and to be thoughtful, compassionate, creative and confident leaders of tomorrow. education positively affect not just the life of an individual, but the life of a society. we at georgetown are committed to ensure that every shrove receives a quality education, -- every child receives a quality education. with our partnership with a network of schools, which brings with them a number of high- school students from all around our country, including from the secretary arne duncan's hometown of chicago, where participation in the washington, d.c. reitz program, and through the tutoring and mentoring of our 0- -- d.c. reads program and

through the tutoring and mentoring of our students, and it through the choice that many of our students have three made through teach for america. we remain to -- committed to confronting the pressing issues. the united states secretary of education comes from a family of educators. his late father was a professor at the university of chicago. his mother has run a south side triggering program for inner- city children since 1961 -- tutoring program for inner-city students since 1961. he helped fund a college education for a class of inner- city children under the i have a dream program. he was part of the team that started a new public elementary school built around the financial literacy curriculum.

it ranks among the top elementary schools in chicago today. for a 2001 to 2008 -- from 2001- 2008, he was the head of the chicago public schools. during his tenuere, the students' meeting or exceeding state reading and math standards increased. throughout his career, secretary arne duncan has focused on innovative approaches to education and education reform. we are honored to have him here with us today. secretary arne duncan, we are grateful for all you have done and for joining us here at georgetown university this morning. it is my privilege to introduce the united states secretary of

education, the hon. arne duncan. -- the honorable arne duncan. [applause] >> good morning. thank you so much for that kind introduction. i am a huge fan of his and this university. i feel smarter every time i come and a place like this. this university's commitment to academic excellence, leadership skills -- he was so much for what you are doing. i also want to thank "parenti magazine," for sponsoring this conference. my wife and i are huge fans. thank you so much for what you are doing. last fall, the president was in south korea where he had lunch with the president. president obama was aware that

south korea pose the economy had expanded rapidly in recent decades. so he asked the president, what is the biggest educational challenge you face? the president said without hesitation, the biggest challenge i have is that my parents are too demanding. when president obama tells that story, he often gets a few chuckles. i think the south korean president's comments were interesting. south korea has to import thousands of children. all parents insist that their children must learn english in elementary school if it will be successful. we cannot say that our biggest educational challenge is the consistent demand from all parents for excellence in our nation's schools. the south korean challenge is one that i would love to have here in our country by think

everyone would also agree that america strongly believes in good parenting and family involvement is essential if children will flourish and fulfil their dreams. the extraordinary accomplishment of the mothers in this conference are a testament to that belief. there is a paradox when we talk about family engagement in schools. it is this -- americans celebrate good parenting and family involvement, yet they feel that too often, the parents do not know their responsibilities. parents and educators have been looking out the window instead of in the mirror. inadequate parental involvement is seen as a problem for other people's children and not for our own. it reminds me of a story that warren buffett like to tell about a man who was new in town. the stranger walks into the town square. he sees a man sitting and reading the newspaper, next to a

chairman shepherd. he asked the man, does your job dog bite? he reaches down to pet the dog, only to have of the dog terror a shred on his coat. the man looks up and said, this is not my dog. i am here to say that we need to stop treating the issue of family engagement as though it is not our dog. parents think well of the school their child or children attend. but they believe at the same time that public schools in general across this country are not as strong as they need to be. the same split vision of education is evident when americans asked about parenting and family engagement at school. overwhelming majorities say that their parenting skills are solid, but they are actively involved -- they are actively

involved in their child's school. they are convinced that other parents are falling down on the job. other parents how about too little with homework, failed to discipline their children, or leave their children alone too much after school. this cognitive dissidence -- dissonance his troubled both political parties for years. it leaves paralysis in civic life. most parents think their own schools and family engagement is fine, fostering complacency about challenges close to home. but the challenges that other schools seem to distant or overwhelming to tackle. lamar alexander, a good friend of mine, and a secretary of education, once said that this i am o.k. but you are not syndrome is the overwhelming obstacle to everything we are trying to do. to many people say that schools are bad, but my school is good.

sour to your a bubble low math scores, but my johnny is doing -- sorry to hear about below math scores, but my johnny is doing just fine. when parents look in the mirror, they are forced to develop a can-do list of actions on how they can improve schools in support children. when they look out the window towards others, they produce and if only approach to reform. one word children can be helped if only others would take action -- one which children can be held only if others take action. every parent, regardless of race, class, socio-economic status, they want what is right for their children. but how do parents figure out that their school does a good job of educating their children? i'm the big believer in looking at data, but the acid test for this is personal. good schools engaged parents and the surrounding community. when i was ceo of the shuttle

public schools, i could walk into a school and five minutes and figure out what was going on. i have an 8-year-old daughter and a 6-year-old son. if i walk into a school, and it feels good enough for my children, i think it is a good school. if it is not good enough for them, that is a school that needs work. for far too long, we have created schools that are good enough for somebody else's children but not for our own. so this has to be personal. if not, we will perpetuate status quo. as president obama points out, all the innovative education programs that the administration is providing will not in and of themselves make a difference if each of us as parents and community leaders failed to do our part by increasing excellence in our children. i learned about family engagements schools firsthand at my parents' feet. in 1961, several years before i

was born, a neighborhood pastor asked my mother to help teach the summer bible study to a group of 9-year-old girl. my mother figured everyone could read a few sentences and pass the bible to the next grow. she was horrified when she discovered that not one of the 9-year-old could read. she decided to do something about that. she opened a free -- opened a free, after-school tutoring program. they were not the norm in chicago. my mother could not get any school to let her set up shop, because chicago schools generally shut down at 2:30 in the afternoon. so she opened the after-school program in a church basement in a poor neighborhood on the south side of chicago. we stayed at one church basement or another for the next four years. from the time were born, my brother, my sister, and i worked at that after-school program every day. the older students tutored along turkthe younger kids.

her philosophy was that everyone should be teaching and being taught at the same time. [applause] after we were done with their studies, we got to play basketball together. everyone knew our program was a safe haven where kids were nurtured, respected, taught right from wrong. from the corner of 46th in greenwood avenue, some remarkable success stories emerged. the teenager who had the tough job of to bring my group of students, today is an ibm engineer who i. another student became a brain surgeon. michael clark duncan pursued his dreams in hollywood. another helped me manage the chicago public schools. i learned of the high-quality tutoring program can be a good thing. but a high quality tutoring

program run by caring adults is a great thing. it can literally help transform lives. parents will always be a child first and most important teacher. parenting is the most important job that every parent takes on. no other activity in our lives carries the same degree of responsibility or influence. it also takes caring and talented principals, teachers, and guidance counselors. it takes nonprofits that provide opportunities for recreation. it takes to government agencies that provide health care. it takes mentors from the community and churches to teach children the virtues of community service, leadership, and self discipline. it takes a high quality after school and urban childhood education programs. with the exception of my brother, sister, and die, all the students in my mother's program were african american. despite these challenges, my

fellow students just wanted a chance to succeed. to see the extraordinary potential that every child has, no matter where they come from, that is what i learned from my mother's work. that is what drives me today. we cannot let a child falls through the cracks, regardless of what is happening in their homes, regardless of obstacles they face to becoming successful. poverty is a never destiny. my vision for family engagement is ambitious. as i said, i actually want president lee's problem. i want to have too many parents demanded excellence in their schools. i want all parents to be real partners in education with their teachers, from cradle all the way to a career. students and parents should feel connected and teachers should feel supported. parents can serve in one of three rolls -- partners and learning, advocates and advisers to push for better schools, and

decisionmakers to choose the best educational options for their children. when parents demanded change and better situations for their children, they become the accountability backstop for our educational system. parents have more choices today than ever before, from virtual schools, to charter schools. in our schools, we need to empower parents. we need parents to speak out and drive change in underperforming schools where children receive an inferior education. with parental support, struggling schools need to be turned around now, not some hour, because children get only one chance at an education. sometimes it can be pretty hard for parents to envision a brighter future, but not always. in fact, we have extraordinary parent leaders across the country. i met one this friday in texas. she refused to accept any excuses for her children or her school. she demanded that her high

school be turned around and do whatever it takes to give her kids the education they need and deserve. just two years ago, after some tough conversations, pain and hardship, that school did turn around. today, that school as a model of reform that everyone can all learn from. she is a hero who shows us what the power of parents really means. that is the power we need to harness if we are going to transform public education in our country. now, parent engagement is a two- way street. parents, in part, disengaged because schools sometimes fail to welcome their input, making parents feel intimidated about speaking up. parents come to school only when there is a problem, rather than touching base regularly to see other children are progressing. a good parent and family engagement program removes obstacles that parents face and encourages them to be good role models for their children.

in communities where adults need better literacy, more schools should be running family literacy programs were adult education classes take place after hours, with transportation and child care provided so students can study after school as well. for families where no one has attended college, i want middle school and high-school teachers and principals providing guidance about courses children need to be college-ready. families should be encouraged to visit college campuses, starting not in high school, but in middle school. the nature of parental involvement has changed since i was a child. more parents are single parents. if your families have stay at home moms. parents are sometimes -- fewer families have stayed home moms. some are looking for new jobs to support their families after being laid off. it is tough out there today. i was lucky to grow up in a family with two well-educated parents, who read to me every

night. not all parents -- children grew up in middle-class families or their supporters along the way. schools should be places of honor -- that honor and respect families. that may mean teachers giving up their cell phones to field questions at night. or calling that that single mom who missed a parent-teacher conference because she had to work. that neutral support is still missing from far too many of our nation's schools -- that mutual support is still missing from far too many of our nation's schools. as first lady michelle obama has set about childhood obesity, our kids did not do this to themselves. she points out that our kids do not decide what is served in a school cafeteria or whether it is time for gin class or recess. our kids do not choose -- for gym class or recess. our kids did not choose this sugar or sodium or super sized portions.

we have a long way to go before all schools support student learning and healthy growth. but parents are not off the hook,, in this partnership. president obama urges parents to turn off the television and shut off the x-box. many parents think those warnings are not really for them, but for other parents. i could not disagree with that more. earlier this year, the kaiser family foundation released a study that shows the problem of heavy media use and lax supervision is far more pervasive than many people imagine. in fact, the study's findings almost defy belief. the average teenager today spends nearly 12 hours per day using media. that is higher for black and hispanic students, and includes almost six hours of television every day. by contrast, teenagers spend

about 25 minutes per day reading the book. one of my predecessors, richard riley said that the eight magic words from children that can solve all our problems are -- please shut off the television. i am trying to read. we do not often hear those magic words. in the days when families share food and lessons learned at the dinner table -- they are fading fast as well. two out of three young people eat dinner with the television on. this oversaturation of electronic media has summit -- amassed by overly permissive parents do. only about 1/3 of the parents and the study report setting any rules on television, playing video games, and using a computer. parents rebelled against these limits, whether it is removing sweets from the dinner table or insisting children finish their

school work before playing video games. the time-honored fact is that the job of parents is apparent, to login and give them direction and set reasonable limits. -- to lovingly give them direction and set reasonable limits. the problems of new media -- is real, but it is transforming it education we. children can research online and watch educational tv programming. they can make connections on line. they can learn to socialize, communicate, and right through social networking sites. -- and write through social networking sites. the hopes of those new media proponents have only been at partly realized. heavy use too often in peace student learning. in the study, though some may have use of electronic media, spend less time reading books and do poorly in school.

