticized by president, asman guided --

-- by president obama as misguided. senator john mccain and fellow arizona senator john kyl have threatened to filibuster any legislation that does not secure borders first. >> c-span. our content is available on television, radio, and online. you can connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube and son of for our scheduled alert e-mails that cat c-span.o. let's made another winner in the student cam the documentary competition. we asked students about strengths or the challenges our country is facing. we talked with ethan young from

knoxville, tennessee. welcome to c-span. >> thank you. >> widely believed that freedom of speech is that part of our nation? >> i believe that freedom of speech is the heart of the nation because it is central to the way that we go about american life. the heart of the nation is central. without freedom of speech, america would not be the country we are today. >> what did you know about the freedom of speech before you started your documentary? >> we had a good understanding of what the freedom of speech and the first amendment, what it meant. i do not think we understood how important it was. that is what we learned later on in a documentary. >> what did you learn from the people you interviewed? >> we showed the interview to people in the media industry. we learned from the media perspective how they use freedom of speech on a daily basis. they are exercising freedom of

speech probably more often than most of us. and so, we learned a lot about what their views of freedom of speech were and how they use that every day. >> if you could have picked anyone to interview for this documentary, who would you have chosen to talk with? >> olive our interviewees were great. if there was one person, i would say mr. ken paulson. he seems very knowledgeable. -- all of our interviewees were great. >> what are the risks associated with the first amendment? >> it protect everybody's rights. if somebody is expressing something i do not like, they can still express that. i am not able to block them off. so sometimes it can make people feel uncomfortable. sometimes you have somebody sharing an opinion you might not agree with. because of thathose rights, we e

become a successful nation. we have all these ideas coming together, and we form solutions with these multiple ideas. and so freedom of speech protects everyone's rights, regardless of how you feel about other people's opinion. >> how does freedom of speech played out in your daily life? >> freedom of speech and the first amendment, it is not just me saying something you might not agree with. it could be the clothes you wear. a could be expressing something that you believe in. that sure it is protected by the first amendment. in a lot of ways, everyone is able to express themselves and share their views freely without worrying about the government coming down on them, or a public school. it definitely in daily life it can affect everything we do. >> tell us one notable tidbit

about your documentary. >> in the end of the documentary, we have a freedom of speech monument. we were driving to an interview with mr. mcelroy and we were driving and we saw this freedom of speech monument on the side of the road. we had no idea it was there. we pulled over and fell dead. it was just awesome, because it was like fate. we were driving and we saw this monument and it was awesome. >> that is very interesting. we would like to thank you for your time. congratulations on your win. >> thank you. >> here is a portion of ethan's documentary. >> it is the most defining of american freedoms. the right to speak your mind freely. included in the amendment that is first, the right to free speech along with free press, freedom of religion and

assembly, and the right to petition are such a part of the american character, it is difficult to imagine america without these rights. rights are not to be taken for granted. rather to be asserted and defended. >> to watch the documentary and our winning videos, you can go to our website. >> there is a huge lack of knowledge about how this town works, how congress works. >> when you are doing their research work, you have to do that yourself. >> this weekend, richard norton smith and douglas brikley will talk -- douglas brinkley will talk about their work. >> "book tv" is live from the "la times" festival of books.

some of the featured authors taking your calls, e-mails, and weeds. coverage starts saturday and sunday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. follow the discussions live on c-span2. get this schedule and our web site. >> we really have to get this right. if we do not, we can stifle innovation. we could stifle the free market, we could stifle our economy. we could cause more harm than good. >> as the senate moved closer to a vote, see the process unfold with congressional leaders. at the c-span video library. every program since 1987 novenow online. >> tonight, a debate between the five republican candidates for indiana's senate seat. headed by is not seeking reelection. candidates include dan coates and state senator marlon stu

ttsman. a live debate. we spoke with the reporter in little rock for more about that race. >> the senate seat in arkansas is shaping up to be a key competitive race this year. in arkansas. this is currently leading republican. and this is also listed as a tossup. joining me is the little rock bureau capital correspondent to talk about this. blanche lincoln, the incumbent, she is being challenged in the primary on may 18 by the lieutenant governor. guest: this is a key race to

follow because blanche lincoln, even before he was in the race, was considered one of the most vulnerable democrats facing reelection. the approval numbers in arkansas have gone down, over the last year. especially as the debate has increased over health-care overhaul. she has described herself as being the role in the middle of a tug-of-war between the extreme right and the extreme left. halter got into the race right at the beginning of the filing in arkansas, and basically, at the urging of a lot of different groups that have been unhappy with her positions. she was seen as going against the obama administration on some important issues like the public option in health care and halter has the support of a lot of groups that are not happy with

her, including labor unions and moveon.org. they are putting a lot of money into the race, and this is looking like one of the most expensive political race in the history of this state. host: moveon.org has raised about 1.5 million online to support the lieutenant governor. how has she respond to this challenge? guest: she has responded very aggressively. that is one thing that is very striking. this has become a very bitter battle, very quickly. if you live in arkansas and you turn on the television, you will see advertisements between them and not to mention, other groups that are doing independent

expenditures. they are going after either candidate. she is trying to make him look like he is supported by a lot of the outside groups. she has been making an issue out of the support that he has gotten from the labor unions. it is very hard to get over that period. guhost: she is part of the agricultural committee, and they rode a large part of this when it comes to the derivatives. some are surprised by what she brought to this legislation. guest: this is a move over to the left, especially for her. and this is something that many of the bank's do not like. they do not like what this puts on the practice. and there has been some speculation that she was moving

to the left on this because of the challenge from halter. she has got a lot of press out of this, and she has a lot of attention from this. this was approved in the agricultural committee and she was able to get one republican to support this. this is something that she has been mentioning more, and we expect this during the first debate, she will be talking about this as an example of working against wall street. the message against her has been trying to paint her as an advocate for wall street instead of main street. host: the first debate will be tonight and we will have this at 8:00 eastern time. the first democratic primary debate for the arkansas senate seat. your story for the associated press have this headline. blanche lincoln says that she will not take the money from

goldman sachs. guest: this is an issue that has been raised and we expect to hear about this tonight. and there will be another debate on saturday. i expect to hear about this message on friday and saturday. even though she is working on derivatives legislation, she has received money from goldman sachs. on january 1, she received $4,500 in contributions from the political action committee. another web site reported that she had a fund-raiser at their headquarters planned for monday. she had canceled this. the campaign says that they did not have anything scheduled but they had been discussing about some kind of meeting their. but they now say it -- because of the charges against goldman sachs, her campaign would not

take any contributions from goldman sachs or the employees, or schedule anything related to the campaign. this was a change from what she had said before. but one thing is that alter -- alter -- halter is telling her to return the contribution. she has been talking about the derivatives legislation, and she says that this does not influence policy. this is something that goldman sachs of the other banks would not like. >> how are the opinion polls? >> there is some variation. one website recently did an opinion poll that shows that she has only a seven-point lead, 38-31. this was about 20% of the people have responded, they were

undecided. and 10% were supporting the third candidate in the primary, and he has not been getting a lot of attention. he is a very conservative democrat. he is the only one calling for the repeal of the health-care overhaul. the other opinion polls have shown a greater margin for blanche lincoln. she had a 45%-33% lead with 6% undecided. this may be anywhere from seven%. -- digit lead. she is still below 50%. there was internal opinion polling that gave her a greater margin, above 50%. but there is definitely a variation, and the interesting thing is that many people thought that this would be decided on may 18. there is the possibility that

there may be a runoff, that may stretch until june. host: and there is the republican primary as well. who is running in that contest? >> there are eight republicans who are running. and the top contenders, the most well-known and the one conservative front-runner is john boozman. he got into this very late, not until earlier this year, and many of these candidates have been running for the past year. he is believed to be the front runner just because of his name recognition, and also, his fund- raising ability. there is also gilbert baker and he was considered the front- runner. and he is still considered a front runner. he is well-known for working

with the legislature. several other candidates, including jim holtz. -- holt. he was the nominee in 2004 and he lost against lincoln. he is experiencing -- either one of the maine democratic candidates he has experience against. >> the general election has been said to be leaning republican. does this mean that both of them would probably lose in the general election? >> it is difficult to tell, and it really does depend on how the primaries are. one of the interesting messages that you hear in both primaries

is about how they are running similar messages in terms of saying that washington is broken. halter is using this on lincoln. baker had his campaign make the argument that if altar is given -- halter is given the nomination, it will be easier to use this argument. the match-up >> next, live, the first debate among the candidates for the u.s. senate seat in the arkansas democratic primary. you will hear from blanch e lincoln and d.c.

morrison. it is being held at the university of arkansas at little rock. coming to you courtesy of katv. . .

>> i am scott inman predict it is my pleasure you -- scott inman. is my pleasure to welcome you. if you are watching across the country on c-span tonight or worldwide on katv.com. we are glad to have used for the next 60 minutes. we will be engaged in an important discussion about the future of our state and our country. we will be focusing on the democratic side of the united states senate race. there are three candidates who want your vote on may 18, 25 days away. we would like to introduce them to you now. to my left, senator blanche lincoln . to her left, d.c. morrison. to his left, and lt. governor

bill halter. the candidates tonight will be fielding questions first from the panel. we have four people on a panel tonight. they wiill also be getting e-mail questions from our viewers. to my right is christopher smith, the president's chair at uilr. to his right is jessica dean bedewed to her right is fred canada to his right is david cantonese from politico. the rules are simple. the panelists last big question. they may direct it to one specific candidates. each candidate will have one minute to respond. each candidate after that will also get 1 minutes. they can rebut or continue with their own answer. we will begin with a to an

opening statement from each candidate. the order was determined earlier before our broadcast. we will start with the bill halter. >> thank you prada i thank katv and you for hosting us. welcome, senator lincoln and morrison. i have been honored to be serving as your lieutenant governor for the last three years. i would like to thank the people from arkansas that have embraced my family. my wife and i are blessed with two beautiful baby doctors, lauren and julia/ it means that your the to the governor has not slept in three years. the second thing it means is that i have been in the maternity ward at least twice in the last three years. maternity wards are one of the great people in our society. when you go there, it is a matter what your what is. everyone what the same thing and hopes and dreams. they want a happy, healthy

child. i have seen it. i have seen the parents and grandparents as they make of that silent prayer and that silent promise. they say that they will do everything they can to give their children a better life unfortunately, washington is no longer working for those families. or for our features. that is why i'm running for senate. washington has added $7 trillion and to our national debt in the last 10-years. $100,000 for each arkansas family. we have lost millions of jobs in this recession. washington listens more to special interest than they listen to us. it takes special interest money and then they bowed their way rather than whether for arkansas families. they led wall street run our economy into the ground and then they want to take credit for finally noticing the problem. that is the washington way.

as your signature, i will not take a pay raise as long as the federal budget is still in deficit. i will get in the truck and told town hall meetings in all 75 counties in arkansas, because we need to but more often sell -- arkansas bodies into washington. >> thank you. next is a pitcher lincoln. >> thanks to all of our sponsors and coast. this election is about choices. our sponsors are providing a great public service by allowing the candidates to speak directly to the voters. i was raised in a east arkansas family. i was taught to be an independent thinker and to fight for what i know is right. special interest extremes have been shooting at me from both sides. i must be doing something right for our consultative -- for arkansas.

in the 184 years, the senate committee on agricultural and forestry has never had a chairman from the state of arkansas. it does now. the committee has jurisdiction over at least the issues that cover 1/3 of our economy. in our first six months, i passed the most ambitious child nutrition bill in history. we passed a disaster bill in three months, where it had taken three years previously. we have brought sunlight to a $600 trillion in derivative market where wall street speculators can no longer able to trust in good faith taxpayers. i fight for transparency and accountability. i stood up to special interests as i have done to wrap my life.

