suggestion. one way is to take our social security taxes and let the half that the employee pays be put into an account, li a 401k. th government would not be able to borrow for it to pay for general fund spending. >> thank you very much. mark who works as a cashier and lives in indianapolis 7 and our next question. he would like to know the following. in your official role as the united states senator, what would your position be if faced with casting votes on the related issues of the don't ask don't tell policy concerning gays ithe military or a constitutional amendment to defined marriage as only between a man and woman? i would like for each of you to take 45 seconds to respond to this question. >> i do not really understand

what the federal government has to do with marriage. whether it is a heterosexual marriage or a marriage of same- sex couples. it is not in the constitution. it belongs at the state level. it should be done through contracts. everyone should have a marriage contract. we can take that problem off. if people want to have a marriage, a traditional marriage, they can go to a church and have their marriage sanctified anyway that they choose. under the law, every person in this country has to be treated equally. as far as don't ask, don't tell -- >> your time has expired, unfortunately. >> i believe marriages between a man and a woman. that has how ihas been since the beginning of te. this does not mn that someone

can choose to live an alternative lifestyle. just do not call it marriage. on don't ask, don't tell, i was part of the effort that negotiated that with the democrats. it has worked as effectively because our military had testified significantly on the difficulty of that issue. >> your time has expired. >> . . ld be between one man and one woman. in regards to don't ask don't tell, i fall in line with secretary gates don't ask don't tell is coming to an end.

we are forcing anyone who is going to go fight for our country and be injured and killed, they should have the ght to serve. we are spending billions of dollars kicking good soldiers out of our military. >> now we have reached our final question of the evening. you are back to 90 seconds. joining us tonight is a social worker. what is your question? >> thank you. the currentdministration vows to change washington and in partisan politics. however, it seems as though the political climate is more partisan than ever. what would you do to encourage more collaboration amongst the parties? >> thank you for that question. we need to send people to washgton -- my career in law enforcement was about resolving

disputes. listening to all sides and try to fix the problem as best you can. it was not about republicans and democrats, black and white, rich and poor. that is what people do not like about washington. they want the truth. they want someone to serve the public and not serve themselves. we can stop senators and congressmen from going to be, lobbyists. put a lifetime ban. then they really will come home after they suggest and come home to the people they represent. that needs to happen. civilities to return to washington d.c. no one had a corner on the market on good ideas. we should be working together. i have one of the most independent voting records in the house of representatives.

to critics know that great working together, not stereotyping one side from the other is during important. that -- those are the kinds of ople we should research and sent to washington. >> if you want government to change and if you want the atmosphere in congress to change, you need to stop wasting your vote on old parties. you need to send a party to washington who cares about the people in the country and the people in this state. they are not beholden to special interest and not worried about what committee they will get on, someone who has worked with both sides of the aisle as well as combined with people who have agreed on controversial issues and have come together. there are several plans that have been agreed to two people and are in favor of it. as far as cutting military spending or the way to save social security, i would join

with those kinds of people in the senate. you cannot count on the old parties to change. it just is not going to happen. if you continue voting for them, they will continue to ignore you. if you do not vote, they will ignore you. if you vote for a libertarian, they know that you want to change. you have seen it through the smoke screen. you want small constitutionally limited government. do not waste your vote this time. check out my website. >> tnk you. >> this is not about civility. our country is in a serious recession. unemployment is higher than it has been since the great depression. we are entering a third year.

we have a government that my opponent supported 90% of the time. it is putting our country -- our children at risk and our grdchildren without the kind of opportunities that we have had. we have a serious problem that we have to address. we have to hold this party responsible for taking us in the wrong direction. we are entering the third year of a serious recession. kids are graduating from college and cannot get jobs. we have a bailout -- we have had bailout of companies and bailouts of the banks and entities that caused this problem in the first place.

the spending is beyond comprehension and we have to put a stop to it. it is by cutting back on washington, going back to principles of limited government. >> thank you. thank you for watching the 2010 u.s. senateebate sponsored by the internet -- indiana debate commission. our thanks to the candidate, dan coates, brad ellsworth, rebecca sink-burris. we would also like to thank our broadcast coverage. we would also like to thank our host, the university conference center. a special thanks to the voters to ask questions tonight. you can submi your own question to the candidate for the october

22 debate in fort wayne or the october 25 debate. to do so, log onto our website. on behalf of the indiana debate commission, good night. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satelle corp. 2010]