i will admit that i was not raised in the vanguard of the technological revolution. in fact, quite the opposite. i grew up without a television in our house. when other kids were turning on the chicago bulls, we read books. my friends thought it was crazy we did not have a television. at the time, i thought the same thing. today, 3/4 of junior high and high school students not only have a television in their bedroom, but a profile on the social networking site. we will never put the electronic the genie back in the bottle, nor should we try. but parents can do a better job of setting limits on children's use of electronic media and work towards using it more creatively to support student learning. there are examples of using technology to better engage children in their own learning. but more and more parents are concluding that media oversaturation and addictions

are real problems for their children. these are not just modern-day afflictions that affect other families. it is time for all of us to look in the mirror and not just out the window. and that absolutely includes us at the u.s. department of education. [applause] for 45 years, ever since the passage of the elementary and secondary education act, the government has encouraged states, and districts and schools to promote parental involvement in children's education. parental involvement, for example, has been a cornerstone of headstart. yet the department has done a mediocre job of supporting parental engagement. we have been too concerned with monitoring for compliance and not concerned enough with improving student learning and boosting meaningful family engagement. part of the problem has been a

parade of parental involvement policies in the last half century. at various times, congress and the department have promoted parent advisory council meetings, volunteering in school, school parent context, and helping children learn at home, yet these policies have rarely been shown to move the needle on the student achievement. it is well documented and common sense that parental involvement in taught -- child education boost student learning and improves behavior in attendance. we know that children with parents or in case are less likely to drop out. there is surprisingly little research to show what works and does not in family engagement programs, to accelerate student learning, yet there are many promising programs all across the country. in arkansas, the national council for family literacy is running a family literacy program, primarily for latino and immigrant parents in their schools. parents spend two hours a week

in class with their children learning literacy practices for use in their homes. the reading scores of both children and their parents have risen significantly as a result. in chicago, or one development program has boosted reading and math scores using parental involvement. other cities like new york and boston, as well as one in florida, are empowering parents with information about their schools and education as never before. new york is holding monthly. academies on saturdays for parents. they provide child care, the subway access, and translation services in an array of languages. in florida, with did transparency, parents can determine not only if graduates of their local high school are going to college and jobs, but how their college and job market performance compares to that of other high schools in the state. our blueprint to reauthorize us

d -- it supports -- it empowers families with additional high quality school options. support programs that ask families how they feel about their child's school and educational experience, giving parents a real voice in -- and opportunity to engage. increases the number of schools that concern as community centers and provides more than $200 million for certain neighborhoods, which will have excellent schools and comprehensive community services. our proposal allows family engagement to be included as one measure of success in teacher and principal evaluations. and it would define professional development -- to include working with their students' families. we are putting more resources

into the it -- the importance of activities because we need to do more and do more faster. we need to do a much better job in this area. so today, based on feedback, we propose to double funding for parent engagement from 1% to 2% of type of title i dollars. [applause] to bring that total to $270 million. the same time, in order to drive innovation, we will allow states to use another 1% of title i dollars for grant programs that support and expand district- level, evidence based, parental involvement. we want is to think big about family engagement, to propose new strategies and hone in on the best practices there raise student activity. leslie, require our parents

information resource centers -- lastly we require these parent information resource centers. we must justify every dollar we spend and in short that it benefits our students. we do not have all the answers. but i am so struck by the extraordinary success stories of the delegates to the moms conference. it is not just that these mothers volunteer regulate and serve on -- volunteer on school boards. seated behind me, i am convinced is the future. on the stage are moms who crafted programs to train teachers to work with special needs students. we have mom secreted textbooks for kindergarteners and detailed curricula -- moms who created textbooks. we have nutrition educators who

are helping get junk food out of school lunches and vending machines. we have mothers who run summer programs that provide arts education and academic enrichment. so, today i want to honor all these incredibly strong women here, the woman in texas, and my own mother who, for years later, is still running her after-school program. -- 40 years later. all of you here have shown, through your commitment, your courage, and your insight, that we can multiplied your power many times over and over and build our capacity in knowledge to help parents unable every single child to learn and live to their full potential. thank you for your vision, thank you for your hard work, and thank you for the example you set for all of us. as a nation, we must educate our way to a better economy, and

collectively, you are helping to lead the country where we need to go. he was so much for having me here this morning. [applause] -- thank you so much for having me here this morning. >> we are going to make a quick status change, and then we will move into the town hall portion of the meeting. secretary duncan has agreed to take some questions from the audience and from our delegates on stage. it will take as a couple moments to get the podium out of the way. let me say that i will serve as moderator. it will be tricky because we have questions coming from the audience as well as the stage. there is a microphone in the middle of the stage, if you're interested in asking a question, move behind the microphone and we will get to as many questions as weekend.

if you're going to ask a question, interest out -- introduce yourself and provide context. name, affiliation. now i will invite the secretary duncan and susan to join me in the middle. i think we will start the conversation with a question from the editor in chief of "parenting magazine." . .

the president is committed to, and talked about it last week. it was hugely important, we did not want to see class size skyrocket and summer school after summer school being eliminated. i said earlier, the economy is still very tough. we would like to see legislation passed. we're working as hard as we can to make sure that it does happen. we see schools going to four days a week rather than 5 days a week. we need more time, not less. i worry a lot about summer school and after-school being eliminated. we want to see the focus of jobs still around education. >> we will fight for you. >> let me see if there is a question for many of the delegates on stage.

-- from any of the delegates on stage. >> good afternoon. thank you very much to georgetown for having -- parents, and secretary dunton. -- duncan. i have to give a shout out to benjamin franklin elementary school in connecticut. they took the time to write essays for you of what they need to succeed in schools. [applause] benjamin franklin elementary school. i state that because parents and use are the only consumers who don't have decisionmaking power. we need to be very clear about that. we can give input, feedback, but the final decision -- but the

final decision lies in the hands of others. it doesn't matter if you give 2% or 10%. if you don't hold school officials and school districts accountable to how they spend the money, we will end up in the same position having the same conversation. my question to you is, when you give this money, whether it is for improvement grants, early learning, it doesn't matter. the accountability, the checks and balances to ensure that they are spending the money effectively to ensure better outcomes is what i need to know as a parent. and every parent in the audience today, i want you to smile. this is a clear pathway to power. that is my question. accountability. >> these are phenomenal questions. for me, we have to get out of the blame game, and it is

parents against educators, it does not get us where we need to go. we have to hold ourselves mutually accountable. we're challenging everyone, saying that we have to give much better. we have a drop out rate that is unacceptable. 1.2 million students are leaving our schools for the streets every year. it is economically and unsustainable and morally unacceptable. far too many have to take remedial class is in college and are not really prepared. we can talk more about that if we want, but at the end of the day, we need to hold educator's accountable. you need to hold me accountable. we need to challenge parents to step up to do more, too. does this -- there is a story about south korea, what we had that problem here?

parents should not be shy. speak up. your voices should be heard, we need to work together in a respectful way. we have to do so with a sense of urgency. everyone thinks their school was ok and everyone else is not any good. these are hard conversations. in houston, they had a lot of resistance to change. a lot of folks say things are ok but they aren't. double the number of students in one year, graduating in going on to college, we can do these things. it takes courage. it takes every parent here looking at themselves in the mirror and being self critical. we're trying to -- we're going to push teachers, parents, administrators, school boards,

and we have to push ourselves harder than anyone else. what do we do individually and collectively? i think we are done. thank you. >> let's take a question from the audience. >> i have a question. i am a parent advocate. we go round and will help the parents of baltimore advocate. we help them navigate the system. we do try to help, and we try to work with the school system. when we can't, we have to get assistance and help. some of the parents are grandparents, some are parents that are not educated and cannot help themselves. grandparents may not have graduated from high school or from -- you know, finished

middle school. they don't understand homework. some of them don't get a chance or have the opportunity to understand the assignments that have been given to them. you talk about encouraging people or parents to assist were to work with the schools, but what about funding to help the advocates work with the school system? we have prevented some much, prevented a lot of lawsuits. the school system has saved a lot of funding. the grandparents have spent some much time raising them, the students. helping them go through the schools. there is nothing there in his blueprint, because i have read the blueprint. there is nothing to help financially assist the education of any of these groups that i have spoken of. you can't be college ready if we

are lowering the bar. they cannot assist and work towards goals of being number one in the united states if we are constantly lowering the bar and we're not building a good, strong foundation for our children. we take handwriting out of the curriculum, lower the bar for everyone involved. >> do less statements and more questions, we have a long line. quickly, we want to try it double funding from $135 million to $275 million to support parental engagement. we want to make sure we are finding those path to that work best. >> is that engagement being assisting finances to educate? or is that engagement to work with the schools? >> it will be determined at the local level.

we want to support the best practices or make a difference. if you can demonstrate the difference is making to students, we will support it. there are multiple ways of doing as well. the best dancers will never come from your from washington. >> i have a document like to leave with you before i leave. >> thank you. >> we only have 10 or 15 minutes. if we can move the questions quicker. >> i am amy from new york state, the executive director for health the school food. thank you for your efforts with obesity prevention. the child nutrition reauthorization act only happens every five years and is coming up now. an independent committee has only proposed a 6 cent increase that will do almost nothing. it still isn't enough. the question is, what can we do

when the food industry is still really defining what is healthy in determining nutrition policy and pushing their packaged food products and claiming that they are healthy with their unscrupulous labeling practices. how can we get to the real nutrition and a real funding to provide healthy food for kids so their bodies and brains can actually function? if they don't have that, they can't learn in the first place. >> for all of us get to where we need to go, we talk about partnership collaboration. a lot of folks think that -- i am fortunate to have a secretary who is a phenomenal partner. he is pushing very hard.

i am very hopeful. i got rid of the junk food and vending machines in chicago, and it was tough. i thought it was common sense, but it was a brutal fight. it was -- to me, there are a couple of things. it is really emphasizing physical activity, recess, after school. if i didn't get a chance to run around, i couldn't make it through school. i had a -- we know the challenges and the difficulties. i am convinced of this historic opportunity. if we do it right now, we can

change things for the next couple of decades. working together, we have a chance for a long, long time. >> i want to say thank you for allowing the parents to engage with you this morning. and the coordinator for the urban parent leadership program in baltimore city. what i like to bring to the table, as he spoke about parent engagement, and my concern is that as the money funnels down, getting to do the things we need to do. there is no budget line for

parent engagement. there is no budget line for parent involvement. and the statements that you said about how the problems are parents -- in our neck of the woods, when parents speak up about the knowledge they have learned and asked to raise the level -- you are excluded. you are pushed out of the neighborhood. these are parents that have normally volunteered. i have a group with me. the volunteer in baltimore city extensively. there -- they are parents, care givers, and more. we taught them how to build partnerships. what the law says about education, they were educating others had to get better education.

that is my question. many of the districts that get the money like to play with those who agree with them. they do not want to play ball with those that want to speak up, talk about what is for real, and keep a real. i am concerned that you come from a grass-roots organization and you have a lot of parents out here. first of all, they are never going to meet your face. parents are crucial, raising the bar, working with school systems, etc.. what is going to be done that the budget line clearly indicates? i have not seen a budget line yet. the grass-roots organizations, the schools like to play ball with. that is my question for you. [applause] >> that is something that we can

look at an oregon. i will say that this is about all of us building a different culture. there are many parents who feel disenfranchised by schools. we talked about changing it -- the money is never going to solve this problem by itself. it is about how you train teachers and principals to think differently. it is something that they are evaluated on. we talked about it being part of the definition for meaningful development. parents are scared of teachers, teachers are scared of parents so we shut down and close our doors. it is hard, it is difficult. you're living it, but we have to find ways to build provisions. when parents fight, who loses? the kids lose. when the parents and teachers fight, the kids lose and a fall to the cracks. i don't have an easy answer. we want to make sure their resources are hitting the

group's that are making a difference, but we have to break down the barriers and the fear to get folks working together better. i can use the bully pulpit, working through them and creating models that work. there are hundreds of those around the country. >> i'm going to need to interrupt because we have a time commitment. i apologize that we will not be able to get to all the questions that we have. they will get to work the next couple of days, and secretary duncan has quite a busy schedule. i want to thank the secretary duncan for being with us today. [applause] before you leave, susan will have a few closing remarks for us. if you could remain on the stage. >> i and the editor in chief of "parent thing.