-- throughout my life. this is what you sent me to washington to do, to stand up for what is good and right in arkansas. i come before the voters of arkansas proud of my voting record that makes me accountable to you, the people of arkansas. i would appreciate your votes in support in this election. >> thank you. >> d.c. morrison. >> thank you for hosting this. i am honored to be here tonight to visit with you. when i decided i would run for this office, i began by going all over arkansas, door-to-door, to meet people face to face but to see if they felt the same way i do. they are dissatisfied with the national government but it time and time again, people have never seen it before and their lives and they invited me into their homes -- excuse me -- and

i found that their concerns are the same as mine. one thing they are concerned about is jobs. i have some ideas that i think can help our country rebuild our jobs. one of the things i would like to work on is the passage of the fair tax. it is supported by 82 current members of congress. it would abolish the irs and appealed the 16th amendment. you pay the tax on consumption and not on income. this would encourage businesses to invest in the united states insists sending jobs overseas. the tax code is called "code" for a reason. there is indecipherable rules and regulations that create --

that keeps americans in trouble with their taxes. i would like to work on this health care legislation. how will 16,000 new irs agents and 150,000 bureaucrats improve our health care? they will not. within 10 years, private insurance will not exist and you will talk to a government bureaucrat in place of talking to your doctor. i want to do something about that. thank you. >> thank you. our first question is from a politico reporter. >> you have touted your opposition to what is known as cap and trade, where companies would be charged for their commission. in the last congress, you come -- co-sponsored a bill that would have capped commissions with the market based trading

system i would like to know why you changed your position on cap and trade and where you stand today. but i do not think i've changed my position. i have expressed that it is critically important that we focus on lowering our carbon emissions in cleaning up our environment. i think it is essential that we lessen our dependence on foreign oil for economic reasons and in terms of national security. we should see the challenges that exist by creating good, green jobs. i supported a bipartisan bill that came out of the energy committee. we look at energy standards. we make sure we but those in place. we make sure that everyone is helping to solve those problems, not picking winners and losers. the legislation that came through the house picks winners and losers. that does not include many of our industries and arkansas.

we want to support wind and solar. we want to make sure agriculture's part of the solution. we want to encourage industries to be around the table as they lower the carbon emissions. but thank you. d.c. morrison is next. >> i am opposed to the cap and trade legislation . i think the man-made global warning is a hoax. co2 accounts for 3% of the greenhouse gases. of that 3%, only 3% of that 3% comes from activities of man to g. i want common sense solutions. i would like to look at it. i do not like the man-made global warning argument. over the history of our earth, there was a mini-ice age.

the earth's orbit caried in the orbit arounds the stem orbitunspots hand and -- around day sun. sunspots have an effect on this. we need to step back and take a but at this and do what works. >> thank you. i would not support the current cap and trade bill without some changes being made to it to level the playing field with some of our competitors like india and china. i have been to china. i have seen the pollution . we are putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage. we clearly need to meet the goals of the cap and trade bill. we also need to establish energy independence. we are spending $1 billion a yday on imported oil.

not only is that a drain on our resources, it presents us with a national security issue . it is evidence of a real figure in washington. we've been talking about doing this since 1974. we have not done it. it has costas in terms of security. if you send me to washington as a senator, i will make progress. >> our next question is from 4029 news. mr. morrison will be first to answer. >> the question for you, and a lot of views that you have seemed to be those close to some republican views. some viewers are asking what kind of democrat are you and how would you define the candidates running against you? >> i was born a democrat.

my mother is a democrat. my family are democrats. the democratic party serves the state of arkansas well, very well. and lots of our county judges are democratic folks working not for the little salary that they are paid but because they want to serve their community. my problem is with the liberal democrat in washington for duke i think that we should put it -- washington. i think the way to put party politics aside. i am not happy with either political party. i am an american first. i am a member of several hunting clubs. i am a christian. i am a father the way down the list i am a democrat.

you can make of it what you want bett. i was born a democrat. i am a democrat. >> thank you for that statement. i would say that like d.c. i am an american and a father, a husband. i am also a very proud democrat. i am proud of what the democratic party has done to advance our nation's ideals. i am proud of what the democratic party has done in its best days in advance in education for americans, in protecting medicare and social security, in trying to give everyone a great start in life so that we can all live up to our god-given potential. i do not shirk from that lightly or at all. we have done great things as a party. it is hard to put one word labels on both. i know there are a lot of folks that would like to do that. i have some conservative and

moderate positions to do i think all of them are within the mainstream. i am proud of that. >> thank you. >> i'm a democrat from birth. i am proud of that. i am proud to be an arkansas democrat predicted that means we do chairs the root of our democratic party, the encompassing is so much diversity that we know is a rich part of our history. i think it is important to note that democrats are doers. we work hard. whether it is educating our children or protecting our soldiers are making sure that our communities can create the environment where we can bring in good jobs. that is the number-one issue. i worked diligently in trying to eliminate the deficit and making sure that we create jobs.

i think democrats are doers. that is where the reasons why i am a democrat. i'm proud to be an arkansas democrat. >> thank you. our next question comes from jessica dean. >> good evening. my question to you is this. this will make it easier for unions to organize. do you agree with this or support it? >> the employee free choice act is really no longer operative. if you talk to labor leaders, that is no longer on the table. what they are talking about is streamlining elections, speeding up collections, and putting in place some opportunities for folks to make sure that they are not inhibited in their democratic decision making when

it comes to whether or not to organize or not. interesting hoehling, senator lincoln was a sponsor of the employe 3 choice act. now she has been an opponent. she signaled the leadership that should filibuster the employee free choice act. i am looking for a compromise. what i've heard of the principles of that compromise i would support. >> senator lincoln is next. >> i appreciate that the bill has seen that compromise. most senators have not seen that compromise. i think the biggest issues are jobs in the economy. the countries and when it the greatest climate since they treat depression. it has traded a volatile environment. there are 100,000 arkansans letter out of work right now.

we can work to bring business management and workers together to help create a good economy. i do not support the legislation. i do not support card check. i think it creates a division as well as destruction at a time when we do not need that. we need all hands on deck. there are great strides that can be made, particularly in looking at the national labor relations board and the improvement there. i hope that we will. >> mr. morrison. >> thank you. i like to listen to mike builders. some people may can sitter me an elder produced a guide that i really admire was senator george mcgovern. last year he made a statement that he opposed card check.

i would have been opposed to that as well. senator mcgovern, if you like to know about his life, you can get the book. it is a great story. he served in the senate for about 30 years. when he got out of the senate, he went back to north dakota and one is to open a business. he said at that time that if he had had any idea abou the votes that he cast while he was in the senate and how they really impact small business, he would not have done half of them. that is my point. a lot of the people in washington are out of touch with main street and the folks here. that is a good example. >> thank you. our next question is from christopher smith. senator lincoln will be first.

>> what kind of judicial nominees to the supreme court would you support with your vote? would you consider a judicial activist or a very progressive nominee? >> one of the most important responsibilities we have as a senator is to judge those nominees that the president brings before us. to look at it in a holistic way and make sure we are looking at individuals who have the background and the ability to look at the issues and to make a judgment based on the block. -- law. i do not being a judicial activist is inappropriate. i do not think it is appropriate for them to try to create law but to look at the law and implement it as it has been written by congress. i think we have great

opportunities. i have looked at several of the supreme court justice nominations that have come before me. some of them i have agreed with politically. some of which i have not agreed with politically. i based on their qualifications. >> thank you. >> of the fed did is that's abide by the law. there is one thing that is important to me. should i be elected, i would oppose the confirmation of a dead to the supreme court that i even suspected of being pro- abortion with every ounce of strength that i have. >> thank you. i think a senator should evaluate judges on there being

impartial and fair minded, adhering to the constitution. we should look to those candidates for hired judgeships who have previously been judges. we should defend their record and discern whether or not they have been fair and balanced. i think that the united states senator who put forward judicial nominees to the present for consideration should make sure that they represent the broad diversity of arkansas. you can count on me to do that, to make sure that judicial appointments in judicial nominations are represented broadly. >> thank you. we are also including e-mails. the economy and national debt are to the most pressing challenge things. -- challenges.

what do you plan to do about balancing the budget and reducing the debt? mr. morrison will be first. >> we have to get spending under control. çif we keep going in our curret trap, and 10-years of the national debt will be over $20 trillion. we cannot leave them for our children and grandchildren to pay off. it is like if you give someone a salary of $25,000 and bay co $25,000 to credit card companies, how will they ever dig their way out of that? excuse me. we cannot leave that the det. if you are a parent, would you go into your child's room and take money that they earned

babysitting or mowing the lawn and spend it for something that you thought you wanted? of course you would not. the politicians in washington are willing to do that. that is one of the reasons i am running. >> thank you. >> i am proud of the fact that for the six years of bill clinton's presidency i worked in the white house budget office. when president clinton into that office, we had a two and $80 billion deficit. it was projected to go higher. i was proud to be part of the team that balance that budget. it left a surplus at the end of his administration. w3since that time, washington hs wrecked our budget. this year we will turn in at least a $1.40 trillion deficit. in the last 10 years, we have added $7 trillion of debt on top of arkansas families and the

rest of the country. that is not right. there are things we can do and have done to try to trim spending. also, we need to get our economy moving again. that will help us to reduce the deficit in the longer term. i'd look forward to working on these issues. i look forward to balancing the federal budget again. >> thank you. >> in my first days in congress, i started a group called the blue dog democrat who supported the constitutional amendment. my opponent takes credit for balancing the budget under president clinton. that is a tough vote and make it a reality. there are important things we can do to help is still without a deficit. putting our spending is a critical part of it.

long-term spending is also important. we have got to deal with those. that is one of the reasons why healthcare has been so important. it lowers the deficit by $132 billion. i have helped to pass pay-go rules. we should be balancing our budget and the nation. i put instrument in place to help our nation do that. >> that concludes round one. we will now move into rounded to produ two. >> you have criticized the signature with her votes for the tarp stimulus, right? we cannot seem to get an exact answer it how you had been in

their how would you vote? >> tarp and the stimulus are two different things. i would have voted no on that tarp bill. it has very few strings attached and accountability. i would not have voted to dicker regulate wall street in the first place. -- to deregulate wall street in the first place. this problem did not occur overnight. as president obama said just yesterday, the responsibility for this lies with wall street and washington. i also cannot simultaneously regulate an industry and then go out and solicit campaign contributions. i asked senator lincoln to give back the contribution goldman sachs made to her campaign. they are under investigation for

fraud. i think it is unseemly to be raising money from the very folks you are supposed to regulate, particularly when they wrecked our economy. >> thank you. we have indicated that we would no longer take any of those funds are deal with goldman sachs. the 45 countries that i received from the tax unfortunately has not affected what i have done. i have created an passed the toughest reform bill on wall street that anyone had seen. we bring the $600 trillion out to the dark and into the light of the dave . -- of day. we lowered systemic risk. we bring 100 and transparency to the market with real-time reporting to both the public and

the regulators to do we protect municipalities. when regulate foreign exchange -- we regulate foreign exchange. i get criticized because i deny do this 10 years. i have done the best since i could since i have gotten it. >> thank you. washington always seems to solve the problem that just happened. the financial meltdown began with misguided efforts in washington, d.c. for home ownership for every american takeovers to banks to make unsound loans -- every american. a day, worst ç-- they coereced bacnk to make loans.