>> 37 senate seats are being contested this year. 19 are held by democrats. you can see all of the key debates on line at c-span.org/p olitics. politico is reporting that kendrick meek is not in negotiations with the independent charlie crist to drop out of the three-way race. he is denying reports to keep marco rubio from winning. >> we want to give you a campaign 2010 update on the pennsylvania senate race. is chris brennan, political writer for "the philadelphia daily news." the incumbent, who is -- will no longer be in this seat, senator arlen specter, who was a republican and ran as a

democrat, beat joe sess tech in the primary, is now going to campaign for mr. sess tech. -- sesteck. why now? >> he's being deployed strategically in the city of philadelphia. he's still very popular in philadelphia though his favorable -- unfavorable ratings in the state are not so great. i think that this is a chance for joe sestak to raise some last-minute cash. he's known to close late. nobody knows that better than arlen specter. sestak was behind in the polls going into the may 18 democratic primary, and with the help of a rather devastating political campaign commercial, closed the gap and beat specter quite handedly in the end. i think specter will help him raise the money that he will need if he's going to have a shot at former congressman pat

toomey. they will be holding the primaries in a downtown law firm. it's a private event. it remains to be seen whether specter's going to have anything to say publicly about sestak before or after the event. there's a curious dynamic here. when it became clear before the may 18 democratic primary election that sestak was starting to close the gap, people started asking arlen specter if he would endorse joe sestak if he was victorious and arlen specter sort of said he would support whoever the democratic nominee was. joe sestak on the other hand repeatedly said he couldn't imagine a scenario in which he would lose to specter so he couldn't address the question of whether he would endorse specter if he won the democratic primary. so i got to think that's something that arlen specter remembers. host: the white house has been

involved in this race. our viewers saw the president there yesterday. the vice president has been to the state many times. what will happen over the next few weeks? will they continue to visit the state? >> yeah, i think you'll hear them quite a bit. president obama and vice president biden very popular in philadelphia. i think you'll see them here. you may see biden in things like scranton and pittsburgh where he's also very popular. it's an interesting sort of balancing act for joe sestak because he rejected the white house's and treaties to get out of the race. they wanted him threeve arlen specter in the primaries. reject that had. rein and then he won and then -- he ran and then he won and he's trying to make great political hay around that around the campaign trail sort of declaring himself an independent democratic stepping up to his party which in this

year with the anti-incurvency fervor, that's a pretty good hessage. so it's dicey to both be the guy who stood up to your party but then also held and embraced the party in a political rally such as they had in philadelphia. host: the republican candidate in this race, pat toomy, has been ahead by -- toomy, has been ahead by seven points. what will be fort right, upfront and center in the next couple weeks in this race? >> the thing that jumps out most to me is the question of the undecided voter and whether they just stay home on the election day. the -- our latest "daily news" and franklin poll shows that the undecided vote in the toomey and sestak race, it was 39%. if you look at the likely voters, it's 32%. that's a full third of the electorate that are undecided

after a great deal of advertising and a great deal of media attention. this is -- this is a national race that's getting a great deal of attention. and the fact that a full one-third of the voters still don't know how they're going to vote suggests to me a real scenario that they wind up staying home. host: one final thing here. will the two square off in a debate? when and where? >> there are -- there's a debate in philadelphia. there's another debate scheduled in pittsburgh. i believe there's a talk of a third debate. i know they definitely have one scheduled at the national constitution center here in philadelphia next week and then there's also -- they are going to follow that a couple days later with a debate in go to c-span.org/politics.

>> cspan's local content vehicles are traveling the country as we look at the closely contested house races leading up to this year's midterm elections. ♪ >> how you doing? >> bless you. >> how are you? thank you. i need your help on november 2. >> when you get there, do what you know to do. >> i will come back and keep talking to you. you can look at that a couple of ways. sometimes no is a good thing. no one stimulus and so on. the party of know, know what is in the bill before you vote on it.

we have 26 counties and is made up of the delta on the eastern side and the ozarks on the western part. it is a stark contrast in general. socio-economic status, this is one of the poorest districts in the united states. the folks are good hard-working arkansans. they provide a good living for their family. just hard-working people, good people. >> voters in the first district vote conservatively at the national level. they will elect democrats pretty solidly minus a few pockets. there has not been a republican elected since reconstruction. the primary candidates in the first congressional district are republican rick crawford who is a radio broadcaster with a

bit of a media empire that crosses the agricultural span and chad causey is the retiring congressman. you got the quintessential guy who understands washington and how works and what is going on in the district against a first time republican candidate who understands the bread-and-butter issues of the district, which are primarily agriculture. >> if you ask for up and down votes on the big issues that have been dominating the american political agenda this last year, health care, the stimulus, cap and trade, car checks, some of those issues, you will find in total agreement on those issues. how much of that is how they truly feel about the issues is debatable.

that is definitely the message they are sending to voters. >> this race is about people. not about me or my opponent. not about the national parties. it is the values that people in arkansas have. and what they want to see and the person that will fight for them regardless of party. it is about sending someone to washington with conservative values. i share those values. >> where i do see differences is chad causey has a more experienced and deeper working knowledge of some of the big projects that are going on. crawford has a broader populist appeal. i will go up there and oppose some of these big agenda items

that you are telling me are opposite to the wishes of the voters. i think you would see him being the type of member of congress. >> what folks are looking at is a citizen legislature that has been here and made contributions here and is not entrenched in washington. not a bureaucrat, not one of the political elite. i want to make sure that everyone in this district has the opportunities i have had. >> the first congressional district is one that everyone will feel like a coin toss. maybe your best way of deciding. you will not hear either one identified by party affiliation. it will be by name. i will not be surprised if the 50.