i want to say to secretary duncan, on behalf of all of us, thank you so much for coming today. it means so much to all of us. parent thing into the modern congress, we applaud your efforts to include parents more in the education process, and we look forward to working together with you for many years. we hope we can continue to make sure that parents of voices are heard. i heard some very passionate voices today. these are the kinds of voices that need to be heard, as i am sure you agree. but just knowing that education is one of the most important issues to this administration, it makes me, as a mom, prideful and hopeful. we have to give them that.

i wanted to thank georgetown for hosting this event. you have been so wonderful. to our sponsors, thank you so much. and everyone in the audience, all the passionate people, give yourselves a round of applause for coming out today. [applause] thank you for coming. if you want to pose questions to parenting.com, we will try to get answers to you. >> can we get a picture with secretary duncan? if you can take a picture with the community -- >> i am happy to. [laughter] [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] the >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," an update on the oil spill with stephen power of the "wall street journal." after that, financial market regulation. after that, alec macgillis,. each morning at 7:00 eastern. >> the c-span video library

fact, there are nearly 6000 references to abraham lincoln in the video library. if you're one of the millions who enjoys our sixteenth president, you will find interesting programs online. there is also the book, "abraham lincoln," now in paperback at your favorite local bookseller. >> the republican candidates running for governor in california, after that, president ahmadinejad in new york. up next, democrats from the state that went to replace him face off in a debate. courtesy of kentucky educational television, this is about an hour. ♪ >> welcome to "kentucky

tonight." tonight, we will talk with the u.s. senate primary democrat candidates. our guests are attorney-general jack conway, lt. gov. daniel monjardo, darlene fitzgerald price, and marlene sweeney. thank you for joining us across the state of kentucky. let me begin by asking all of you, if you will, to give us a brief biographical sketch of who you are, what you do, and how would you do contributes to what you are running for the u.s. senate democratic nominee. let me begin with you. >> i am a family physician from henderson, ky. i run a clinic for the uninsured. i have eight children. watching them grow up and wondering what their future is going to be like, how much the deficit has affected their lives are ready, i can either run from

it or run into the race. i decided to make a difference for my kids and my community. >> mr. conway. >> i am jack conway, attorney general of the commonwealth of kentucky. i am married to my beautiful wife elizabeth davenport conway. i am proud of the fact that i have established a record of treating the public office as a public trust. we have created the cyber crimes unit that has taken 60,000 child porn images of the internet. we have created a task force that have addressed that particular problem. elder abuse prosecutions are up over 300%. i think that is a record of working hard. and we will make washington work for places like kentucky. >> of the top four candidates in this race, democrat or republican, i was the only one

born into a working-class family. i grew up over a laundromat. my father dropped out of high school when he was 15 years old. i know the value of hard work, and faith in god and a very young age. it is because of the struggles and sacrifices of my family that i was the first to be able to graduate from high school. i made it through college and medical school working through summer's end busing tables throughout the year. i am running because washington is broken. it works great for wall street and the corporations, and it has become about the pursuit of money. our country is in trouble. i am running to change the culture in washington. >> i have a different career than most politicians. i am not a professional politician, is my first race. look at where we are at. i began my career serving on active duty in the military

police corps, and i became a special agent on the front lines on the war on drugs. i ran counter smuggling operations. i found out that i would say -- that i had exposed major corruption in my agency when many managers allowed what would have been the largest on record for any agency, 40 -- up to 40 tons of narcotics. from there, i came to the solid conclusion that our elected officials are not voting in the interests of us, we, the people. they are voting in the interest of who is funding their campaigns. i decided to run a different kind of race. i will not take a dime of corp. money or bank money into my campaign. that can be verified. i am not anti-corporations. but they should not on our government.

that is what is broken. you can't be drinking from the corporate kool-aid and asking everyone else to turn in their cup. >> i was raised on a dairy farm on east jefferson county. i come from five generations of teachers, farmers, and community leaders. my father was a teacher, principal, insurance salesman, and went to medical school to become a dentist. my mother is 91-years old. my sister and i take care of her. she wrote -- my dad died when i was 6. i am a graduate of eku. i worked seven years for national city bank, the campaign

for jefferson county. we went back for another stands, and now i am a small business owner. >> let me ask you all again. tell me what separates you from the rest of the candidates here. >> what distinguishes you, and why should democrats vote for you? >> i believe that you shouldn't have to be a doctor, lawyer, or a baseball player, but you have to have a record of serving. >> we ask people to serve every day. i like to think i represent those that volunteer. you know, there is a big difference between an opportunist and a leader. an opportunist with tell you what you want to hear, a leader will tell you what you need here. we have had too many opportunities to run for office, we give it to them, and they are running for something else 13 months later.

was it about us and our sacred trust, or was it about their own self? their quest for something else? i believe that we have to empower other people to try to do what we are doing. it is to run for public office, make a difference, and say no. >> we are in three wars right now, to in the middle east, and the forgotten war. the war on drugs. i have counter-terrorism and counter smuggling experience. i am the only one that can say that. this is a federal government position. as a federal agents working on the task force, i have worked with virtually every agency within the federal government. i have done in various

undercover work, and when i blew the whistle, i did not write a memo. why gave testimony in front of congress, i was on c-span twice, and as nbc, fox news. the cartels would love to have my head on a stick for exposing their huge pipeline of mark -- narcotics. i put the lifeline on the line from my country. i am the only one that can say that. the veterans also in the of voice on capitol hill right now. my son just joined the military. we need a voice for women. we have no voice for women. in the women's centers -- no women senators. we need a voice for women. we definitely need someone who has proven to be a real watchdog.

>> i have a 25-year history of being on the front lines of health care. the vice chief of staff, chief of staff, i have stood up and change the culture. i have been a three-term state senator. i have a record of passing landmark administration. kentucky is being seen as a leader in health care delivery -- also, with tourism. we are making kentucky the number one destination for everything you can imagine doing outdoors because of the legislation i have done. i did it as a doctor, a state senator, and i will continue to do it as the united states senator. >> i have been very up front in this campaign, but this race is not about me. this race is about the people of

kentucky. they're hurting right now. we have a state with 11 percent and unemployment, families are being torn apart because people are worried about educating their children. i think i have been the most up front and on the campaign trail. i have a plan for jobs, opportunity, and accountability. a home tax credit will go farther than the congress has already gone. . .

>> i have been endorsed by kentucky right to life, which is the first endorsement for democratic candidate for senate a long time. i would like to see the party breathing out of both the left and right side. i make fiscal conservative. i am a political and social conservative. i see things from a different perspective than the other candidates. i think i am more in tune with the majority of kentucky democrats in the state, because we tend to be more conservative. >> we invite your questions tonight from kentucky viewers. you can send an email. please include first and last

name, town or county in your message. you may also want to use our web form. click on "contact us." 1-800-495-7694. you had a war of words on the air waves recently. i would like to give you a chance to refutre the claims. you made the claim that the attorney general approved utility rate increases and took thousands in a campaign donations. mr. conway, you countered by saying he saved taxpayers on utility rate increases and accused lt. governor daniel mongiardo of excepting campaign donations from utility

employees. who is right and who is wrong? >> he is not. i think this is important, because right now, what we have is the campaign is in a demanding phase. what dr. daniel mongiardo has been saying, he has been stretching the truth. he has been stretching it to 10 full of what had actually taken. i do not approve -- sti did not approve utility rates. it is an administrative procedure, not a criminal procedure. two former attorneys general are calling on the lieutenant governor to knock it off, because the fact of the matter is, i have gone before the public service commission. we have fought and fought in an aggressive pace to save the ratepayers of this state over

$100 million. i have not only done in the area of utilities. i've taken on the pharmaceutical companies. i sued 47 different pharmaceutical manufacturers. we are collecting medicaid, up over 600%. this is an effort by his campaign to distract the electorate -- electric from other issues. >> is he right or wrong? >> if you save us any more money, we will all go broke. the report that he took $10,000 . he took $57,000 from kentucky utilities and turned around and agreed to a rate hike. you cannot serve two masters. the attorney general is supposed to be the guardian for ratepayers. you cannot be the person to

protect ratepayers and then turns around and negotiates with utilities when you take money from the utilities. >> are these reports incorrect? >> they are incorrect. >what you are doing is you are saying anyone who is ever had a contract with lg &e new hampshire extrapolated out to where they claim there was an hour -- and they extrapolated out to where they claim it was an outlandish amount of contributions. represented low-income constituents. i save the ratepayers of the commonwealth of kentucky over $100 million. i got a decrease from the previous rate in their electricity rates. dr. daniel mongiardo's allegations do not hold water. >> i do have to respond to that. he has taken money fromatmo atms pac, the political action

committee, from their executives, from the registered lobbyists for lg and e, and kentucky utilities has a $262 million a rate hike request in front of the attorney general. you is he representing? is he representing the ratepayers or the utilities? you cannot serve two masters. it is a conflict of interest. >> i will respond to you that they have a rate request in front of the public service commission. as the attorney general, we are filing a motion to dismiss the case, since these utilities were going to be acquired by an a state company. i will dismiss a request for a rate increase. >> a conaway press release states then daniel mongiardo

claims $30,000 public fought -- public housing allowance as part of his compensation package. he was behaving like a wall street executive and said he abused tax payer money as lieutenant governor. in your campaign advertisement, daniel mongiardo claims conway is passed by wall street -- backed by wall street. >> he has taken over one of a thousand dollars from big banks, executives from wall street, from bear stearns, from merrill lynch, from goldman sachs, and as far as the housing -- a $2,500 per month housing allowance. i was listening to a new television advertisement that jack has on the air. it reminds me -- i'm from eastern kentucky. a friend of mine says that what he is saying is much like

shaving tick. a pig. there is a whole lot of squabbling going on. jack attacks my life from ordering a $7 -- $7.50 cup of crumble aeme brulee. he charged taxpayers for fancy french bottled spring water. what constituents are asking is, are you too good to drink water from the tap or too lazy to walk down the hall and get it out of a machine for $1? >> bill? >> this is a clear abuse of the public trust. he gets a housing allowance of $30,000 per year. the lieutenant governor used to have a mansion. now to get a housing allowance. daniel mongiardo has been renting property in franklin county. what he claims he was doing when

it was first confronted with the question was, he said he was putting the money into this property. they have not lived up there. what it is is a private, real- estate deal. he has been trying to develop his property with partnerships, the company is called 21st develop properties. it's been going on since 2003. a reporter came up and confronted him with his sister to develop this piece of property. now claims the stove is broken. what he has done is taken the taxpayers' money and put into private real-estate. the reason spending on creme brulee and using taxpayers' money. a newspaper looked at both of our spending. it is seven times what mine is. he billed taxpayers for state dinners. he billed the taxpayers to go to a facial cosmetic surgery

practice in las vegas. >> answer those questions, daniel mongiardo a , especially about the property. >> i had a partner in 2003. i decided not to. he went ahead and bought it three years later. the furnace was broken. if jack had his facts straight, he would understand that. here is the fact. jack has run a u.s. senate campaign for the last one. five years. he has not done the work it takes to build a winning campaign, and now this is what he has got. he is attacking me. it does not have one job or fix health care. he does not have a vision for the state. this is all he has got. i thought we were going to come here and talk about our vision to make kentucky a better place. i will stand up and fight for the people of kentucky. all these claims, they looked into this and said it was bogus.