they were ignored by washington because they wanted to continue this practice. barney frank has said that he wanted to roll the dice a little bit more. when it all came down, the taxpayers had to pick up the bill. of course wall street is responsible. any company that leverage is up 40 to 1 deserves to go broke. the taxpayer should not have had to bail them out. >> our next question is from jessica dean. >> recent polls show that the majority of arkansas voters think that the health care bill was bad for the country. you voted for it. do you still believe that vote was good for arkansas? >> asaph this lead. there is no doubt there has been a lot of misinformation.

we started this debate with seven different bills. i started working on health care in 2004, working with senator snowe on a bill that focused on the largest percentage of uninsured, working to see how we provide a marketplace similar to what we have for small businesses to access quality health care at a low-cost. when the health-care debate happened, i heard from our canteens. -- from our people from arkansas. they wanted to make sure children were not born to be denied health insurance. we did that in this bill. we made sure that the 230 million americans better uninsured will be able to keep their interns in the private --

that are insured will be able to keep their insurance in the private marketplace. >> thank you. mr. morrison? >> i think it is a job killer. health care needs reform. there is no doubt about that. i do not believe the federal government has the power to force you to buy anything, including health insurance. a just published study from the cleveland clinic gives us a little clue -- smoking, alcohol and drug abuse, lack of exercise accounts for 50% to 60% of the health care costs. health care costs are not tied because premiums are high. health-care costs are high because of habits of the american people. the federal government is not one to solve that. my concern is that seven or 10

years down the road, you will not be able to buy private insurance. you are going to have the same people running your health insurance that thought home ownership for every american was a good idea. >> i think there were many good things in the bill, including an elimination of pre-existing conditions to exclude people from health insurance. you cannot be done this issue unless you are clear in what direction you are going. senator lincoln was initially for the public option. then she said she was against the public option. then she went to the floor of the senate and threatened to filibuster the public option. she voted against the reconciliation bill which would have improved to the underlying senate bill but is now the law. president obama supported that. senator lincoln has run television ads saying she oppose

the public option that president obama supported. shares also run radio ads on african american radio propossag she supported president obama. you have to be clear and decisive . that did not happen in this issue. >> thank you. our next question is from christopher smith. >> mr. marston, since president obama was in office for two more years, how would you go about establishing a good working relationship with him? what issues would you support and issues you do not support with the president? >> if i'm elected, i am going to be working for the people of arkansas and the people of the united states of america not president obama. the issues that i would like to work on are the issues that are

before us now that i mentioned earlier. i would like to pass the fair tax. i think it will work. i would like health-care reform that would work. without forcing them to buy health care under the threat of a fine or going to jail. another thing i think that is important that is not being addressed is the board is security between the united states and mexico and our border security all around the country. it is a little disconcerting to mention. there were 17,000 murders in northern mexico and the last three years. that is scary. 650 kidnappings in arizona. something has to be some. >> i think our most immediate needs are to work on creating jobs in the united states and in

arkansas. i would wear to eliminate the tax provision that action against american companies an incentive to move jobs overseas. replace those with tax credits so that we can create jobs here at home and said the more bailout for wall street. but put those funds into loans for arkansas small businesses. i would build on a scholarship lottery to improve the training of our workforce long term. i believe we could get passed federal legislation that would build on the arkansas scholarship lottery sell arkansas students with a 2.5 grade point average could go to any public college or university in arkansas tuition free. that has been an ideal and go for democrats for years, to provide that educational opportunity so we can live up to our potential. >> i am glad to see that he is

back on his a positive campaign. we would like to agree with him. it is very important to have this tax credits. i join the governor and fort smith. we noted the mitsubishi plants coming in. making sure that we are working to provide those kind of tax incentives to keep jobs in america and not send them overseas. i already work with president obama. i already know him. i work well with them. healthcare was a big issue. i feel proud about what we did. bill thinks the reconciliation was very essential. i did not think it was essential. i think we did a good job with the health care bill. i voted for it on christmas eve. i did join the president in the signing ceremony. i believe we have made a good effort.

we are making sure that people could not be denied because of an illness or be dropped because of an illness and not to mention covering our children. >> our final question from the panel tonight is from david catanese. >> you and the senator have spared recently about the issue both social security. like medicare, it is an entitlement that is going insolvent. what is the most feasible option that basis social security? raise taxes? raise the retirement age? >> about social security, i was proud to be the deputy commissioner under president clinton. i thought president bush's attempts to privatize -- in the past, when we have needed to improve solvency of social security, which always had a

balanced package of revenue increases and benefit reductions. in the past, we have worked with raising the retirement age. that is the current law. my birth year covert to be the first at the age of 67. if you look to previous history on social security reform, you will see that we can do this. over a 75 year time frame, so security is only out of balance by about 1.8% of payroll. that is something that we have successfully addressed in the past. with a balanced package of revenue increases, we can balance social security for the long run. >> thank you. >> i certainly believe that keeping our promise to working americans will be there in their

golden years is absolutely a promise we must keep a bit and do not think there only three ways to solve the problem. i have opposed attempts to privatize social security. bill has mentioned that he does believe there is an opportunity to be able to invest social security money in what street. we know what would happen if we would have done that. i do not support a reduction of social security guaranteed benefits. i introduced a bill to try to implement this. i think it is inexcusable. a bill will preclude members of congress from getting a pay raise this year. social security benefits are not. i was a strong supporter in the effort to trim the bush tax cuts and direct it to insuring solvency of the social security

trust fund. the best thing we can do is get our economy back on track in getting people back to work. >> social security is very important. we must do everything possible to make sure it is there. you folks have paid in cash. it has gone to the government. he should be able to trust them to do what they say they will do. when social security began in 1937, we were a dunk nation. there were 16 working folks for every been necessary. there was never an accumulation phase. the money should have been accumulated over the years. currently, there are three people working for every recipient of every social security. there will soon be two people. in 1981, the congress raided the

trust fund, to cut the cash and replace it with an iou. this year, we are having to cash in those ious. we are probably barring some of the money from china. the government has to keep their promise. i would do that by cutting spending. >> we will close with e-mail questions. we go to john -- i am sorry commentary for our next. senator lincoln will be first to respond. >> do you think though "biting sound-byte" ads, that you run it to a stronger candidate? >> i am disappointed by the negative tone of this election, too. the problem is that i'm being outspent 3 to 1. there are outside groups coming in and spending large numbers of money in arkansas.

those people will not tell you who they are predicted. tagline at the bottom. they will not tell you who they are in terms of telling you who we should be in arkansas and what you should think about me. roughly 1/6 of the ads are mine. all i'm trying to do is to make sure i can get my message out and insure the voters are able to see the path of the opponents. i think that is only fair i had a 15 year record of votes. i am proud of that record. >> i have enjoyed the ads. [laughter] i used to think that talk was cheap until i found out what

channel 7 charges for television. [laughter] it is worth every penny. if i had the money, i would do it. i enjoyed one that showed children throwing money in the air papil. i am trying to show folks that you can do things without money. money is not the solution to all our problems. personal responsibility and hard work will take you a long way that is about all i have to go on with my campaign. i am opposed to a lot of the ads. i think we should just stay to the issues and run on your record. i think that would work better. thank you. >> i too would really love to see an improved tone. as senator lincoln pointed out, there is an ad out there that folks will not even reveal who they are. they basically charged that i

was for the privatization of social security which is a lie. they will not tell you who they are. they are still out there. i suspect they will run some more ads. that was such a distortion that jim roosevelt came out and called it an outright lie. unfortunately, senator lincoln has run ads that commentators and arkansas have called this honest, smearts. if you hours to launch another ad -- it provides a pretty girl to take down of a recent plant lincoln as smeaer, so the lies continue. i've taken down the website that is called bailout blanche. i would ask you as we go forward if you stop referring to me ask dollar bill. [laughter] if you would seize the

mailers. let's present a positive that we want for our futures and kids. >> that concludes the question portion of tonight's debate. we will now move in to closing statements. each candidate will have to statements predicted minute. -- two statements. >> thank you for everyone being here. two nights ago i was at a pizza joint in arkansas where i met three generations of an arkansas family. the grandparents are on social security. the mother is bravely raising two daughters alone because her husband and their father died in service to our country. the 16 year-old daughter told me proudly that she had a 3.4 grade point average and that she was going to college.

her 11 year-old sister spoke proudly of her dad. she said she was going to college, too, because she was going to earn a scholarship. they are not asking for special treatment. they certainly earned it. they have not given up. neither will i.. this family deserves a senator who is on their side. together we can stand up to special interests and we can change washington's ways. in arkansas, we passed a scholarship program that provides scholarships for the two young woman. some say it cannot be done. we got it done together. as your senator, i will be proud to work with better jobs in arkansas to fight social security privatization and cuts in medicare and to balance the federal budget again.

if you are tired of politicians to take special interest money and then otvote their way, if you think it is ridiculous for washington to stand by white wall street runs over our economy and now want to take credit for addressing a problem that has been there for tenure, as i would say let's change washington together. to that family in dumas and across arkansas, when you give us a level playing field, we can win. >> thank you. senator lincoln is next. >> i certainly will meet that challenge of being positive and bill will make sure that the special interest will bring down the negative attitude as well. i think it is so clear. primary voters have a clear choice beginning may 3. you know where i stand. i have proven that i will take the tough votes. i will make the tough choices when it is right for arkansas.

my vote for the budget in 1993 meant that i had to face a difficult reelection the next year. it was the right thing to do. that budget agreement led to four straight years of budget surpluses and a booming economy. fisher, my vote for reform means that i will face a re-election that is difficult. i know it is the right thing to do for arkansas. it will help stabilize our economy and offer access to more than 500,000 uninsured arkansans. as we enter the final days i want to ask for your boat. you may hear a lot of guessing or misrepresentations about my motives from people outside our state. i am proud to be an arkansas democrat. i will always say predictable

and dedicated to the three things most important. i'm not going to expect that we agree on everything i know you will stand with me to help our proud and beautiful state to remain strong. i can assure you that the folks in washington do not care or know much about what happened in arkansas. this is what i fight for. we want to thank all the sponsors tonight. we think the voters. i wish my opponent well. and what thank the people of arkansas to give me the opportunity to represent you. >> the health care legislation is not one to create jobs. there are a lot of things that we can do. i'm a strong believer in the

fairfax. as far as special interests, i have no money from special interest. my interest are first and foremost our children. a lot of this have completed our carriers. we should not be debt to our children. we to the they legacy. we are leaving debt. i do not think either one of these are going to do anything about it. i am willing to stand up to them and cut the size of the federal budget and cut spending in washington, cut personnel. i would cut everything but national defence and border security and use it to rebuild social security, medicare and medicaid, and cut down the national debt. i am giving the people of arkansas, regardless of your political affiliation, a chance

on may 18 to send a message to washington that it is time for change. we have term limits for the president. we have term limits for our state legislature it is almost impossible, but i'm willing to do it. i will work hard. it is almost impossible for an individual like me to compete with this. leading people in office until a lot of cases they die in office before you can get the amount -- [laughter] that is no indication here for sure. [applause] we have to make a change. that is why i am running for office. >> ladies and gentlemen, or three candidates foon the democratic side. [applause]

>> we hope for the audience and for those of you watching around the state that tonight has been informative. we hope that it has been helpful. for those in arkansas, the surgeon hope they will vote in a primary on may 18. that is going to do it for our debate tonight. thank you for watching. thank you for being here. good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] caller[captions copyright natiol cable satellite corp. 2010] >> a discussion on the role of the media and national security issues by panel of the judiciary correspondence. the university of texas law school is the host of this offense. its start at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. sunday, the second of three

british election debates. david cameron and nick clegg and gordon brown are competing to be the next prime minister. it is at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c- span. >> next, a debate between the five republican candidates running for the u.s. senate seat from indiana in the may 4 primary. indiana will have a new center next year. he is not seeking reelection. this is been rated as when the most competitive races in the country. it is held at the studios ofwfyi tv in indianapolis. it is one hour. >> live from indianapolis, the u.s. senate primary debate, sponsored by the indiana debate commission.