it was absurd. he has scoured to my record for 10 years and this is all he has got. he is in sad shape. >> on cap and trade, daniel mongiardo, your latest advertisement that ran adjacent to the kentucky derby says that jack, which supports cabin trade while investing millions in texas natural gas. mr. conway, is that true? >> no. that is not true at all. >> you did not support the captain trade legislation? >> i did not support the cap in trade legislation. i judge any energy bill by four criteria -- one doesn't do the right thing by kentucky. you know, does it do the right thing by our electricity rates, because we have a lot of companies that are here because of our lower electricity rates. does that make sure that traders are not getting rich off of this scheme? are china and india and other emerging economies playing by

the same roles? when you put the cap and trade bill up against that criteria, it does not pass. according to the treasury board, it will cost the average american family $1,700 per year. that is too much. i have been consistent. i cannot care what any newspaper has said. i oppose caps and trade. it is a raw deal. >> what would you include that in an advertisement that aired over the weekend? >> his home town paper, a pretty large paper, other newspapers have all said the job, and we supported cap and trade. he may have changed his position because of the key he has taken, but the facts are the pet -- the heat he has taken, but the facts are the facts. he invested $5 million in the texas natural gas company that pipes natural gas from louisiana and texas up to kentucky in exchange is it to atmos, which

he regulates. a clear conflict of interest. >> is that true? >> no. the ranges that you put in the disclosure reports for the u.s. senate. i disclosed that i have invested in this natural gas company. the price of natural gas fluctuates. if he knew anything about utility regulation, he would understand that. >> he has invested more than $5 million in that company. and that natural gas comes to kentucky. we pay for that natural-gas, three other utilities. jack has direct oversight for us ratepayers'. >> the questiis representing ths or utility companies? -- is he representing the ratepayers or utility companies? >> it should there be legislation to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions by limiting carbon pollution for companies that operate coal- fired plants? >> absolutely not. i think the cap in trade is based on bad science. that will hurt our economy and hurt kentucky coal. what these two gentlemen demonstrated -- we need somebody in washington that is a problem solver, not someone causing problems. we need to have kept in trade taken care of, and not affected at all, because it will hurt our economy. it will hurt our business. it will hurt kentucky coal. the way the economy is and the way the deficits are, we cannot have anything else on our backs. we have to help the consumer. not hurt them. >> i am against the cap in trade bill. it as many loopholes in it. you will have to change the name to the cap and fraud bill. there is no way to enforce this. we will have to invent the cap and trade police.

it is a very badly written bill, too many loopholes. there are other ways to reduce greenhouse gas. we do need to be doing something about climate change. when 11 generals from the pentagon who are anything but left leaning write a report that said, climate change, called global warming, a threat to national security. i think the cat is out of the bag. we need to move on this. we need to come up with a bill that does work and is not full of loopholes. >> mr. sweeney, what about reducing emissions from coal- fired plants. >> i think that people who are opposed to get in trade have a hidden -- doing something about carbon emissions is inevitable. kentucky can dictate change or change will be dictated to it. that's why we need a senator who will be able to get the attention of the senators, of

his colleagues, and be able to demonstrate what coal means and what happened trade can look like. we already have -- what can and trade can look like-- what cap and trade can look like. it is something that coming. he will not be able to change it. we need to be able to put a center who the rest of -- a senator whom the rest of the world war -- rest of the country will listen to. one of the things that's missing is the truth. you asked these guys to tell you the truth, and the public should not have to decide which one is telling the truth. somebody who is willing to take the truth and tell the truth regardless of consequences. >> this is our first web messes age.

there is presently in obama administration initiative for a high-speed rail corridor in the midwest linking louisville to chicago. how'd you feel about funding amtrak and other passenger rail initiatives? >> i came out with a comprehensive proposal to make louisville the hub in kentucky. we are being left out. our leaders in washington do not believe in a high-speed rail system. we need to be part of an integrated transportation system, including high-speed rail, light rail, and rapid access monorail systems. louisville can be one of the hubs. with a high-speed rail coming straight to the heart of kentucky. we are blessed geographically by being the great heart of our nation. we ought to be a crossroads for every $1 billion we spend on this mode of transportation we sustain 36,000 jobs right here in kentucky. we are already paying for.

for every gas tax we sent it -- 80 cents goes into roads and bridges account and we get 94 percent of that back. 20 cents goes to a transit account. we get less than 20% of that back. if we had plans for high-speed rail and rapid access bader raúl system, we can get that money back to start to pay -- grab a excess monorail system we can get that money back to start to pay for itself. it is a job creator we can have appeared and it will create an infrastructure for -- and it will create in in the structure for our country. >> why don't we save the money and put it against the deficit and start cutting expenses? we do not need to be spending our way out of the recession, but we need to look at ways we can save money, pay down the deficit, and get taxes off our backs. >> mr. conway? >> i support the high-speed rail

corridor coming from chicago down towards atlanta and coming to the commonwealth of kentucky. daniel is talking about modern real and a light rail. that is a lot of money. -- monorail. in jefferson county, we have been to a 16-your conversation about transportation. we have decided that the most pressing needs are those two bridges, in east and bridge to bring us together as our region. my first transportation priority in the u.s. senate would be to make sure we get those bridges finally built. >> what jack does not understand is it -- there are two different accounts. there are roads and bridges. i am all for that, not only in louisville but in henderson. there is a separate account for mass transit. if jack understood that, and we are sending our money to washington which goes to new york and other states. we could start to build this.

once we start to build it, we create the atmosphere to bring private companies which will create long-term, high paying jobs. it will be one of my party. >> i have lived in jefferson county for a long time. i understand jazz -- transportation needs. >> i work for the transportation cabinet for four years, and i can tell you that pie in the sky sounds good. people are telling you what you want to hear versus saying what you need to hear. is not affordable. it is not an idea -- a new idea. they have done it before and it failed before. they are talking about are trying between low of zero, lexington, and in northern kentucky. -- between louisville, lexington and northern kentucky. that is the rich getting richer.

we need to use existing rail and tried a pipe people into those sectors where the jobs are. >> we will take our first telephone call from jamie lee. ." >> hello. can you hear me? miti the is behind this telephone call people -- my television is behind this telephone call. turn it down. my question is for daniel mongiardo, and that would be that i want him to win because i think he is the best candidate. but darlene fitzgerald is talking about a problem in kentucky with drugs. one the biggest problems we have an kentucky right now is with prescription drugs. and they are not all toxic cotton -- oxycontin.

i want to know what these candidates will do to stop some of that. how are they going to stop it? >> thank you very much for your question. ms. price, the drug problem. how would you do a better job in kentucky than what is being done today? >> i know a lot about it. i was on the front lines for many years. number one, you have the backup the money. why is there so much oxycontin flooding the market? big pharma buys off our politicians, and they know they have much more on the market than they have prescriptions for. they get away with this. if we do not fix crony campaign financing, the legal borrower worry and lobbying on capitol hill, -- the legal bribery, it will and us. methamphetamine is a huge problem in the state.

a tried-and-true thing is drug corps. the people enter have an 80% finished rate. -- success rate. we need to expand drug course in the state. -- drug corps. our counties are going broke, our jails are getting to waufle. i have been to every single county in this state. our jails are getting too full. every jailor will tell us we are going broke because we cannot afford to house all of these drug people. everyone we are resting. oftentimes, these are people who, their only real crime is they are addicted to drugs. i am not saying that is good. it is bad. but when you take someone in possession of drugs, and throw them in jail, you are sending them to crime school. they will get out. when they do, they will have a new set of skills. what we need to do is go to drug

crops. the hammer, carrot process they use it works. we need to expand that. that is more important right now. the drug addiction and the thievery that goes on with it, everyone in the state has been affected by this. >> let me move on to the arizona immigration law. would you be in favor of a state or national law based on what we know as -- has occurred in arizona? >> we have a national law. it says is illegal to be here. we need to better enforce the law we have. i have expertise. i lived in arizona and on the southern border and in california. >> we need a lot on the books right now? it is adequate if we had enforcement? >> that's right. we have laws the state is illegal to cross the border. it is illegal to be here. the reason it is not being

enforced is several things. number one, we have no border security. we have no port security. we have window dressing. that is not quality agents. we have agents that are sitting out in the desert in doing dangerous jobs. they are outgunned, out man. they did not have proper radios. they do not have the proper vehicles. they are put in danger every day because we do not have enough manpower, and of radios, the right kind. we do not have it in iraq for ability for them. that needs to be fixed -- we do not have interoperability. we have over 9 million containers coming in to this country every day, and less than 5% of them get checked. >> what about the errors on a lot? >> we need to beef up patrols by 20,000 men. >> -- what about the arizone law? >> we need to beef up patrols

by 20,000 men. we need to find the source and the employers that bring them in and support them. >> so no new national immigration policy? >> i think we have it. we need to enforce it. >> do you think illegal immigrants should be arrested, and immediately deported? >> what we do not need our states developing a patchwork system of immigration laws. darlene is right. we need the federal government to step up. as the chief law-enforcement officer of the commonwealth of kentucky, we do with immigration and customs enforcement from time to time. what i know is that kentucky is part of the several state region. there're only nine officers as part of this region. we need immigration reform that is tough, fair, and makes sense.

12 million illegals are in this country, many of whom have kids and our board here. they need to go to the back of the line and get behind those who are in the country legally. >> we need to beef up the border and not let them come in, because not only are we letting illegals come in but potential terrorists as well. we do not need state by state laws. arizona acted because the federal government was slow. this is a constitutional, federal constitutional issue. the federal government needs to get this. >> what would you do to employers that employed illegal immigrants? >> that is one of the things we need to do, decrease the demand for those jobs. if those jobs go way, illegal immigrants will go away. they are here for those jobs. because of the recession, the illegals have gone down by some 10% to 50%, because the jobs are not there. they have gone back to mexico. we need legal immigration,

because there are a lot of employers across the state in this country that need that work force, that is not available. the first thing we need to do is make sure every kentuckyian that wants a job has a job. then we need legal immigration. we need to tighten up our borders. >> this email from chad crabtree in frankfurt. what current or former supreme court justice would best suit -- described a perfect justice? >> i think clarence thomas is excellent. he represents mary -- many different facets of our society. he is well educated, well scripted in what he says. he is an excellent justice. >> who would you choose, mr. conaway? >> stephen breyer. i've had a chance to meet him. he is an amazing intellect. he is able to outthink an hour right his colleagues. -- and out-write his

colleagues. he understands the great mantra of the supreme court, equal justice under law. he believes about giving opportunities to those who need the opportunity. >> to somebody else have a choice? >> i like stephen breyer myself for the same reasons. >> what are the attributes of an ideal justice? who should they be, with an appointment coming up? >> i think we need to level the playing field. the supreme court right now is too far to the right. because of the bush appointments. we need to appoint someone a little bit more left-leading to level the playing field. i think it needs to be an objective supreme court. right now i do not think it is. >> somebody that interests the constitution and sees it as a document they need to go to, not a briefing document they can use to make up whatever -- a breathing document they can use to make up whatever.

it needs to be something they look at that has standards. look at what is written there and go by. not try to get international law to affect what we have here in the united states. >> look at the latest -- sonia sotomayor, who is a self-made person. she has an immigrant background. she entered is the constitution, has a great character and great intellect. who was initially appointed by republican presidents, and now was appointed later on by democratic presidents. i will not have a litmus test when it comes to voting for a supreme court justice. i will instead look at their character, their intellect, their background to make sure they enter the constitution right. >-- enter the constitution righ. >> allow people on the right to cry activist judges. -- a lot of people on the right

decry activist judges. there was an equal protection rights and set in the future courts could not rely on that. if that is not judicial activism, i do not know what is. >> the final word? >> and his presence of record, most of them appointed -- they have been more activist than just going by the constitution. and the last election of george bush, we have seen it over and over again, were the supreme court got overly involved. >> the second telephone call from greyson county. welcome to "kentucky tonight". question or comment, sir, please? >> i wanted to ask everybody, you're democrats, but you are from kentucky. so once you get into the senate, just because, say harry

reid is pushing an agenda, doesn't necessarily mean it is good for kentucky. >> thank you very much. appreciate your question. let's begin, mr. sweeney. >> i think what you are seeing is the beginning of the end of partisan politics as we know it. kentuckyians are tired of the partisan politics. we are tired of red versus blue. we want the best people who will look out for the interests of the people of kentucky. i think the listener is right. we need to have people who can think for themselves and to have been proven leaders. that is one of the things i am most proud of. >> ms. price? >> i have a record of standing up in the face of extreme adversity against the federal government, to the point of putting my life on the line. i have had guns pointed at me. my leadership includes, i have

had decisions where i have had to make -- i have had people -- if i made the wrong decision, my colleagues and i would have ended up on a cold sweat. i think i can stand up to harry ried. >> i have stood up against this current administration when it comes to cap and trade consistently. i opposed the ben bernanke and his reappointment. i have stood up and worked with the opposite party. david williams, the president of the senate is a republican, and i co-sponsored the health bill. the adventure -- adventure tourism bill, which went through both houses and was bipartisan. we need someone who has a record of standing up and fighting for kentuckyians. my first race was is against an incumbent democrat, who has not

been doing the job he was supposed to do. i will stand up and fight for kentucky and as a united states senate. >> i would be an independent minded senator. i have taken on my party. i am opposite of my party on the captain trade issue. i am opposite on the idea of having those terror trials in new york city. that does not make sense to me. -- i'm opposite to my party on the cap and trade issue. i will work with senators and others to get those through. >> dr. james buckmaster? >> you have to remember where you are from and who you represent. when you're in washington, you have to remember that those are the people you are sacrificing for and they are sacrificing to send you there. you are bound to hold up the matter how much pressure they put any.

when you sit in front of a patient with cancer, you have the tough time to tell them that. you have to have the experience of being able to say the hard things, to make the decisions you stand by. >> a health care question from j. smith and has appearein haza. would you have voted for obama's bill as it is, not if it had assurances? this is a yes or no question. >> yes. >> ms,,.. price? >> yes. >> i think it would have some influence on this bill. >> as is. >> this bill goes a long way to make some changes, but unless we change the real problem here and that is the cost and quality for all of us, this bill will fail. >> one more chance. yes or no, would you have voted

for? >> as i said, i would not have voted for it. >> there is a major difference between the two major candidates right there. a few weeks ago when health care reform passed, it was time for democrats to stand up and the democrats. this is a core issue for us. i would have voted for. i will be sticking to it -- to improving it if elected. i would like to have a purchasing power for medicare which could save us $200 billion. he said it is time to stop and start over. that is where the tea partiers and mitch mcconnell is. >> what i said stop and start over, it was about the nebraska deal that was a bad deal for all of us. that is what needed to be taken out. what else i've said is that this bill will fail. jack wants to let this bill continue want to see if it will work for a period of years. if it does not, we will open up medicare. i am scared to death for our

senior citizens. if we open up medicare, it will drive up the cost for everybody. if you are sr., and medicare will be your health care, you should be scared to death of jack conaway's approach. >> i think both of you are changing your views very frequently on this subject. i have been very consistent. arkansas would like to take the health care bill, start on the table and drive a stake through its heart heard this thing needs to go. we need to scrap it and start over. -- this thing needs to go. >> i think it is interesting that anything that is for the middle class or poor, we cannot afford it. we have 45,000 people in this country dying because of lack of access to health care. >> we can do that and make it affordable. >> we cannot afford it. let's get rid of these two wars. we are throwing business of dollars in the sand, not to mention thousands of our troops

and dying over there. we are not doing counter- terrorism. bring these guys home, put on the border and use that money for health care. if it is for the middle class or poor, you know, it is amazing that the average ceo of an insurance company makes about $6 million per year just in bonuses. why is this happening? it is because of the big pharmaceutical companies are the biggest contributors to the campaigns on capitol hill. again, this is the symptom. the disease is chronic campaign financing. our elected officials on capitol hill were bought off by big pharmaceuticals and big insurance. >> if they do not have jobs, they cannot afford insurance . we cannot destroy the economy and say, here is your health care, but you do not have a job anymore. >> this is the biggest be it is -- big issue for the future of our country. patrice social security, medicare and medicare --

medicaid and medicare, that is worth 60 cents of every dollar of our deficit goes. we will not get our budget under control. there is a recent report showing that 50% of the money we are spending on health care is wasted. we have to do real health care delivery reform. i lost a brother because of lack of adequate health care. i have been on the front lines of this for 25 years. not only do we need to get our dollars worth of health care, so we get our budget of control, we have to improve the quality so that it is consistent whether we go to harvard or you live in hazard, kentucky. >> you do not do it by putting it on the shelf. since teddy roosevelt, we have been tried to do something with health care. what this really is about -- just like the borders -- we need to take time out and figure out what role do we want government to play. right now, the same people that complain about our government being too big, that one government to pay for everything and spend for everything. you cannot have it both ways.

you cannot have protected waters and less government -- borders and less government. >> mr. conroy, last word >> we have 654,000 kentuckyians without health care. here's my concern. the congress has been too vague. make sure that medicare can negotiate for lower pharmaceutical prices. let's also have state-by-state medicare fraud units. we have increased collections about 600%. you need have a state-by-state unit. we could really put medicare on a better financial footing. >> this is something a proposed in 2004. it has not been done. this is an old idea that has not been addressed in washington,

but i would put that forward quite some time ago. >> let's take our last telephone call. catherine from franklin county. welcome to the program. >> hello. i would like to know what our attorney general did to aid the taxpayers and the people of central kentucky, the ratepayers of kentucky-american water. i was at every meeting, all the public hearings, everything. and they handed $165 million to kentucky american water -- the kentucky river cannot even sustain 22 million gallons per delaware from inpudauy. >> thank you for that question. the first meeting that i took after being sworn in in january, 2008, was on the kentucky

american case, because i inherited a brief that was due in 72 hours on that case. my predecessor was going along with the proposed treatment plant and was doing so without cost cuts. what i did as my first act as attorney general was to say to my office of rate intervention, we will take a different approach. we will not sign off unless the public service commission agrees to a cost cap on this project. so i turned the position of the office of attorney general, rallied 180 degrees. we opposed that. -- i turned the position of the office of attorney general around 180 degrees. it was appealed by the circuit court. the standard for overturning the public service commission, there could be no basis in the record.

i cannot remember one ever being overturned. the treatment plan went in. there is a rate increase for the ratepayers of central kentucky. they want additional revenues. as attorney general, we are opposing net rate increase. we are doing a comedy doing it actively. >> this is the lightning round. buck ryan calls it that. if you win the primary, would you what the president to campaign for you and the fall? >> i do not think he and i agree on too much. >> i would be happy to have the president in the state. i may disagree with him on issues, but i would be happy to have them. >> this raises corn to be about kentuckyians -- this race is going to be a lot kentuckyians. i would love to have him come to eastern and western kentucky and discuss issues facing our families in this state, because

he needs to know what his policies, how they impact on our families? >> but to campaign for you? >> this will be decided by kentucky. >> i would be honored to have our president, because it would bring attention to our state. our state is the bottom 5% of just about everything. are people on capitol hill are not voting our interests. >> i would be honored. i'm the only one that stood up when our lieutenant governor said he would not what the president of united states to campaign here. i think they need a real leader to it -- to sell kentucky to the president. >> what do you think of this record -- his record in office today? anyone? >> i think he has done some good things. his approach to finance reform was admirable, because we have to stop this from happening again. the troops surge in afghanistan, i am for. but i think he has fallen short on some areas -- capt trade, i am completely opposed to.

the epa rulings on water and surface for eastern kentucky -- his opposition to call, i think he is wrong on. >> i think he has improved our image abroad. there are areas where i disagree. we desperately need financial reform. we need to make sure these banks never get too big to fail again. we need to bring derivatives out into the sunshine. we need consumer protection. >> what one person living today would you want to come into the state other than the president to campaign for you? >> frank serpico, because in justice anywhere -- and he was a whistle-blower just like i was sure he put his life on the line. >> i want mark and his family to campaign for me across the state. he wrote me a letter last week. he is from louisville. he sent a $3.00 money order. it is families like this i am fighting for across the state

who are suffering, who do not have a voice in the halls of power. this is why i get up every day and fight. >> i want my daughter to campaign with me, because then i will liquidate may not miss her so much. >> i think we need someone -- she is not here anymore. >> i heard colin powell speak last year. i would like to see him come. >> thank you, all, for being here. two more days to go. good luck to you. our series of "kentucky tonight" programs continues. we ask you to send questions to the candidates through our web site. thank you for watching "kentucky tonight". i am bill goodman. good evening. c-spa[captioning performed by

national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> a debate between the two candidates running for governor in the january primary. steve poizner and meg whitman are trying to replace republican governor schwarzenegger. it took place over the weekend in san jose. it is one hour. >> live from the tech museum in san jose, the 2010 california republican primary gubernatorial debate. today's program is sponsored by comcast. time warner cable, cox cable, the silicon valley leadership group, the cal channel, and the california cable and tele- communications association. welcome to san jose and welcome to this allied state broadcasts.

-- this live state broadcast. i'm john myers. i and the moderator for this debate. thank you for being with us. i will introduce the two candidates in a moment. first, let me introduce the journalist on tonight's panel. they are -- carla marinucci, santiago lucero, michael blood, the associated press, jack chang, and josh richman. let's bring up those two candidates, both vying for the republican gubernatorial nomination -- steve poizner and meg whitman . [applause] [applause] >> steve poizner is currently

california state commissioner. meg whitman is the former ceo of ebay. let me remind you of the rules. the candidates will be asked questions by the journalist. they will have two minutes to answer. the challenger will get one minute for rebuttal. at the end, closing statements will be two minutes each. the order for the questions was determined before hands. there are no opening statements. i know each of you are dying to thank everyone involved and make an opening statement. let's assume it has been done. let's their right into the

questions that californians want to hear about. the first question comes from me. it is the only one i will ask. ms. whitman. the franchise tax board reported that in 2008, the median household income in california was just under $69,000. your personal wealth was $1.3 billion that same year. there is a vast difference between the life you lead and the lives of millions in the state lead. my question -- what you say to average folks who may doubt that the super wealthy person really gets the sacrifices they made? >> let me thank you very much for the cable tv broadcasters for this debate. thank you for the tech museum. it is fun to be back in my home town. i have been very fortunate in my career, but it was not always like this. when we moved to california in 1981, he was a resident at university of california and that was a new consultant. we have been successful, but we embody the california dream.