>> good evening. welcome to the indian in debate commission. this one features the five gentlemen seeking the republican nomination for the united state s senator. for the next hour, boaters will ask the questions -- voters will ask the questions. friday night, we will hear the candidates answers. let me marlins stutzman was a farmer. he served three terms in the senate. richard behney amended plumbing company. he is a community volunteer. john hostettler was elected to represent the eighth district in 1984. winchester is a financial adviser. he is a board member of the chamber of commerce.

- coats is an attorney. he is an ambassador to germany and served in the senate from 1989 through 1999. the campaign has drawn lots for their position on the stage. i will announce the length of time each candidate has to answer a question. most will be one minute answers. the final answer is 90 seconds. i may announce that the answer will have to very to get this to the final question. as moderator, i may have to cut off when it these five gentlemen if they exceed the time to answer a question. i hope that does that happen tonight. that question will be reviewed by the debate commission. they note to use only small notes. let's meet our first future of voter. geoffrey miller is a boat trip from indiana. thank you for coming. >> good evening.

what is your idea of a representative government? would you go to the will of the people are vote your own mind regardless? >> -- you will have 60 seconds to answer. >> thank you for posting. i i think this is one of the questions that a but the people are asking themselves, how do our representatives represent us as people? i believe as a representative we are elected . the route the campaign we make our case to the people and ask them for their support. for myself, i have my personal convictions that i would always few as very important toç me ad break my personal convictions and be the constitutional parameter for our federal government. it is important that we listen

to the people and those who have elected us and have that dialogue. when you are communicating in listening, you can better represent those who you represent at that time. it is important for us to make sure that we are listening. >> thank you. >> thank you for being here. a great question. this is where i have come from this last year. this is what i've heard from thousands of users across our state that have this concern with politicians and politics, that we have strayed away from citizen representation. that is the outcry i have heard this past year. we want to get back to a people that we are that they had in mind, with citizen representation. that is what the qualifications are very clear.

so that your neighbor would go and represent you. it to be an honor and not a career. i believe in citizen representation. i will lead with my convictions and concerns and by the constitution. >> thank you. >> thank you for the commission for allowing us this opportunity. excellent question in that one of the five of us before you tonight will take an oath ultimately to uphold the constitution. that is essentially our job description. . . times prior and the people, when i took that oath, of the 8th district of indiana at that time and indiana in the future will know that it's my obligation to

and talking about how i will fill them. >> thank you. thank you for the questions. w3. . past few years is that government is not listening to the people a poll came out this week showing that four out of government is not listening to the people. four out of five people don't trust the government. we have seen our representatives go to washington and live happily ever after and ignore the will of the people. that has to stop. that is one of the reasons we are seeing this reawakening in indiana. it is because people are realizing their voices in the past have not been heard.

it is one of the reasons i am running to be your u.s. senator. i am going to washington to represent you and listen to you. >> d.c. morrison -- daniel coats. >> thank you for hosting this event. we do take a solemn oath. one of us will take that oath to uphold the conversation -- uphold the constitution. you have to listen to what they have to say. had this president done that he would not have advanced is spending agenda on the american people. i also believe it is important for a representative to state to the people he represents -- to state their basic convictions. sometimes the popular mood moves populist -- say they want to legalize drugs.

if it goes against your convictions you have to say this is not what i believe. they have the opportunity to vote you out of office, but it is important to let people know your fundamental convictions. >> joan could not join us tonight, so she recorded her question for the candidates. >> i am from indianapolis. i would like to know what do you propose to do about the lack of bipartisanship in washington? >> as we rotate the order, we began with richard behney. >> great question. it depends on what you talk about bipartisanship. right now there is this idea of compromise being good for we are as a people. i will not compromise when it comes to our constitutional principles and values of life

and liberty. i will have no problem extending a hand across the aisle when we are discussing what kind of paint color we want to have, or maybe what's jets we want to purchase, but when it comes to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, i will not compromise. >> i believe the people of indiana and the u.s. will be sending a message to washington in november, and that will be heard loud and clear on both sides. this is likely there will be a new majority in washington very similar to what happened after the 1994 elections. the members of congress will get to work doing the people's business. there will be that mandate to work together in order to bring

the federal government back to within its constitutional constraints, balance the budget. it is the result of the people doing their job to maintain their own liberty that will be practiced in november that we will see an outpouring of bipartisanship in washington on capitol hill. >> thank you for the question. i'm sorry you could not join us. nine number one responsibility is to represent you -- my number one responsibility. even if i have to be partisan, if i am doing the work you want me to do it then i am willing to go it alone. one of the things i have noticed in washington is there seems to be a double standard. it appears we want republicans to be bipartisan but there is not this move for democrats. i don't think that is fair.

my responsibility is to represent you. if i can do that in a bipartisan manner, i am happy to. we have to do what ever it takes to put people back to work. i will do everything i can to do so in a bipartisan manner. >> daniel coats. >> currently in washington there are two different views of america. the view represented here this evening by people speaking to you is a different view than what is coming out of the white house. that makes bipartisanship very difficult. two parties looking down opposite path. the issues our country faces are issues we have to rally around. we have to support them on the basis of conservative principles because they have worked. what we are doing to our economy with this administration is

leaving as down a disastrous road. to solve that problem we need support from the other side. people have to support that. they should come our way on that. the threats from abroad. we need bipartisanship in dealing with people who want to kill us. that is something we have to reach above ideology and support each other in protecting america. and when i've traveled the state as i've traveled the state over 25,000 miles talking with hoosiers and listening to them and hearing what they believe what i'm finding is there's a common thread through us as hoosiers we believe in the constitution we believe in freedom, we believe in god, we believe in our families, we believe in our communities and we believe that hoosiers are the answer to our problems, not always the government and that's the problem right now in washington, d.c we have politicians who are trying to cram legislation down our throats and taking over major portions

of our economy, for example, the healthcare legislation that just passed i believe if they would listen to hoosiers and realize the effects that they have by taking over more and more of our freedom that people are going to react very strongly in this next election i think bipartisanship is important on those issues that we agree upon, but some there are going to be issues that we just have to agree to disagree >> thank you matthew daily yea's a lawyer and lives in fishers, indiana matthew, what is your question for our candidates? >> thank you, sir my question is: if you were to be elected to the senate what would be the topic and purpose of the first bill you >> what would be the topic and purpose of the first built you would address -- dziewit draft to make law law? >> we will begin with john hostettler. >> legislation would have to deal with the deficit. it is the single most important

issue facing our country. the expansion of the government evidenced by a takeover of the health-care system by the federal government, an incremental step is such that it is important members of congress focus on this issue of the deficit. legislation i would introduce would deal with a plan to bring the budget into balance as soon as possible. that would require a discussion of many issues across the board. that is legislation i would be introducing early on in my tenure. >> thank you for your question. on december 31, 2010 the bush tax cuts will expire. the next day every taxpayer will get the largest tax hike in the history of our nation. we cannot afford to allow this to happen, especially in a time

when our economy is struggling. we have 10% unemployment in indiana. we need to generate jobs without an artificial stimulus bill. the first legislation would be to make those tax cuts permanent. it will inspire confidence that we are serious about rejuvenating our economy and it will get as that on the road to recovery. >> the same reason that the state of india struggles with the bouncing of the budget the u.s. congress needs to struggle to balance the federal budget. until we have a balanced budget amendment that forces members of congress to control spending, to stop government from exceeding its constitutional bounds, we will not have fiscal responsibility. we have run up debt that is unconscionable. we are digging a hole that our

children may not be able to dig out of. you send money to washington and it will be spent. we have to have an imposition of those under oath supporting the constitution disallowed from spending money and not bringing our fiscal situation into balance. people are depending on that. we are losing credibility around the world because we cannot stay up with it. >> time served. >> thank you for the question, as a small-business owner that is one thing i bring to the table. i have never voted for an unbalanced budget. we need to control washington the same way. there should never be a budget that is unbalanced. we would have to raise taxes and put our children at risk, whether through deficit spending -- it is important for

us to ask our government to do the same thing so many families still, to have a balanced budget. it is a very appropriate thing with the trillions of dollars of debt one of my opponents voted for a debt ceiling increase. we cannot continue to borrow and spend. we need to stop the in balanced budgets congress continues to pass. >> that is just the point, our government is creating too much legislation. i am asking hoosiers to repeal a lot of this legislation that the government is shoving down our throats. this health care legislation must be repealed. it has changed the dynamic of who we are. we are no longer a free people.

i will work to repeal this legislation, for is an economy- killer. it is a killer of our liberties. >> our next question is from a student's point of view. he is from indianapolis. >> my question, do you think taxes are a viable way of getting out of debt? do you think a limited federal government can exist in this day and age? >> thank you for the question. i have a lot of friends on the campus of iu. we must lower taxes in our nation in order to rejuvenate our economy. president reagan approved if you allow the american people to keep more of their money they know how to rejuvenate this economy. yes, you can do both. we can lower taxes and live

within our means. that will force us to make difficult choices. we have to acknowledge that the spending binge we have seen did not happen overnight. republicans were elected in 1994 with a mandate to straighten government. it only took them 12 years to lose their way. we have to rebuild trust with what we do in washington. >> daniel coats. >> you hit on a very important point. raising taxes as soon as government needs more money. right now our government is soaking up some much through taxes and sell much incentive is lost in providing support for small business and providing relief forç homeowners that our economy is stagnant. government is bloated and doing beyond what is required to do. is spending money as if there is

no tomorrow. that is destroying our economy and putting us into a difficult situation. lowering taxes -- john f. kennedy lower taxes and it stimulated the economy. what is the role of government and how will we stop this ever expanding government? this health care plan will add hundreds of thousands of people to the government rolls. stimulus has added government workers. we have to stop the expansion of government. >> i think our government can exist and we could not do better. we in indiana have done the same thing. in 2005 we had a $1 billion deficit. we have eliminated debt without raising taxes. if you keep taxes low you broaden opportunities for people and reduce the cost of business to government. you are not paying as much to the government and can put that money in your own pocket.