what i see every day on the campaign trail -- i've spent the last year and a half talking to individuals about their lives. i bend to their places of business and their homes. what i see is anxiety around unemployment. people are desperately concerned they will lose their jobs. they've seen a company move out of their area. they are were they cannot send their child back to uc because fees have gone up by 30%. i see every day on the campaign trail how tough it is. in the end, that is the reason i am running for governor, because i know california can be better than it is. we can create the california dream again. we can make sure that everyone has a fair shot, and ability for a great education, the ability to get a great job, the ability to move up and out. what is true about america and california, it is not about were you then. it is about where you are going. that is why i am running. i think california can be better

than it is. i see it every day. i deeply understand the challenges every californian it faces. >> you get one minute. maybe you could take a stab at this. you are multimillionaire. how you relate to the average californian? >> i started a small business in silicon valley. i know what it is like to start with nothing and build a new company from scratch -- and to employ a lot of people and make sure everyone in california that worked for me had the opportunity to achieve at high levels. there's a big difference between ms. whitman and me in regards to understanding what it is like coming from the trenches. the working folks -- it is not something that meg whitman understands how to relate to. this goldman sachs issue is a big issue. she has massive investments in goldman sachs. she made huge amounts of money from the collapse of the housing market. then, when it was time for goldman sachs to get bailed out

by taxpayers, meg whitman campaign for taxpayer funded bailout to save goldman sachs. my question is, did she inform people that she had this massive conflict of interest? the $10 billion that went into goldman sachs from taxpayers, did she let people know that your investment portfolio would be saved at the same time? a lot of people got damaged because of goldman sachs. she is in the middle of that. that is a factor >> let's move to the next question. if you will indulge us and hold your applause. now to the panel. a question from carla marinucci. >> mr. steve poizner, the new arizona immigration law is the toughest in the country. you said you'd watch closely how it is implemented and whether it has a positive result. even a few minutes ago, you came out in support of that law. why the shift? what about the charges that this

law encourages racial profiling? as california governor, would you have signed this lot as it stands? >> yes. a few days ago, i was concerned about the arizona law. the way it was originally structured, there was a concern about racial profiling. just yesterday, the governor amended the law. they are taken care of -- they have taken care of any concerns about racial profiling. i support what is going on. they've taken the power in their own hands to do something about the problems of illegal immigration. the federal government was not taking care of it. finally, the people of arizona decided to step up and take care of it themselves. if you follow my campaign, i believe there is a serious problem with illegal immigration in the state. it is time we have people running for office that have some guts to talk about the honest truth. the truth is, of legal immigration has been fantastic for the state of california. illegal immigration is a serious

issue. billions of dollars of taxpayer- funded benefits to people that come here illegally every year, we cannot afford it. we are now bankrupt. we need to take some steps to stop the flow of people come here illegally. meg whitman and i, major differences. she believes in amnesty. i don't. she does not want to stop the taxpayer funded benefits. i do. we all heard three parties. i dream about it now. i have heard so many times. one of our priorities is not dealing with illegal immigration. it is one of my top priorities. voters have a choice -- do you want to nominate a republican who will make dealing with the problems of illegal immigration a high priority? yes or no? stop all the taxpayer funded benefits for people here illegally. number two, as governor, i will enforce the rules with employers. if you are people in the state

of california, they had better be legal or i will revoke your business license. i will crack down on sanctuary cities. they should not shield people, criminals from law enforcement officials. and i will do a much better job of securing the border. i will send the national guard if i have to. >> your bottle on the immigration law? -- your rebuttal? >> this is a classic case of him at changing his mind. it was against the law. now he is for it. he ran for assembly in 2004, and he changed his position on every important thing. he was against the bush tax cuts, and now he's against it. he was against proposition 13. now he is for. he was the only person who got planned parenthood approval rating. now he is against partial birth

abortion. i understand of frustration that arizona has, but if it came to me, i would oppose the law. that is because i have a better plan to stop illegal immigration in california. i want to, first of all, you are dead wrong. i am 100% against amnestied. no exceptions. i will secure the border. i will build an economic fence to keep and poor's from hiring illegal aliens. -- to keep employers from hiring illegal aliens. >> thank you. let's move on to our next question from santiago lucero. >> ms. whitman, your campaign website says that you are one of% opposed to any form of amnesty -- 100% opposed to any form of amnesty. 70% of voters support a path to

legalization. are you on the wrong side of voters on this issue? >> i do not think i am. i talked to voters about this every single day. people are concerned about the fact that our borders have been open for many years and the federal government has not stepped in. that is why you saw what happened in arizona. i think what we have to do, we have got to get control of the illegal immigration problem. what i want to do is i am 100% against amnesty. i want to eliminate such worries cities. i cannot leave this subject to -- i want to eliminate sanctuary cities. we need more h1-b visas. weeded guest worker program -- we need a guest worker program. we have to prove to the american people that the federal government can secure this

border. this is the most important thing we can do. >> one minute for rebuttal. >> you said on the san diego, california border, people here illegally should have a pathway. pay a fine, and that is the pathway to citizenship. that is amnesty. you can deny that is what the word means. look it up. meg whitman supports amnesty. the last time this country provided amnesty was in 1986. there were 3 million people here illegally then. they were granted am's -- amnesty. that was about to take care of our problem. what happened? we have 12 million here illegally. amnesty is a huge magnet. it is a mistake. so our taxpayer funded benefits. that is a mistake. allowing employers to hire people here illegally, that is a huge magnet and a mistake. as governor, i will take steps to address the problems of illegal immigration once and for all. there is a choice. meg whitman has not made this a

priority. she supports some form of amnesty. she does not support stopping all taxpayers funded benefits. there is a difference between the two of us. >> thank you. the next question is for steve poizner. >> the tea partiers movement has been the talk of the nation. in this race, it is rarely mentioned. are you a tea partiers, yes or no? will the ideas being promoted by this group be good for california? >> i have been to a bunch of tea partiers. i spoke at least five. i find myself in sync with the tea partiers movement. i embrace their basic principles. they talk about individual liberty and personal responsibility. they are passionate about the free market system. they are angry -- not just republicans, by the way. there are democrats and independents alike. in california, they have had

enough. this is the worst economic crisis may be in the history of our state. our unemployment rate, if you added the people who quit looking for jobs and the people who are unemployed, that is 20%, 4 million californians that are underemployed or unemployed. people are angry. they want change. there are differences between the two of us in this campaign. big differences in our background and our character. . . r vision for california. i love going to the tea party events, because i outlined a passion for taking california in a completely different direction. that is what people inside and outside the tea party are looking for -- bold change. half measures will not do. >> meg whitman, are you a supporter of the tea party movement? >> i am supportive. they are, at their core, fiscal

conservatives. you will not find a more determined, more tough fiscal conservative than the in this way. there are desperately concerned about the debt that we're running up. they are desperately concerned that we're by gleaning the cardinal rule that you cannot spend more money than you take -- that we are violating the cardinal rule that you cannot spend more money than you take in. steve poizner date to wonder thousand dollars of his money to thousand dollars of his money to weaken -- gave $213,000 of his own money to weaken proposition 13. he bought nearly $2 million worth of cars in a recession or should not have been buying any cars at all. if anyone is looking for the tough fiscal conservative industries, i promise you that it is me. i have balanced budgets. i have made those difficult trade-offs. i know how to do more with less. i know how use technology to make us better. i have outlined a plan for cutting $15 billion worth of spending out of the california

budget. >> that is one minute. >> i will get it done. if we can get our fiscal house in order by cutting spending, i think every californian will be delighted. >> thank you. our next question is for meg whitman. >> you have accused steve poizner of increasing spending by 14% at the department of insurance. his predecessor proves that spending they're actually dropped 13%. you are referencing old budgets. given that, do you believe you are presenting an accurate picture of his spending record? >> two minutes. >> absolutely, i do. there has been a lot of controversy. if you look at the numbers and the entire budget that he was responsible for, you can apply sacramento games where you only talk about part of the budget that you were responsible for. you have to talk about the whole

thing. the truth is the budget went from $190 million to $216 million. budget cuts were made by arnold schwarzenegger. the truth is that ackerman to politicians and bureaucrats can make -- that sacramento politicians and bureaucrats can make all kinds of claims, but the numbers do not like. my view is that is the truth. i think you have to look at the two candidate and say, who do you trust to be the fiscal conservative? i was successful in business for 30 years, because i stopped to corp., a conservative, the school principals. i know how to do more with less. i will take on, by the way, public employee unions. we will not be able to stop the red ink in california unless we stand up to the unions, decrease the number of state employees, revise the entire pension program. that is part of the way we are

going to get back to fiscal health. we also have an opportunity to reform the welfare program. with about 12% of the population in the united states -- and 30% of the welfare cases. we have five times the welfare of new york, even though we have a portion of the population. we have to reform this program. if we do not, we will have weaker communities and will not be able to afford what we do have. with the government cannot afford. we have to take this -- we have a government that we cannot afford. we have to take this up. if we do not decrease spending, we will not be able to have this government. we need to achieve that $15 billion worth of cuts. >> steve poizner, your rebuttal. >> that is a lot to cover. meg whitman, you do not know what you're talking about. "the sacramento bee" audited my information more than once. they called you a liar. that is their words, not mine,

not once, but twice. my operating budget has shrunk permanently by 15%. come on over and i will show you. my budget is down. i have a huge surplus at my department. i passed that surplus back to my marketplace with tax cuts -- close to $20 million worth. i think you're looking at the only person in sacramento history who has ever downsized anything. i am proud of that. i would do the same thing to the other departments and agencies that i did at my department. let me talk about the tax from 2004. those are also false. misleading half truths. we saw the mudslinging going on in this campaign. she spent $10 million to try to smear my reputation about 2004. >> that is your minute. that is a good spot. [laughter] >> to be continued. >> i think you'll have more time to talk about those issues.

the next question is for you, steve poizner. >> steve poizner, gun enthusiasts say their exit using -- exercising their constitutional rights by carrying a loaded firearms in plain sight in public places. one pending bill supported by groups including the california police chiefs association would make this practice illegal. are they wrong to support this ban? >> let me finish and then get your answer. the fact is, it is preposterous that someone like meg whitman would be attacking me for my record in 2004. in 2004, i was here and running for the state assembly, proud to be carrying the republican banner. i knocked on over 10,000 doors and registered 10,000 republicans. it was a seat that was considered to be impossible to win by a republican. i am proud of my republican credentials. >> i think that is a point to

end that. >> she endorsed paul board. -- al gore. she endorsed barbara boxer. >> can we get to the question about the gun law? >> there are a lot of attacks and i just wanted to correct the record. you should insert for the republican base why you supported those people. with regard to guns, i am a proud supporter of the second amendment. i think it is crystal clear. people are right to own and bear arms. i recall -- i oppose any law that order stick -- that would restrict people's rights. >> you support the idea -- this proposal on concealed weapons? >> i do not support any more gun laws. we have plenty of them. we should focus on implementing the current set of laws. we did not want to restrict the rights of people to fulfill

their second amendment rights. i am passionate about that. >> ms. whitman? >> i agree on that issue. i do not think we need to spend much time on that. there is only one liberal republican onstage tonight. it is not me. steve poizner calls himself an arnold schwarzenegger republican. that was when he ran for the assembly -- the insurance commissioner. now that governor schwarzenegger is not a popular, he is actually running the opposite direction. he has changed his position on virtually everything. he will say and do anything to get elected. what happened in 2004? he was running in a democratic district. he was against taxes, against the iraq war. -- he was for taxes, against the iraq war. it is and the remarkable where he has gone down the line -- it is simply remarkable where he has gone down in changed his mind. it is absolutely true.

-- he has gone down the line and changed his mind. barbara boxer was on the right side of the issues. it was essential to ebay employees and shareholders, as well as the sellers. >> that is your one minute. thank you. that is the first round of questions. we're having a good time, so let's keep going. [applause] will begin the second round of questions -- we will begin the second round of questions in this debate. we begin with a question for meg whitman. >> in 2005, you settled and ebay shareholder lawsuit regarding the spending of ipo shares offered to you by goldman sachs? in your book, you said the board urged you to site -- fight those suits because they knew you had done nothing wrong.

you said you would not do it again. you noted that it was legal at that time. do you still believe, as you said in your book, that you did nothing wrong? was your behavior unethical, yes or no? >> i am main street executives, not a wall street executive. i have spent my career at hasbro, procter and gamble, and ebay. here are the facts on goldman sachs. i was on the board eight years ago for 15 months. i got off. as donald trump says, i fired them. i did not like the culture or the management. with regard to ipo shares, i did receive those. we had a brokerage account with goldman sachs. we did make money on that. about $1.8 million. it was a very legal, a very standard practice at the time. when it was called into question, i actually ended up

giving those profits back to charity and to the company. you have to be above reproach. legally -- leaders have to always look for conflicts of interest and perceived conflicts of interest. i did not see a conflict of interest here. it was a completely separate account and had nothing to do with ebay. leaders have to be above reproach. there can be no real or perceived conflict of interest. in my administration double we will put our assets into a blind trust -- in my administration, will put our assets into a blind trust -- we will put our assets into a blind trust. >> you do not believe you did anything wrong? >> no. it was a legal and standard practice. with 20/20 hindsight, i would not do it again. i could see afterwards what the conflict look like it. -- look like -- looked like.