you have so many more opportunities. it is vital with the massive amount of debt we have that we reduce spending and keep taxes lower. i believe that is what will get our economy moving. i come from northeast india out with high unemployment rates. -- northeast indiana. we need sound policies like energy policies that will get our economy moving again rather than more government. money to buy additional equipment or employ new employees so certainly we must make the bush tax cuts permanent this year but more than that, we must simply stop the spending we have a $3.9 trillion budget that is one-third out of balance one-third out of balance that's $1.3 trillion out of budget we simply cannot continue in

that manner we must stop the spending and we must cut our budgets and make the bush tax cuts permanent and that will go a along way to help small businessmen like myself >> moderator: mr. hostettler? >> ronald reagan often said >> it is not that the government tax is too little bit is that it spends too much. i have consistently voted to cut taxes across the board in order to allow people to keep more of their money and recognized that they invest much more wisely than bureaucrats. they have created the jobs as a result of the spending. might impose to bring the budget into balance -- it is that the government spends too much. it spent trillions of dollars at this point.

the question is not can limited government be a possible -- it will take place if we do not take steps now to limit government deliberately -- it will be limited as a result of an economic disaster that we must work to avert. >> you are listening to the indiana debate commission's debate of the five candidates for the republican nomination. our next question comes from barbara. she recorded her question with the help of our friends from lakeshore public tv. >> would you support legislation about the treaty president obama signed with the head of russia earlier this month for a reduction in nuclear arms by both sides and with verification? >> this is another one minute

answer. daniel coats, you can answer this first. >> i will not support that until i find out the details. we have seen treaties proposed that once you get into the details you find out information that does not justify the decision. i have to be frank with you. i think the foreign policy of this president is someone who has not had experience -- he has gone around the world apologizing to our enemies and not representing us in a way we need to be represented. we saw the positive results that resulted from that. this deserves great scrutiny. while it is desirable to reduce

nuclear weapons, i don't want to see the u.s. give that up given the policies of this particular president? >> i would not support this agreement. it is crucial for us not only to secure america, but also protect our men and women who serve in the military. one of the responsibilities is the federal government -- is national defense. we need to make sure we as americans that we are fulfilling that responsibility and making sure our nation is secure. we are the first to help those countries in need after a natural disaster. it is important for us to maintain our freedom through that strength we had in our military.

the president continues to weaken ourselves militarily, those countries wanting to do damage and hurt our freedoms will see that as a sign of weakness. it is important stand strong in our military. >> i will not support this treaty. i believe our president sent a poor message to those who wish to do america harm. message, this gentleman is bent on creating nuclear power, nuclear weapons and a nuclear iran would be unthinkable and we need to send them a very clear-cut message that if they build it, we will come >> moderator: mr. hostettler? >> barbara, i would not support this treaty because i think the president has gotten his priorities backwards and that is before you move to disarm, limit the capability of striking back, we must first

fully develop a layered national missile defense shield when i was in the house of representatives, it became the policy of the united states government to develop a layered national missile defense shield that would be able to defense us from not only long-range attacks from, say, russia but also short and medium-range attacks so that we could preserve the security of our -- of our -- our nation and all its territories we must do that before we seek to disarm, because without that defense, without that capability, disarming would be -- would not be in the national interests of our country and would make us more susceptible to danger >> moderator: don bates >> barbara, thank you so much for the question i have to tell you there are many times when i >> thank you for the question. there are many times when i feel like i am living through jimmy

carter park two. one of my greatest disappointments with president obama is his foreign policy. he has insulted our friends and apologize for our greatness to our enemies. i would not support this treaty. i was disappointed he pulled back from the czech republic and poland with the missile defense we promised them. i believe we are sending the wrong message. instead of a message for leadership we are sending a message of appeasement. >> our next question is from stephen per ervin. what is your question for our candidates? >> where do you stand on any future semi-automatic weapons ban? >> let's start with marlin stutzman.

>> i believe it is the people's liberties teeth. it is the second amendment for a good reason. i would not support any additional restrictions on assault weapons. i don't believe in it is necessary. we need to protect those rights. back in the 99 because there were votes to ban assault weapons. we have to be vigilant in how the government and fringes on our second amendment rights. we value those freedoms we have that are guaranteed by the second amendment. this election is very important. the nra is making a clear statement how they will endorse the upcoming primary. it is important to stand strong on the second amendment issues and would not support additional

appeals. >> i believe the founders were very clear with the second amendment. they were not talking about deer hunting, they were talking about protecting one's self and one's republic. i believe any attempt to take away the second amendment rights in any way is not appropriate to who we are as a people. it gives teeth to the amendments and has kept us a prosperous people. i will work hard to protect our second amendment rights. >> i oppose any new restrictions on firearms ownership. in 1995 i cast a vote to repeal the clinton gun ban put in place prior. i also opposed national gun registration and have worked to

make sure paperwork collected is destroyed within the time requirements of the federal law with regard to reciprocity, i sponsored -- legislation to allow those individuals with -- to conceal and carry with other states. i think the second amendment is very clear and we should not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. >> banking for the question. i will not support legislation that hinders our right to bear arms. the second amendment goes to the heart of one of our liberties, the right for us to protect ourselves. you will notice among most democrats there is a difference of opinion when it comes to the

second amendment. it seems like they are always coming up with legislation that will hinder our right to bear arms. there have been a few well- meaning republicans who have joined him. i will not support any legislation that will hinder your ability to bear arms. >> i would not support legislation of any of the three questions asked. the second amendment guarantees people the right to protect their home and their family. it gives the right to collectors to maintain weapons and keep weapons. that is a right guaranteed by the constitution. it is a right that ought to stay where it is. >> what would you like to ask the republic candidates -/ç askd the republican candidates? >> how would you cut spending

and attempt to balance the budget? >> i will start with richard behney. >> being 80 party guy, i would like to rip everything out. our economy is very sick. to do such a thing would throw our economy into -- nothing would be left off the table. i would take a businessman's approach and look at our budget and our expenses and look to make cuts across the board. we must make the cuts and must look at it as a people. these are entitlement programs. what are you willing to give up? that is a question each of us must answer for ourselves. we must start making cuts. our nation is depending on it.

>> it is an excellent question. it will take a layered approach. this year one-third of the senate will be reelected, so we will have numbers which we will have to work with in order to make the change in philosophy and the way of doing things. the first thing we must do is we must not allow for any new spending. when i was in congress for 12 years under democrat and republican presidents congress was lobbying for new spending. i opposed that. ultimately, we must look across the board at reducing spending in all areas. my only exception would be international defense given that the constitution requires the government have the defense of

our country. every other program would have to be on the table. >> thank-you for the question. this is one of the waste republicans lost the trust of the american people. it is one of the reasons we lost in 2006 and the lost to a democrat for the first time since 1964. we must acknowledge even republicans lost their way. i have been very specific about where we start. i am not a politician and i have çanswered these specifically. i am asking senators to take a 5% pay cut. i told you americans do not trust government. if we said weç have cut our pay 5% it will go along with. after the supreme court takes down the health care bill we must reform of medicare and medicaid. we must reform social security

for those my age and younger. we need to understand social security must look differently. >> thank you , i will try to give three or four quick points. now new programs, even if it is a popular program. we cannot afford it. government has way too much. we need to get government back to its original purposes. there are a lot of things governments can pass on to the states. there are things that can be done outside the government because they do not trust the rest of us. line item veto, offered that when i was in the senate. -- i authored that when i was in the senate. congress will spend anything they are given.

leslie on defense, i am for a strong national defense, but to say we will not take a penny out of -- there are items that have to come out that were built in the cold war. >> thank-you for the question. as a small-business owner i have dealt with budgets needed to be cut. we have done that under the state level. we have been able to balance our budgets and cut spending. there are three things we can start on. i believe we should eliminate ear marks. there is no need for earmarks' to be spent when we are facing trillions of dollars worth of debt. with our children having to pay for frivolous spending going on in the government. we need to look at every department head and they need to deal with their specific department as a business owner. how can i cutbacks we cut almost 20% across the board.

we can also look at the department of education which is a huge spender of those dollars. it is better suited for our states. rather than the federal government trying to find more ways of spending dollars. karen k. leonard is a retired teacher from indianapolis karen, welcome, glad to have you kind of step up to the mike so these distinguished gentlemen can hear you what is your question tonight? >> my question is by what parameters would you determine whether to support a nominee for federal office? for example, an appointee like a supreme court justice? >> moderator: we begin this time with john hostettler >> thank you, karen that's a very important question in that there must be a philosophy of government that underlies >> there must be a philosophy of

government that underlies all of these decisions. the senate has given the power to advise and consent. that idea of consent is important in that we should not look at every appointee who goes before the senate as someone who has a past because they had been chosen. of would ask diligently of this nominee is their political philosophy and how they would apply the constitution. i would not take part in a compromise that would suggest that future nominations would be based on some nebulous agreement. its is as a result of diligence we must make sure every nominee will do that which they are asked to do under the constitution.

>> thank you for the question. i am not here to talk about the past, i am here to talk about the future. i am concerned about what the supreme court will look like by the end of president obama's first term. i will weigh every nominee carefully, but i am probably buys from the get go because i know the philosophy of this president. i know how he is trying to shape the supreme court. therefore i am concerned. i will look at the records and whether they have been legislated from the bench in a way that proves to be a liberal activist. i am very concerned that these nominees and i am concerned about the future of the supreme court. >> the justices of the supreme court are there to defend the

constitution, not to rewrite it. they are not there to interpret it said they can advance their own ideology or policy projections to what they think congress should have done. that is not their prerogative. i was fortunate enough to be announced by president bush to shepherd through the confirmation process just as illegal -- justice samuel alito. there was a man faithful to the constitution for what it says. he was faithful to the rule of law. together with justice roberts, we have two models of who we ought to support, faithful to the constitution, judge roberts and judge samuel alito were great additions. >> it is one question that is

very important in today's government. the judicial branch is the third branch of government. i look at the judges as umpires to keep the rules of the game and not to be legislating new rules. if it is very important that those judges who are nominated by our president for the supreme court understand that. they are not to be changing the law, they are to be interpreting it. i would agree in the 1990 possible and senator coats voted for justice ginsberg, that that is not good for the process. confirmation hearings are there for a reason. it is more important that we've that each one of those nominations for how they viewed the constitution and what role they play in interpreting the law. i would support making sure we

applied strict constructionists. >> i had an american by s. -- i have an american bias. i believe our constitution protects life through its inception, disability, age, all the way until our father in heaven calls us home. i will not vote to confirm any justice to the supreme court who will not publicly announced they understand our constitution protects life and they are pro life. >> i'm sure you will agree there are questions from hoosiers that demonstrates hoosiers can come up with great questions. they came through our indian that the debate commission website. larry is from marion. here is his question. what are your proposed plans on the north american free trade

agreement and other trade agreements that allow companies to move out of the country and still get tax benefits? >> thank you for the question. >> i'm sorry, it one minute answer. >> thank you for that question. it has come up on the campaign trail quite a bit. i have heard people say we need to abolish nafta. i'm sure there is validity to that point, but it you were to abolish nafta i can promise you prices will triple in america. that is that the action we want to take to rejuvenate our economy. what can we do to preserve jobs in the u.s. and in indiana? i believe you do it through tax cuts. we are losing jobs to mexico. we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. why don't we incentivize