>> steve poizner, your rebuttal. but you really do not get this. you were the ceo -- >> you really do not get this. where the ceo of ebay. goldman sachs -- you were the ceo of ebay. goldman sachs started the new these sweetheart deals. you did not think anything was wrong until you got caught. the s.e.c. immediately declared what you did in legal. the shareholders investigated what you did and they sue you for a huge conflict of interest -- sued you for a huge, but interest. only reason you pay back any money is because you had to pay back a lawsuit -- for a huge conflict of interest. the only reason you pay back any

money is because you have to pay back the lawsuit. you made millions from it and that is just wrong. >> but move on to our next question for steve poizner. >> when you're running for the 21st assembly district, you said, i am republican. you're in support of raising taxes. now you are different. a few years ago, you were totally different. >> thank you for asking. i have always been conservative. i will tell you this -- i have gotten more conservative since i have been the insurance commissioner. i have been insurance commissioner for three and a half years. i have seen the culture of corruption. i have seen the wasted taxes and the out of control spending. i have gotten more conservative since 2004. there is no question about it.

compare what i was doing in 2004 to meg. that is why i find it really amazing that she would criticize me. she was not even a republican in 2004. she only wanted it -- she did not want to join the republican party because it might hit her business career. she said she endorsed barbara boxer in 2004. that was while i was carrying the republicans like, registering republicans. she endorsed barbara boxer for one reason -- you just heard it. barbara boxer -- she convinced her to take a certain position on an internet tax that would personally benefit her and her investor friends at ebay. that was reason to endorse barbara boxer, one of the most liberal senators in our country? a senator who has 100% approval ratings from the unions. a senator who supports all of these tax increases and is an extremist in many ways.

is that how you make decisions about who to endorse? to endorse barbara boxer and campaign for her, after she endorsed al gore in 2000 -- who are you really? the republican base is looking for republican with a track record. actions speak louder than words. how does your endorsement of al gore in 2000 -- you're campaigning for barbara boxer in 2004, your support for dan jones -- van jones -- how does not fit into being a republican? >> ms. whitman, your rebuttal. >> he is an engineer. he engineers the new position for every office he runs for and every election cycle. whatever sit-in at the time, to see whether he can elected -- whatever suits him at that time, to see whether he can get elected, that's what he does. i did not endorse al gore.

i give money to the bush campaign. steve poizner wrote a $21,000 check to outboard and $10,000 of that went to the recount -- check to al gore and $10,000 of that went to the redoubt in florida. this race -- recount in florida. this race is about cutting government spending, getting californians back to work, and this -- and fixing our education system. we have to focus on what matters. the legislature has a 9% approval rating. we're not doing the business of californians. let's focus on what really matters to californians -- getting them back to work, improving economy, and this -- and fixing our education system. >> thank you. the next question goes to meg whitman. >> california has more than a million people without medical

coverage. last week, governor schwarzenegger said it was time to stop the political fighting. he announced his support for washington's health care overhaul. if elected, would you dismantle the system that schwarzenegger is now setting up? if we repeal the federal law, what should replace it? >> i am not for the federal health care bill, as you might imagine. i am not for the individual mandate. it is because of what it does to california. this will put a $3 billion unfunded mandate on our budget, which already has a $20 billion budget deficit over the next 16 months. it is also a tax on small business. if you own a small business with more than 50 employees, you have to provide health insurance in the way the public cannot afford right now. i would encourage our attorney general -- jerry brown has no intention of doing this -- he should actually join the lawsuit to repeal this lot and start

again. we should try to cover more americans. we should allow people to get insurance who have pre-existing conditions. there is no question about it. i think health care in three ways -- access, cost, quality. if all you do is increase access and you do not work on cost and quality, you will get into a program that you cannot afford. my view is that this is going to cost america over $1 trillion. it is going to actually continue to hurt california, from a budgetary point of you. -- of view. i would have said people with pre-existing editions -- but let them into insurance. we should have more competition. there should be cross-border competition in california, with high standards. that would make a big difference as well. we should put technology to work on electronic, medical records. we need to identify the best practices across our system.

we need to start to bring down the cost of the system, increase the quality so that we're in position to improve access over time. cannot afford program right now. >> steve poizner. >> have mentioned barbara boxer? she is one of the people in the u.s. senate that led the charge on this obama-care overhaul. thanks for that. i think it is one of the worst pieces of public policy coming out of washington in 50 years. $1 trillion of new spending and billions of dollars of additional unfunded mandate and california. we now have a $24 billion budget deficit. this reform is wrong. it violates the 10th amendment to the constitution. i support the other 19 attorneys general that want to try to repeal this law. we should return power back to

the state, where it belongs. you may have all of my work with and the blue cross. i do appreciate getting an insurance question here. and the blue cross has 57% market share 0-- anthem blue cross has 57% market share. they tried to play with the numbers, i would not let them. we need to drive down costs and increase quality. i also support the interstate sales of health-insurance that would instantly increased competition. >> thank you. the next question is for steve poizner. >> you are backing a voter initiative that would require the state to cap carbon and other gas emissions. do you believe human activity is causing global climate change? how does that influence your position on that initiative? >> first of all, global warming

is called global warming, right? it is not called state warming. when we tried to put in place these extreme environment or rules that stick out like a sore thumb, we pay the price. no other state is following in our path to implement these draconian, global warming rules. india and china have made it crystal clear that they will not, either. california is by itself. what happens when we impose these new taxes and restrictions? jobs leave the, the manufacturing sector will not put up with it. they go to the midwest -- the jobs leave. the manufacturing sector will not put up with it. they go to the midwest. ab32 will make our economy a lot worse. jobs will leave. they are leaving at a rapid clip now. it will celebrate that. it will mess up the environment. we will use more coal-burning.

i am for suspending it until our unemployment rate is 5.5% or less for four straight quarters. if not, it will crush our economy. you have heard plenty about our differences. here is another area where meg needs to make clear where she stands. she to go global warming boat crews during the presidential election -- took a global warming boat cruise during the presidential election of 2008. she said she is a big fan of jones. you said you liked his work. he is such an extremist when it comes to the environment. he is out of sync with anyone who wants to have balance when it comes to environmental policy. >> that is your two minutes. the question was climate change

-- man-made or not? >> the science is still out on that. i do not think it matters whether it is or is not. we need a new energy policy and we need to become energy independent, regardless of the science. >> mrs. whitman, one minute. >> let's go back to anthem. he give the federal government exhibit 8 to help pass this overhaul bill -- exhibit a to help pass this overhaul bill. if he had been on the job, that would not have happened. with regard to global warming, i think the scientists say the earth is getting warmer. whether it is man-made or not, i do not know. i am not a scientist. we're at a disadvantage in california once again. the biggest problem we have in the business climate is that you're a high-cost state.

it will drive businesses away. we can be smart and green. let's put a moratorium on ab32 for a year. let's make sure we know what is happening here. i think we have to compete for the green jobs in a very different way. colorado and texas want those jobs. the no. 2 city for those jobs is houston. they have nothing like this bill. we need had targeted tax cuts -- we need targeted tax cuts. >> the next question is for ms. whitman. >> you spoke earlier of education. california ranks towards the bottom of the heap forkfuls bending- heap for school spending. how do you and your parents who are concerned about increases to class sizes -- how do you answer parents who are concerned

about increases to class sizes and the elimination of summer school, as well as other cuts across the state? >> we have enough money to educate our children well. the problem is how the money is being spent. we have to get more money into a classroom. of the $70 billion that we spend at the state, federal, and local levels, only 60% of it goes to the classroom. -- only 16% of it goes to the classroom. only 40% of it goes to the -- that means over 40% of the coast to the administration. we have an education code that is 5000 pages long. they tell our school districts how to buy blackboards. let's allocate the money on a per child or pork -- or perp claustrum -- let allocate the money on a per child or per classroom basis. let's give parents the tools to hold the school district's

accountable. i am in favor of reading every public school with a simple letter grade -- every school. we need to tell the parents. they did was in florida. -- did this in florida and they are now nubmer 6. diversity is not a challenge -- they are now number 6. diversity is not the challenge. let's increase the number of charter schools. in florida, if you fell for three years, you automatically turn into a charter school -- fail for three years, you automatically turn into a charter school. we have to pay the teachers more. they are doing the job with the children every single day. that is the plan. i think it will work. worked in florida. it went from being -- it worked in floriday. -- florida.

we can and must do better. america's about where you're going. our public as it is an -- our public education system is essential. >> steve poizner. >> we will never fix california schools until we take some big steps to change the way we run these schools. there are teachers out here. one reason i am running for governor is that i'm going direct control of the school's out of the hand of sacramento politicians to micromanage. i will go downhill local level where it belongs. i am so passionate about this. we used to have the best public education system in the country. i'm helping pioneer the charter school movement. i am the founder of the charter school foundation. i help build a bunch of those. it is not just rhetoric to me. i have done it as a volunteer teacher and a pioneer in the

movement. charter schools are public schools that have been granted waivers from the 2000-page education code. it is the ultimate and local control. there are over 800 charter schools in california. i'm going to get all public schools the same type of freedom and flexibility that charter schools have. >> more questions. the next question is for steve poizner. >> mr. poizner, a big problem is pension reform. the state has an estimated $500 billion unfunded pension debt. there have been many proposals about this. given the fact that only two states have managed this kind of reform, what is your plan to get this under control? the thing public safety employees should be exempt from the -- do you think public safety employees should be

exempt from some of these plans? >> $500 billion is the latest number of unfunded liabilities. when you have people like willie brown stepping up and saying, this is unsustainable. the public employee unions have taken advantage of their power and have negotiated contracts that are going to bankrupt the state. even the treasurer, lockyer, says the same thing. we have to change the structure of the compensation. they are great people. we should not criticize public employees just for being a public employee. they are very passionate public servants. the unions have taken advantage of their power and have negotiated compensation structures that fundamentally need change. i support the idea that these pension structures should look more like what you would find in the private sector. in the private sector, there are defined contribution structures. we should have that in the public sector.

i would like them to have their current compensation tied to the help of the economy. when the economy does well, they feel the joy of that year when it goes down, they feel the pain -- they feel the joy of that. it will go down, they feel the pain. they should be in sync together. when i am governor, i will look at what i can do to enforce the laws, as stated in the constitution of the state. article 16 says that voters need to approve any liability greater than $300,000. these pension deals have a liability much greater than that. i am going to take any new pension deal to voters to approve. then you'll put the spotlight on it and let the public employees have to explain to the voters why they're certain compensation structures are being advocated.

that is the way to get this done. >> thank you. meg whitman. >> this liability may be the single biggest problem facing california. we spent $3.3 billion of the general fund to pay these pensions. imagine what we could have been doing with that money. we have to take this up. as governor, i will. we have to increase retirement age. it has to go to 55. for non-public safety, 65. we have to extend and increase employee contributions. for all new employees, except in public safety, we have to go to a more traditional 401-k like program. for public safety, they should be allowed to keep their defined-and the program. they are supporting. the first of government is to keep safe our schools, homes, and streets. that is why i have made that exemption. we have to stand up and fix

this. it won't be easy. this is the train coming down the track at every single californian. we have to stand up and be counted on this issue. it is absolutely essential. you know what is not fair? it is not fair to ask average californians to fund these lavish benefits for public employee unions. >> thank you. >> you have been asked about their voting records several times. you said there is no excuse for your voting record, which you called atrocious. you said you did not vote because you were focused on raising a family and your career. you said what changed was that at ebay use of government got in the way of small business and realize that it really matters "who we elect." it to keep coming debate to understand that -- coming to ebay to understand that.

why did it take so long? >> i did not vote as often as i should. i apologize for that and take responsibility for that. i was not as engaged and connected as i should have been. there were lots of things going on. i am 100% engaged now. what i saw an ebay -- at ebay -- small business will lead us out of this recession. this is the most difficult state in the country in which to do business. politics may be the only way to write this ship that has so many challenges associated -with challenges- right this -- right this ship that has so many challenges associated with that. -- with it. i want to insure we have the very best business environment. -- ensure that we have the very best this is an army.