businesses to grow in our great state? let's not penalize them for sending jobs elsewhere. >> i agree with that. while trade agreements must be fair and must scrutinize them carefully, it is important as a nation that the u.s. be able to export to other countries. in the and that derives a great number of jobs from the export of goods. we have to be careful not to cut off our nose to spite our face. we need to provide the basis for jobs to be preserved in america. the incentives through lower regulations -- this administration is imposing taxes on small business, in opposing that on indiana is costing us all lot of money -- imposing

that on indiana is costing us. >> benjamin franklin said no country was ever destroyed from free trade. what we have done with nafta has been one part -- it has been good but we are hurting american jobs through higher taxes. we have the second highest corporate income tax. when that money is not going to the government, it is going back to standing and a comic -- expanding an economy. we need to lower taxes and have less regulation, because we are creating an unlevel playing field for companies in america. if we are going to tighten them down when we have free trade, as john's will start going elsewhere because it is easier to do business elsewhere. it is important for our economy

to put people back to work that we understand this business principles that made our country. >> this is just the perfect example if we get the federal government out of our business we can get things done. i've created hundreds of jobs in indiana and hired hundreds of employees. we have the best work force in the world. if we can't allow this work force to do the job we can allow companies to figure out how to get the job done, we can get it done. we must get the government out of our business. i will go to d.c. to do just that, to get the federal government off our backs. >> the north american free trade agreement was not a free trade agreement. it would have been easy to say no tariffs shall be imposed on american goods going into the

other countries of north america and no tariffs will be experienced by this exporting to america. it had to create an uneven playing field, otherwise the american economy would have overwhelmed the zero economies of mexico and canada. -- would have overwhelmed the economy'ies of mexico and canad. we must have agreements that recognized u.s. interests of workers come first. we should not get away the farm quite literally in these agreements whenever the agreements must devalue the ability for the u.s. to compete. >> gentleman, we are at the final question. it is not like final jeopardy, but our question comes from

someone fromçó moticello. i will read her question as she wrote it. you will have 90 seconds to respond. that will also include any closing comments to the people of indiana you might wish to make. what makes you exceptional from the other four candidates that you should turn our vote? we have gone through the full cycle nearly twice, so we will begin with daniel coats. >> i think what differentiates me from my colleagues is not so much the position on domestic issues, but the foreign policy experience i have enjoyed as a long-term member of the armed services committee and also serving overseas representing our country. i have had to deal with national security issues on a day-by-day basis during a time of war.

meeting with heads of government, working with our heads of government trying to fashion policies and being very engaged in all of that. let me just say this, the most important words of the constitution are, we the people. i think washington interpreted as me the president and we the liberals. at a time when they ought to be focused on getting our economy back on track they are pushing through a massive new spending programs that are running as deeply into debt. hoosier's know who i am. i had served them. i am a ronald reagan conservative. i am for less spending. i am for a limited government. faith, freedom and family have been my guiding lights. those lights are burning

brighter than ever. we need to be a nation who has a model of not we trust in government, but under guide this government can go forward. -- but under god this government can go forward. >> thank you for your question. i respect each one of these gentlemen and have enjoyed the campaign trail, but it is important for us to look at where we are as a nation to realize the attack on our freedoms and realize what country will we hand off to our children? as a small-business owner, my wife and i were married in 2000. in 2001 our son was born in august. we were down in florida the day we were attacked on 9/11. that they changed my life in realizing my son had his whole life in front of him. i believe we needed to get involved at that time.

we stood together as americans. i believe we are a citizenry that is frustrated with our government because it continues to infringe on our freedoms. our constitution is clear on what the government is structured to do. it is important for us to protect that freedom for our families and our future, to have a senator that will be responsive and will listen. i have had the opportunity to see how federal government affects our state. that is one thing that separates me from my colleagues, i understand the long arm of the government and how it affects our freedoms. i would ask for your vote and go to my web site. >> thank you. >> i appreciate your question. this has been an amazing year for me having brought the tea party movement and to be

standing with these four other fine gentleman, but i feel like i had been standing with four gentlemen who are applying for a government job. we have three who have been there and done that and one who has done little, but all four still had a goal long to get along attitude. -- a go along to get along attitude. it is time to send someone other than a politician. it is time to send someone who will say -- who will stand up and changed the game in d.c. we have an important decision to make on may 4. will we continue with politics as usual, or will we ride ourselves back to the government of the people and by the people and for the people and insert we

the people back into our government? stand with we the people on may 4 and vote for richard behney. if you stood at 80 party, i ask for your vote. -- if you stood at a tea party. thank you for being here. >> thank you for the question. why should you vote for me? when i ran for congress for the first time in 1994 iran to restore trust in government, so i put down on paper my stances on important issues. i was told by people who had done that before who had been in public office that you cannot do that. at some time in the future you may have to cast a vote that deviates from these things you put down. i wanted to restore trust in government. i wanted people to know i was going to do what i told them i was going to do.

if i was asked to raise taxes when i had pledged that i wouldn't, -- when i was asked to compromise on the right to life by folks in my party or an outside my party who said they would let this vote passed, i would not do that. i am hearing all over that what measures are longing for is a voice not only for the conservative values -- what hoosiers are longing for -- a voice that will be consistent in washington, that i will do what i said i will do. if we don't have that trust then we will never be able to make the difficult decisions necessary to put america back on the right track. >> thank you. >> thank you for your graciousness tonight. you have been a tremendous host. thank you for the question.

three of my colleagues in the past few days have worked very hard to earn the support of washington to win the nomination. i don't believe washington should choose this nominee, it should be hoosiers. i am a financial adviser. i am not a politician. i believe i have a grasp of the fiscal problem facing our nation. let me tell you, our nation is at a time of crisis. we stand at a crossroads. down one path is a socialistic state and the other is reagan's shining city on a hill. if you elect me i promise to lead the charge to reagan's shining city on a hill. ronald reagan said let us be sure that those who come after us will save us in their time that in our time we did everything that could be done. we finished the race.

and we kept the faith. i hope you will vote for me on may 4. god bless indiana and god bless the united states. >> thank you for a spirited discussion. i know our viewers across the hoosier state enjoyed it and enjoy listening. thanks to all of you for çwatching to our u.s. senate debate sponsored by the indiana debate commission. our thanks to the staffs. a special thanks to the voters to ask the questions. speaking of voters, primary day is tuesday, may 4. go vote for one of these five individuals. look for news from the indiana debate commission at that debates coming this fall. from indianapolis, good night. ho[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> sunday, the second of three british election debates with gordon brown, a conservative leader david cameron and nick clegg. they are competing to be the next prime minister at 9:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span.

>> c-span, for public affairs content is available on television, radio and on line. you can also connect on twitter, facebook and youtube. sign up for our e-mails at c- span.org. >> earlier today the arizona governor signed in immigration law that would require police to determine if people are in the country illegally. president obama singled out the measure as misguided. now, the president's remarks at a naturalization ceremony for active duty service members. this is about 25 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states, a comedy by secretary janet napolitano -- accompanied by secretary janet napolitano. ladies and gentlemen, here to

sing the national anthem, please welcome sergeant first class collin eaton. >> oh say can you see inhibit -- ♪ [singing the national anthem]

[singing the national anthem] >> please be seated. it is now my distinct honor to present 24 members of the u.s. armed forces from 16 countries throughout the world who /iáe applied for their u.s. citizenship. all of these candidates have been examined by the u.s. citizen and immigration services

and have found to be qualified to become united states citizens. citizenship candidates, as i read the name of your country please stand and remain standing. brazil, china, colombia, england, ethiopia, haiti, jamaica, kenya, mexico, peru, philippines, poland, togo, trinidad and tobago. at this time, please welcome secretary of homeland security janet napolitano who will admit >> good morning.

please remain standing. candidates, please raise your right hand and repeat after me. i, and state your name, hereby declare on both that i absolutely and entirely renounce all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, state or sovereignty of whom were which i have been subject or citizen, that i will support and defend the constitution and laws of the united states of america against all enemies,

foreign and domestic. that i will bear true faith and allegiance, that i will bear arms on behalf of the united states when required by law. that i will perform non-combat service in the armed forces of the united states when required by law. that i will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by law. that i take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation, or purpose of the asian, so help me got -- or purpose of evasion.

congratulations new citizens. [applause] . . >> our nation thinks you for your service. we owe the freedoms that we all enjoy to the sacrifices of men and women like you. since september 11, 2001, the

united states citizenship and immigration services has nationalized over 58,000 members of our armed forces, bringing immigration to our service. enlistees can graduate as american citizens. supporting this work is a cadre of immigration officers who work directly with the military and their families. many of these civil servants are veterans themselves and are keenly aware of the unique circumstances and multiple up once military families can face -- multiple deployments that military families can face. we hope to expand this to all branches of the service no later than the end of this year. we will continue to do everything in our power to

expedite the nationalization process to those that are already giving so much to their country. we are all proud to call you fellow citizens and now, it is my distinct honor and privilege to introduce to you the president of the united states. mr. president? >> good morning, everybody. thank you, secretary napolitano, for being here to administer the oath --for making it official. thank you, also, for leading our efforts to achieve comprehensive immigration reform so that america keeps faith with our heritage as both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. to director mayorkas and all the dedicated folks at u.s. citizenship and immigration

services, thank you for your help to these men and women, and so many of our troops, to realize their dreams of citizenship. we are joined by congresswoman susan davis, deputy secretary of defense bill lynn and the vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general jim "hoss" cartwright. most of all, to america's newest citizens -- it is a great honor to serve as your commander-in- chief, and it is my greatest pleasure to be among the first to greet you as a "fellow american." to you and your families, welcome to the white house. today is your day -- a celebration of 24 inspiring men and women and the remarkable journeys that have brought you together on this beautiful spring morning to our nation's capitol. the paths that led you here began in more than a dozen

countries, from peru to poland, from kenya to the philippines. some of you came to america as children, holding tight to your parents' hands as you arrived in a new world. some of you came as adults, leaving everything you knew behind in pursuit of a new life. and while your stories are your own, today we celebrate the common spirit that lives within each of you -- a spirit that has renewed and strengthened america for more than two centuries. we celebrate the love of family -- your moms and dads who were willing to say good-bye to their own families, their own countries, so they could have an opportunity to give you the opportunity you [sic] never had. like generations of immigrants before them, they worked hard. they scrimped and they saved. they deferred their own dreams so that you could realize yours. so today is a tribute to their sacrifices as well. and i would ask that you join me

in honoring your moms and dads and the families that helped bring you to this day. [applause] we celebrate the spirit of possibility -- an ethic that says if you're willing to put your shoulder to the wheel and apply your god-given talents, if you believe in yourself and you play by the rules, then there is a place for you in the united states of america -- no matter where you come from and no matter what you look like. it's the spirit that brought a young woman from the people's republic of china and inspired her to enlist in the united states air force, where she excels as a material management specialist. so today we congratulate our fellow citizen, yu yuan. [applause] it's the spirit that brought a refugee from ethiopia and led him to enlist in the u.s. army because, he said, he wanted to give back to the country that "has given me the opportunity to be all that i can be." and today we congratulate berhan

teferi. [applause] we celebrate the true meaning of patriotism -- the love of a country that's so strong that these men and women were willing to risk their lives to defend our country even before they could call it their own. it's a patriotism of a daughter of mexico, who came to america in those first terrible days after 9/11, joined the u.s. navy and says, "i take pride in our flag and the history that forged this great nation and the history we write day by day." so today we congratulate perla ramos. [applause] and it's the patriotism of a young man from papua new guinea, who joined the united states marine corps and deployed to iraq -- not once, not twice, but three times. asked why he would choose to

become an american citizen, he said simply, "i might as well. i love this country already." and so we congratulate granger michael. [applause] the four of you can sit down. you represent not only the branch of the armed services that you are a part of, but also the other members who are your fellow citizens here today, and we thank you very much. we're grateful to you. [applause] in short, today we celebrate the very essence of the country that we all love -- an america where so many of our forbearers came from someplace else; a society that's been enriched by traditions and cultures from every corner of the world; a dynamic economy that's constantly renewed by the talents and energies of each new citizen; and a people who understand that citizenship is not just a collection of rights, but it's also a set of responsibilities.

like so many others, these men and women met their responsibilities. they played by the rules. they have earned their citizenship. and so on a day like this, we are also reminded of how we must remain both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. this includes fixing america's broken immigration system. over the years, many have attempted to confront this challenge, but passions are great and disagreements run deep. yet surely we can all agree that when 11 million people in our country are living here illegally, outside the system, that's unacceptable. the american people demand and deserve a solution. and they deserve common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform grounded in the principles of responsibility and accountability. government has a responsibility to enforce the law and secure our borders and set clear rules and priorities for future immigration.

and under secretary napolitano's leadership at the department of homeland security, that's exactly what we're doing. we've strengthened security at our borders, ports and airports and we will continue to do so, because america's borders must be secure. that's part of what these young people here today stand for. businesses have a responsibility to obey the law and not undermine american workers, especially when so many americans are out of work. many businesses work to comply with the law every day. but for those that don't -- those that ignore the law and exploit and abuse vulnerable workers and try to gain an unfair advantage over all the businesses that do follow the law -- we will hold them accountable. and people who are in america illegally have a responsibility -- to pay their back taxes and admit responsibility for breaking the law, pay a penalty, learn english, pass criminal background checks, and get right with the law -- or face removal -- before they can

get in line and eventually earn their citizenship. so responsibility. accountability. common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform. i thank secretary napolitano for helping to lead our efforts, both on and off capitol hill. and i thank senators schumer and graham for working with us to forge a bipartisan consensus on a framework for moving forward, and i welcome the commitment of house and senate democratic leaders to take action. i'll continue to consult with democrats and republicans in congress, and i would note that 11 current republican senators voted to pass immigration reform four years ago. i'm hopeful that they will join with democrats in doing so again so we can make the progress the american people deserve. indeed, our failure to act responsibly at the federal level will only open the door to irresponsibility by others. and that includes, for example, the recent efforts in arizona, which threatened to undermine

basic notions of fairness that we cherish as americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe. in fact, i've instructed members of my administration to closely monitor the situation and examine the civil rights and other implications of this legislation. but if we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country. as a nation, as a people, we can choose a different future -- a future that keeps faith with our history, with our heritage, and with the hope that america has always inspired in the hearts of people all over the world. for just as each of these 24 new citizens once cast their eyes upon our country from afar, so too, somewhere in the world today is a young boy or a young girl wondering if they, too, might someday share in america's promise. in the example of these new citizens, and in the actions we take as a nation, let us offer our answer, with confidence and optimism. yes, there is a place called america that still welcomes those "yearning to breathe free." a country where if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can pursue your dreams. a society where out of many, we

are one -- "one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." that's the promise of america. that is the spirit that all of you are renewing here today. we are incredibly proud of you, god bless you, and may god bless the united states of america. [applause] now, we have one other piece of business. would sergeant ledum ndaanee please come forward. there he is. how are you, sir? >> hello, sir. >> growing up in nigeria, ledum probably never imagined he'd be standing on this stage today. >> that's right, sir. >> neither did i. [laughter] but thanks to the generosity of churches in virginia, he and

his parents found a home in the united states. and ledum, who says "i always wanted to be in the military," found his calling in the united states marine corps. he deployed to iraq, and was serving his second tour when his unit was struck by an improvised explosive device. in the weeks and months that followed, he battled to recover from traumatic brain injury. at a va medical center, with his parents at his side, he was presented a purple heart. and a few moments later, he was sworn in as an american citizen. this marine was not only determined to recover, he was determined to help others. he has been a leader and mentor to his fellow wounded warriors. in fact, i hear he's quite an athlete -- >> yes, sir. >> -- he agrees.

[laughter] he will compete next month in the first warrior games at the u.s. olympic training center in colorado. so for his distinguished service to country, and for inspiring us all with his example of what citizenship truly means, i am proud to join the u.s. citizenship and immigration services in presenting this recognition -- the "outstanding american by choice" award -- to sergeant ledum ndaanee. do we have the award? [applause] with that, i'd ask sergeant ndaanee to conclude our ceremony by leading us all in the pledge of allegiance. all: i pledge allegience to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands.

one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. thank you, everybody. [applause]

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ [applause] >> moral, on "washington journal," justin hyde speaks on the $6.7 billion owed to the u.s. treasury. also, changes in parliamentary

procedures with charles stevenson. after that, anya kamenetz. "washington journal," live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c- span. >> tomorrow, on america and the courts, the role of the media and national security issues. the university of texas law school is the host of this season. it starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> we really have to get this right because if we don't, we could stifle innovation. we could stifel be free market. we could stifle our economy and it could do more harm than good. >> as the senate moves closer to a vote, see the process unfold with congressional leaders and other experts at the c-span video library.

every program since 1987 is now online 3 >> and now, treasury secretary timothy tiner who met with his counterparts here in washington. >> how were you? nice to see you. i want to make a few opening remarks. i will be happy to take your questions. first, my compliments to our caribbean and canadian finance ministers who hosted this meeting today. they did a nice job demonstrating in this.

our meetings were about growth, about greece, and about financial reform. i know that the world economy is coming back stronger and more quickly than many people expected. countries around the world showing encouraging signs. we have all lot of work to do to reinforce that recovery. we want to make sure that as we are working to reinforce the recovery, we want to make sure that we lay conditions for a more balanced global growth pattern. that will require a substantial set of reforms.

i spoke to the greek finance minister this morning and i want to say that i very much welcome the sense of urgency that we are seeing and i want to encourage the greek authorities to move quickly to put in place a package of strong economic reforms and substantial, concrete financial support. on financial reforms, we are getting to the decisive moment, both in the united states and i am very confident that we will have broad support for a very strong package of reform. the u.s. is moving to address key vulnerabilities that helped contribute to this crisis. the rest of the world should see that we are not going to be a source of instability in the future.

of the u.s. can be a source of strength, a source of growth and a source of stability. it is very important to us, as we move in the united states, that we improve transparency in the financial sector and that we are doing so across the major financial centers across the major economies. i believe that we have a very broad consensus on the core elements, but as you know, the key test will be when we transfer that into a new global agreement on capital standards. that is the most task -- the most important task ahead of us. we have to get down to the tougher judgments. i want to make it clear that we will incest on fighting there -- we will insist on fighting very hard for a very strong set of

more conservative constraints on leveraging. that is the most important thing that we can do. again, i think that we have very broad support on the basic elements of reform. this will bring derivative markets out of the dark. it will develop better mechanisms for putting financial problems to rest. with that, and with statements that i made in my original statement, i will be happy to answer your questions. >> your career and counterpart said there was a central discussion on currency. was that true and was a

disappointing for you if it was true? >> we discussed, as we always do, the broad policies that are important to have a more balanced pattern of growth. what that means to us is that in the united states, it is important that we are taking steps to make sure that we are strengthening private investment and that we are putting in place a more financial -- a better financial system to rid we are borrowing much less from the rest of the world. as the recovery strengthens, we will move quickly to bring this down to a more sustainable vision. if you look beyond the u.s., countries around the world are

recognizing that they do not want to rely on the u.s. consumer to provide a source of growth. in the major surplus countries that are lagging the global recovery, we would like to see more policy reforms. that will be very important to us. in the emerging markets, you are seeing a substantial shift. we want to see that accompanied by a shift where it is obviously important to move to more market oriented exchanges. this has brought a consensus -- this meeting, like all our meetings, as those dimensions

and you can see some encouraging signs of shift, but we have a lot more to do. >>yes? >> mr. secretary, the canadians seem to believe momentum is swinging their way. >> all things are swinging canada's way. they won the medal in olympics and that is a good sign for canada. >> are you going to accept a fee as well? >> what me tell you what we're trying to do. we are trying to establish the basic principle pta. we propose a fee on risk. it would cover the cost of our

emergency financial rescue. that is a simple, basic impaired. there is significant support among other countries. the imf gave us a very thoughtful paper that achieves that directed. that was helpful. we will move in the united states because we think that is what we need to do. when countries see what we do, they will wait to see how we do it in the united states. i think that you will find other countries moving to adopt similar measures. i cannot tell how far it will go. obviously, as you have seen from canada and other countries, they have a lack of enthusiasm for that idea. if you look at how canada faired

in this crisis, they came out relatively well. it is no surprise to me that you saw a diversity of views on this. we are going to do what is necessary within our interests. i think that the world will want to watch what we do and i suspect it will provide a basis for other actions across the other major economies. i think that will be good. the basic imperative should be that we are designing incentives for future risk-taking. we established the proposition by our actions that we should not have the taxpayers bear the burden of solving meese -- solving the financial crises. >> i just wonder what you got from the premier when he visited beijing?