we need to spend taxpayer money efficiently and effectively -- that this is the very best business environment. we need to spend taxpayer money efficiently and effectively. >> you cannot just wash it away with a simple apology. when you live in massachusetts, you did not vote for your good friend, that romney -- mit romney, even when he was running against kennedy. she was not registered to vote. she did have two live-in employees -- cook and home manager. they had time to register. the notion that you were too busy -- i do not think that is a good excuse. the campaign comes down the track are heard, -- track record, ethics, and character.

over the last 30 years, i have accomplished a lot more than people thought was possible. i have 20 years of being very successful in the private sector. i know how to create jobs. i have eight years of success in politics and public sector service. i am not a rookie to voting. >> a question for you, steve poizner. >> public confidence in government is that one of its lowest points in 50 years. many voters no longer believed that they can trust government leaders to fix problems, whether that is are jammed highways, endless deficits in sacramento, or illegal immigration. as candidates, you have both made promises. why should voters trust you to be different? >> it is an excellent question. voters are very cynical and skeptical. they've heard a lot of this before. people ask me often, if arnold

could not do it, the action hero, why can you? no one has ever confuse me for arnold, that is for sure. i do have a black belt. i think i could take him if i had to. i am not like governor schwarzenegger or most people who have run for office. i have to order, tenacity, and backbone. i can get done what i am going to get done. i've been crystal clear about my conservative principles, too. it is important for the republican primary base. what are your principles and will you stand by them? my principles have to do with my passion for individual liberty and personal responsibility. i have a passion for free markets and smaller, more accountable government. the legislature is going to have to approve a lot of the things i'm talking about. people also ask me what i would want to be governor and have to deal with the legislature. honestly, ladies and gentlemen,

this is the best time to run. it takes a real meltdown, are real crisis, in order to galvanize voters. they need to get behind a new leader who can take advantage of the crisis, in order to get at these big, bold, a structural reforms required to get our great state back on track. >> meg whitman. >> steve has been part of sacramento for eight years. i do not think it has been successful. he is part of the problem, not part of the solution. what we need is someone who brings a fresh perspective. it was interesting -- jerry brown said, you want someone with an insider's knowledge and an outsider's mind. that sounds like someone who used to work at a bank who came back to rob the bank. we need an outside perspective. the number one issue facing this state is the economy. i have balanced budgets. i have created jobs. i have run large organizations. i deliver results.

the state of california wants someone who can come in and is not beholden to special interests. someone who can pioneered a way forward around things that matter. my focus is on three things. we have to get californians back to work. if we do not, there is no way out of this mess. what happens with high unemployment is revenues go down. unlike businesses, when your revenues go down, costs go up. that is what californians will trust me to restore california. >> we have a short amount of time left. i want to give you 30 seconds to round out our hour of discussion. the state has a $20 billion budget problem. there are laws that have been passed by voters. what one budget-related initiative needs to be reexamined, given what is going on? >> i am supportive of the

initiative process that gave as proposition 13. the initiative process needs an overhaul. we go to voters and we say, would you like high-speed rail? we do not tell them what needs to be done. we have to reform the initiative process, so that when we go before the voters, there is a very clear cost. that is the perform. >> is there one specific one? >> not right now. >> steve poizner? >> i disagree. we should not touch the pro cess. i will give you two. i would put in front of the voters a constitutional change to put a spending cap in place so that we control spending in sacramento once and for all. republicans and democrats cannot control their spending. i would convert the legislature from full-time to part-time and

cut their sovereign in half at the same time. -- their salary in half at the same time. >> is there one on the books that he would reexamine? >> [laughter] >> let's move on for closing statements. it is the speed round. you a two minutes each. meg whitman. >> i'm running for governor of california because i refuse to let california fail. i know california can be better than it is. make no mistake, we have an enormous challenge. the biggest challenge is that california has a crisis of confidence. every day, people ask me, can california really be fixed? the answer is yes. it will take a very different approach an entirely different leadership. einstein had it right when he

said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and hoping for different results. i think it is better to get three things done at 100%, as opposed to trying to boil the ocean in sacramento. my leadership approach will be incurred in fiscal discipline -- anchored in fiscal discipline. i know how to stick to core financial principles. i took ebay to a fortune 500. i know what is required for small businesses to grow and thrive. all californians want california to be great again. we have the chance to turn the state around. we have a destiny in california. we used to be that ended asian capital of america. today, we are not. -- be used to be the innovation -- we used to be the innovation

capital of america. if we can return to our core values of hard work, freedom from excess, and investing in the future, we will be unstoppable. we can make a huge difference. i asked for your support as we go forward into what i think will be one of the most important elections in our lifetime in california. thank you for coming. >> steve poizner. >> the surtax to support mental health funding -- i would repeal that. our tax is already too high. [laughter] i think california is headed in completely the wrong direction. i want to take it in a different direction. that is why i am running for governor. bold, sweeping changes are required or we will be steamrolled by india, china, nevada, and texas. we need fundamental reform of our tax and regulatory system, or we just will not make it.

half measures will not suffice. what track record do you have so that we can believe you have a chance of getting these things done? look at my track record. 30 years of experience at starting in running companies. -- and running companies. i am an engineer who knows how to build things from scratch. combine that with my success in the public sector service. i was in the classroom as a volunteer teacher. i am one of the pioneers of the california charter school movement. i am one of only eight elected statewide officers and i have downsize my department by 50 percent -- by 15%. you have jerry brown on one end of the spectrum. he is a career politician for 40 years. we have meg whitman. she is a rookie. she has connections to goldman

sachs and wall street. i do not think people are ready for that either. i am here in the middle with the rights of experience and the right value and the right track record to get this goods the back on track. i thank you for organizing this debate. -- to get this good state back on track. i thank you you for organizing this debate. >> thank you both. thank you to the journalists for being part of this. thank you to the sponsors prefer comcast customers, are rebroadcast is available on demand. to our audience here at the tech museum and across california, election day is tuesday, june 8. california faces a number of serious challenges. your vote is a vote for the kind of change that you would like to see. thank you very much for watching and listening. good night. [applause]

>> the iranian president to nine that his country was trying to develop nuclear weapons. that is next on c-span. we get a response to his speech from secretary clinton. and then on the duncan at georgetown university. -- arne duncan at georgetown university. tomorrow morning, eric cantor of virginia talks about u.s. foreign policy. hosted by the heritage foundation, the event begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on c-span3, a hearing on the bank tax proposal for the troubled asset relief program known as part. tim geithner third and others

will testify. live coverage begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern. now, a un conference in new york and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. we will hear from iranian president mahmoud ahmadinejad, who spoke for 45 minutes. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. in the beginning, of like to say a word about the statement by the secretary general. the secretary-general said that iran must expect -- except this and that the ball is in a run scored. i would like to tell you and

inform held as well that we have accepted the fact from this part, and i would like to announce again that this is is accepted deal. we have thrown the ball into the core of those who should accept our proposal and work in cooperation with us. in the name of god, the compassionate, the merciful, all praise be to allah, the lord of the universe, and peace and blessings p.m. hon more common than his noble companion. grant him good health and victory and make his followers and those that test in his right foot -- right just as. mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, i thank the almighty god for granting an opportunity to have a dialogue on one of the

key global issues of common concern. this review conference of the non-proliferation treaty is one of the most important international meetings. this is one of the most important international meetings. sustainable security is an inherent and instinctive part of human beings and the historical quest. no country can afford to ignore security. the divine profits and righteous men also sought to offer guidelines in light of their faith in god and divine teachings, to assure a safe answer real-life in both worlds, year and thereafter.

-- here and thereafter. to them, an ideal society is one of global scale based on monotheism, justice, replete with security, affection, and brother leanness, -- brotherliness, led by the noble servant of god and jesus christ. peace be of talk -- peace be upon him as well as righteous people. may i underline that in the absence of sustainable security, it is impossible to adopt comprehensive measures for development and promoting welfare. a substantial part of national resources are allocated for national security, but there is hardly any sign of improvement

in the ability -- hardly any sign of the ability to improve security in the face of perceived threats, and that continues -- that effort continues to defy us. as some states shoes to part from the teachings of divine process -- shoes to part from the teachings of the vine pro -- chooose to part from the teachings of divine prophets, some states define the use of nuclear bombs as an element of stability and security, and this constitutes the world's mistake. the production and possession of nuclear bombs under any pretense is hazardous first and foremost to the production in the country and stockpiling.

you may recall the perilous and unintentional transfer of a new missile on a bomber from a military base and other bases in the united states, which became a matter of concern to the health and security of americans and its government. the sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to annihilate all living beings and destroy the environment, and its radiation could affect future generations, and leaving a negative impact on the environment that remains for centuries. the nuclear bomb is a fire against humanity, rather than a weapon for defense. the possession of nuclear bombs is not a source of pride. its possession is disgusting and

shameful, and even more shameful ais the threat to use such weapons, which is used, the scale is up in comparable to any crime committed throughout history -- is not unbearable to any crime committed throughout history. for those who carried out the first atomic bombardments are among the most hated individuals in human history. the united nations in particular the security council have for the past 60 years been unable to establish sustainable security, let alone give a sense of security to nations and their international relations. the current international situation seems far more challenging than previous decades. wars, and acts of aggression,

and above all, the shadow of thread resulting from the stockpiling of nuclear disarmament, and even worse, unfair policies applied by a select group of expansionist states have obscured the prospect of international obscurity. these days -- these communities largely carry a sense of insecurity as a result. nuclear disarmament and non- proliferation have failed to materialize, and the international atomic energy agency has been unsuccessful in discharging its mandate. during the past four decades, some states, including the zionist regime, have been eclipse -- = with nuclear arms, despite international efforts to

promote disarmament, so what really is the cause of failure to disarm? to answer this question, one should look into the policies and practices of certain states as well as the efficacy and the imbalances it curtails, some of which are followers -- are as follows. first is what i label as a domineering influence. from the perspective of the vine process -- divine profitphets te prosperity is measured by his modesty and devotion to other fellow human beings. unfortunately, by relying on a theory that stayed -- that states struggle is survival, some states seek their superiority through the power to express and to suppress others,

so the seeds of hatred they promote -- arms race in the international arena. their gross mistake is their assumption that might makes it right. second is the misperception that there should even be a policy that allows the production and use of nuclear weapons. the first nuclear bomb was produced by a previous government of the united states. it seemed apparently it would provide the united states and its allies the upper hand in world war ii. however, it became the main source of encouragement to others to develop nuclear weapons and brought the world to the brink of a nuclear arms race. the production, stockpiling, and qualitative assessment serves as

a justification for others to develop their own arsenals, a trend that has occurred over the past 40 years. 3, the misperception that nuclear weapons is a means of deterrence. this misperception, which has in fact translated into policy, is the main cause of the escalation of the arms race. it requires an eds both in quality and quantity of weapons, -- it requires an edge in quality and quantity of weapons. there are more than 20,000 nuclear weapons worldwide, half of which belong to the united states. the other competing groups continue to develop nuclear weapons under the pretext of deterrence. those trends constitute a

violation of obligations under the treaty. 4, -- for this is a misperception that is ok to use nuclear weapons. regrettably, the united states has not only use nuclear weapons but continues to threaten to use such nuclear weapons against other countries, including my country. might remind you a few years back another country from europe also made another nuclear threat. the zionist regime consistently threatened some middle eastern countries with its nuclear arsenal. the fifth issue is what i call the instrument of exploitation of security council and the international atomic energy agency. by enjoy a special privileges and the highest decisionmaking

body, certain nuclear weapons states widely exploited these platforms against non-nuclear weapon states, contrary to the spirit of the npt. this unjust practice, repeated over and over, has turned into a pattern. so far, none of the non-nuclear weapons states has ever been able to exercise their inalienable and legal rights to develop the peaceful use of nuclear energy without facing pressure and threats, despite clear provisions of article 6 of the treaty -- that is the nuclear non-proliferation treaty -- and the statute.