>> what common sense? in thcommon sense in terms of agreement? >> ok, what was the mutual understanding? when did you expect that china would move? but i want to be careful how i say this. i'm going to repeat what i have said before. at nothing new or different -- nothing new or different this is china's choice. -- nothing new or different. this is china's choice. i believe that they will decide it is in their best interest. this was a very important shift. i think that they will do it because it is in their interest.

that remains my view. >> >> i am from argentina. [unintelligible] argentina does not have an agreement and they do not have a consultation process. i was wondering if we would hope to have one and to comply with this? >> that is an excellent question, but i want to leave it to the managing director of the imf to respond. >>yes? >> on the subject of derivatives, of was wondering if

you could directly address senator lincoln's use? >> there was a very strong set of reforms that came out committee on thursday. we are now working with both committees to work out technical issues involved in this very complicated set of reforms. my judgment is that we will have a very strong package of reforms for the derivatives markets. the basic framework is to move the standard as part of derivative markets on to clearing houses and onto exchanges to bring transparency to these markets. we will make sure the major markets are subject to oversight. that basic set of reforms is very important to us.

i think it is important to all the major economies. i think we have a very good chance of getting strong support in the senate for those reforms. >> [unintelligible] >> it was said that some countries might be moving too fast on the financials. what i read that. i thought, "really?" we are not moving with excessive haste. again, i spent a lot of time with people in the world that are involved in similar efforts. i think that they would like to see the u.s. move. i think that -- i will say it this way.

we will move and i am quite confident that you will see the world move with us to replicate or to put in place a similar set of broad reforms to bring transparency. >> [unintelligible] >> no, but we talk all the time. the imf is very supportive, as they should be. >> [inaudible] >> that is an excellent question. i would answer it this way. out of a basic sense of fairness, we are going to make sure that we cover the cost of this crisis in the united states in the form of a well designed

feed on banks so that banks pay in proportion to the risk that they take. the basic principle is that the government is exposed to a risk of loss, we would recoup that loss in the form of a similar fee imposed on banks. that is the basic premise. we think that that makes sense. i think there is a very strong fiscal policy case for that. it is out of fairness that we would adopt that. >> i am with aero china. how would you address this fiscal deficit problem? it is proposed that by 2011,

developed countries should start to do it. i wonder if you have a timeline? >> it is going to depend on whether -- on where the recovery is. in the united states, we will start to bring down our deficit quite substantially over time. that will be the time that she moved. we would get them much closer to the point where we are living within our means. of course, congress would have to reenact those proposals. by letting the action expire, that would be the policy measure in our fiscal deficit

over time. our recovery will be weaker as we take steps to take action around the world. we will have the ability to bring our fiscal ability to turn. >> i have a question on the greek situation. was it any agreement on greece beyond just showing concern? >> i want to leave it to my colleagues in the imf to give you any more detail on the plans ahead. i see -- and you couldn't read

this elsewhere, based on what i heard, they will move more quickly to put in place the very important thing which is the strong package of reforms. i think i need to leave you. one more question? >> could you elaborate more on how the treasury apartment will move on the r and d issue? >> no, again, this is china's choice. i will leave it there. thank you all. >> tomorrow, america and the

courts, the role of the media and national security issues with a panel of judiciary correspondents. the university of texas law school is the host of this event and it starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> c-span, our public affairs content is available on television, radio and on line and you can join us on twitter, facedbook and youtube. >> and now, from the university of arkansas in little rock, the debate of democratic candidates running for senate. this is for the may 18 primary. it has been rated as the most competitive rates in the country. this hourlong debate is hosted by katv in little rock.

and businessman d.c. morrison. only one of these candidates will face republican nominee in the fall and all three will make their best case to you tonight. from the university theater on the ular campus in little rock. >> good evening everyone. it is my pleasure to welcome you to the ualr campus, whether you are watching across the stake or

if you are watching across the country on c-span or world wide. we are glad to have you. for the next 60 minutes, we will be engaged in an important discussion about the state of our state and our country. we will be focusing on three candidates. we would like to introduce the candidates to you, now. to my left, senator blanche will become -- centre blanche lincoln they will field questions from the panel. we have four people on our panel. let's introduce our panel. to my right is christopher smith. to his right is jessica being.

to her right is craig canion into his right is david catanese. the rules are simple. the panelists will ask a question and they will direct it to one specific candidate and each candidate will have one minute to respond. each candidate will have a turn. we will begin with a two minute opening statement. the order of that was determined before the broadcast i think katv and ualr for hosting us. i have been honored to be serving as your lieutenant

governor for the last three years. i would like to thank those that have embraced my family but such warmth and affection first, this means that your lieutenant governor has not slept in three years. the second thing that it means is that i have been in a maternity ward it least twice in the past few years and this is one of the great equalizers in our society. when you go there, everyone wants the same thing. they have the same hopes and dreams. but what a happy, healthy child. i have seen the parents and grandparents as they make that silent prayer.

that is why i am running for the senate. washington has added seven trillion dollars to our national debt, almost $100,000 for each arkansas family. washington listens more to special interests than they listen to us. they take special interest money and then they vote their way, rather than for arkansas families. they let wall street when our economy into the ground and then they want to take credit for finally noticing the problem that is the washington way. as your senator, i will not take a pay raise as long as the federal budget is still in deficit and i will get in the truck and whole town hall meetings in all 75 counties around arkansas. we need to put more arkansas values into washington. >> backs, it is senator lincoln.

>> thanks to all of our sponsors. special interests have been shooting at me from both sides. i will work consistently to get the best results for the people of arkansas. i know who sent it to congress. it is the people of arkansas. i worked hard and in 184 years. the senate committee on agriculture has never had a chairman from the state of arkansas, but it does now. these are the bosses is a part

of our economy. i have passed the most and is that child nutrition bill in history. this week, we brought some light to a derivative market so that lawmakers can no longer gamble with taxpayers in arkansas. i will continue to fight transparency -- fight for transparency. i stood up for special interests as i have throughout my life. that is what you sent me to washington to do, to stand up for what is good and right for arkansas. tonight, i come before the democratic primary voters, proud of my voting record that makes me accountable to you, the people of arkansas. i would appreciate your vote at your support in this election.

i would appreciate your votes in support in this election. >> thank you. >> d.c. morrison. >> thank you for hosting this. i am honored to be here tonight to visit with you. when i decided i would run for this office, i began by going all over arkansas, door-to-door, to meet people face to face to see if they felt the same way i do. they are dissatisfied with the national government but it time and time again, people have never seen it before and their lives and they invited me into their homes -- excuse me -- and i found that their concerns are the same as mine. one thing they are concerned about is jobs.

i have some ideas that i think can help our country rebuild our jobs. one of the things i would like to work on is the passage of the fair tax. it is supported by 82 current members of congress. it would abolish the irs and appealed the 16th amendment. you pay the tax on consumption and not on income. this would encourage businesses to invest in the united states insists sending jobs overseas. the tax code is called "code" for a reason. there is indecipherable rules and regulations that create -- that keeps americans in trouble with their taxes. i would like to work on this health care legislation.

how will 16,000 new irs agents and 150,000 bureaucrats improve our health care? they will not. within 10 years, private insurance will not exist and you will talk to a government bureaucrat in place of talking to your doctor. i want to do something about that. thank you. >> thank you. our first question is from a politico reporter. >> you have touted your opposition to what is known as cap and trade, where companies would be charged for their commission. in the last congress, you come -- co-sponsored a bill that would have capped commissions with the market based trading system i would like to know why you changed your position on cap and trade and where you stand today. but i do not think i've changed my position. i have expressed that it is critically important that we focus on lowering our carbon emissions in cleaning up our environment. i think it is essential that we lessen our dependence on foreign oil for economic reasons and in

terms of national security. we should see the challenges that exist by creating good, green jobs. i supported a bipartisan bill that came out of the energy committee. we look at energy standards. we make sure we but those in place. we make sure that everyone is helping to solve those problems, not picking winners and losers. the legislation that came through the house picks winners and losers. that does not include many of our industries and arkansas. we want to support wind and solar. we want to make sure agriculture's part of the solution. we want to encourage industries to be around the table as they lower the carbon emissions. but thank you. d.c. morrison is next. >> i am opposed to the cap and trade legislation .

i think the man-made global warning is a hoax. co2 accounts for 3% of the greenhouse gases. of that 3%, only 3% of that 3% comes from activities of man. i want common sense solutions. i would like to look at it. i do not like the man-made global warning argument. over the history of our earth, there was a mini-ice age. the earth's orbit caried in the orbit arounds the stem orbitunspots hand and -- around day sun. sunspots have an effect on this. we need to step back and take a but at this and do what works. >> thank you. i would not support the current cap and trade bill without some changes being made to it to level the playing field with some of our competitors like

india and china. i have been to china. i have seen the pollution . we are putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage. we clearly need to meet the goals of the cap and trade bill. we also need to establish energy independence. we are spending $1 billion a day on imported oil. not only is that a drain on our resources, it presents us with a national security issue . it is evidence of a real figure in washington. we've been talking about doing this since 1974. we have not done it.

it has costas in terms of security. if you send me to washington as a senator, i will make progress. >> our next question is from 4029 news. mr. morrison will be first to answer. >> the question for you, and a lot of views that you have seemed to be those close to some republican views. some viewers are asking what kind of democrat are you and how would you define the candidates running against you? >> i was born a democrat. my mother is a democrat. my family are democrats. the democratic party serves the state of arkansas well, very well. and lots of our county judges

are democratic folks working not for the little salary that they are paid but because they want to serve their community. my problem is with the liberal democrat in washington for duke i think that we should put it -- washington. i think the way to put party politics aside. i am not happy with either political party. i am an american first. i am a member of several hunting clubs. i am a christian. i am a father the way down the list i am a democrat. you can make of it what you want. i was born a democrat. i am a democrat. >> thank you for that statement. i would say that like d.c. i am

an american and a father, a husband. i am also a very proud democrat. i am proud of what the democratic party has done to advance our nation's ideals. i am proud of what the democratic party has done in its best days in advance in education for americans, in protecting medicare and social security, in trying to give everyone a great start in life so that we can all live up to our god-given potential. i do not shirk from that lightly or at all. we have done great things as a party. it is hard to put one word labels on both.

i know there are a lot of folks that would like to do that. i have some conservative and moderate positions to do i think all of them are within the mainstream. i am proud of that. >> thank you. >> i'm a democrat from birth. i am proud of that. i am proud to be an arkansas democrat predicted that means we do chairs the root of our democratic party, the encompassing is so much diversity that we know is a rich part of our history. i think it is important to note that democrats are doers. we work hard. whether it is educating our children or protecting our soldiers are making sure that our communities can create the environment where we can bring in good jobs. that is the number-one issue. i worked diligently in trying to eliminate the deficit and making sure that we create jobs. i think democrats are doers. that is where the reasons why i am a democrat. i'm proud to be an arkansas democrat.

>> thank you. our next question comes from jessica dean. >> good evening. my question to you is this. this will make it easier for unions to organize. do you agree with this or support it? >> the employee free choice act is really no longer operative. if you talk to labor leaders, that is no longer on the table. what they are talking about is streamlining elections, speeding up collections, and putting in place some opportunities for folks to make sure that they are not inhibited in their democratic decision making when it comes to whether or not to organize or not. interesting hoehling, senator lincoln was a sponsor of the employe 3 choice act. now she has been an opponent.

she signaled the leadership that should filibuster the employee free choice act. i am looking for a compromise. what i've heard of the principles of that compromise i would support. >> senator lincoln is next. >> i appreciate that the bill has seen that compromise. most senators have not seen that compromise. i think the biggest issues are jobs in the economy. the countries and when it the greatest climate since they treat depression. it has traded a volatile environment. there are 100,000 arkansans letter out of work right now. we can work to bring business management and workers together to help create a good economy. i do not support the legislation. i do not support card check. i think it creates a division as well as destruction at a time when we do not need that. we need all hands on deck. there are great strides that

can be made, particularly in looking at the national labor relations board and the improvement there. i hope that we will. >> mr. morrison. >> thank you. i like to listen to mike builders. some people may can sitter me an elder produced a guide that i really admire was senator george mcgovern. last year he made a statement that he opposed card check. i would have been opposed to that as well. senator mcgovern, if you like to know about his life, you can get the book. it is a great story. he served in the senate for about 30 years. when he got out of the senate, he went back to north dakota and one is to open a business.

he said at that time that if he had had any idea abou the votes that he cast while he was in the senate and how they really impact small business, he would not have done half of them. that is my point. a lot of the people in washington are out of touch with main street and the folks here. that is a good example. >> thank you. our next question is from christopher smith. senator lincoln will be first. >> what kind of judicial nominees to the supreme court would you support with your vote? would you consider a judicial activist or a very progressive nominee? >> one of the most important responsibilities we have as a senator is to judge those nominees that the president brings before us.