[unintelligible] it could be that close. >> c-span's local content vehicles are traveling the country. as we look at some of the most closely contested house races. for more information on what the local content vehicles are into this election season, visit our >> our coverage of 2010 debate's continues in a moment with governors in michigan and new hampshire. in about two hours, a look at attack and is being aired around the country. after that, and candidates for senate in kentucky. >> what are people watching on the c-span video library? you may be surprised.

click on most watched to see the most popular events that we have covered. every program since 1987. watch what you want, when you want. >> on washington journal tomorrow morning, a look at efforts to combat foreclosures our guest will be willzoeller. we will also be joined by representative chris that holland. two members of congress will talk about their members to help members of both parties find common ground. our guests will be john porter of illinois in david skaggs of colorado. washington journal is live on c- span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. mr. romero -- the candidates are

seeking to replace democratic candid general land home. >> welcome to the great debates from the smith studio at detroit public television.

public television presence the great debates, the 2010 gubernatorial debates. ♪ are madegreat debates possible by business, labour, education and nonprofit groups. from the smith studio, this is the 2010 gubernatorial debates. >> welcome to the great debates public television. i'm nolan finley of the detroit news. >> and i'm stephen henderson of on the detroit free press. we're the moderators today for the only televised debates featuring the two major party candidates for governor. joining us today are republican nominee, rick snyder, and

democratic nominee, virg benero. >> tonight's discussion will cover a wide range of topics, including economic growth, talent and education, and effective government. each candidate will have one minute to answer direct questions, one minute for rebuttals, and 30 seconds for moderated follow-up. >> we flipped a coin to determine the order of the two- minute opening statements, and republican rick snyder will go first. mr. snyder. >> well, first of all, i'd like to thank the great debate coalition for doing this. why are we here tonight? because we all love michigan. but our state is suffering. we're in economic disaster we have a broken government. it's not the time to talk about the problems or dwell on blame. the key is what's the solution? it's time to reinvent michigan. and to do that i'm bringing a clear, positive vision, a concise plan, and an attitude of action. the vision, we need to start a new era in our state, it is time for the era of innovation, getting back to our roots of entrepreneurship and innovation.

i've got a 10-point plan that really focuses in on jobs, and then an attitude of action. i'm a proven job creator. i want to bring real world common sense solutions to lansing. and for more information on those, please go to our website, rickformichigan.com. the other thing going with this though is we need to repair a broken culture. we need to change our culture in this state. we need to move from being negative to being positive. we need to stop looking in the rearview mirror and look forward. we need to stop being divisive and get rid of this win/lose attitude. it's time to be inclusive and win together. that's the attitude we need. with this framework of vision, plan and action, and this new culture, we'll create more and better jobs, we will keep our young people in the state, and we will be a great state again. >> mr. bernero, you now have two minutes for your statement. >> good evening.

let's be honest, state government isn't working for regular people. the well-connected and the wealthy, they get taken care of, while regular folks are being left behind. people are hurting. families across michigan are struggling to make ends meet, struggling to make their mortgage payment, to hold onto their job, and to get their kids a good education. we don't need corporate buzzwords or mission statements at a time like this. we don't need handouts for wall street or bailouts for companies who shipped our jobs overseas. we need bold leadership, and we need it now. i've got a plan to turn michigan around, to shake up our broken government, and to get this economy back on track. the michigan i grew up in is a michigan of opportunity. not just for the folks at the top, but for everybody. that's the michigan i'm fighting for. and i'm getting results in my city. the lansing region has the second lowest unemployment in the state. we've laid out the red carpet instead of the red tape for business, and that's working. we've secured half a billion dollars in new investment in my

city, 6,000 new jobs. but while i'm busy creating thousands of new jobs here, unfortunately my opponent has shipped thousands of jobs overseas to china in his role as chief executive outsourcer at gateway. but it doesn't stop there. i have to share with you some disturbing news. we've also learned that another of mr. snyder's companies has created jobs in china, as recently as a couple months ago. mr. snyder is the founder and board director of a company called discera. that company just finished a new state-of-the-art jobs creating facility, but unfortunately that facility wasn't built in michigan, it wasn't even built in america. that plant and those jobs landed in shenzhen, china. here's what mr. snyder's chief technology officer told the press, "discera is helping chinese businesses compete and win in the global marketplace." helping chinese businesses to compete and win, yet you want to be our governor? what about michigan workers? what about the 630,000 michiganders looking for work ? mr. snyder, how could you? >> all right.

well, that was a very good start to this debate. mr. snyder, i want to give you a chance right away to respond to what mr. bernero said. do you own a company that is creating jobs in china? >> discera does not have an operation in china. they're based in san jose, california, and they're based in ann arbor, michigan. they're off doing cutting edge technology and they're doing work all around the world to be successful at that. but their locations are san jose, and ann arbor, michigan. that's where their r&d has been done, and that's the technology we've put into use. with respect to the gateway one, those are also untrue. i mean, i've gone through this so many times. at gateway i'm proud of my record, i've helped create 10,000 jobs. >> you still have more time.

>> well, thank you. i helped create 10,000 jobs, and very successfully did that. when the company got in trouble, they asked me to come back. i came back as interim ceo, and i brought jobs back to the u.s. i brought tech support and manufacturing jobs back to the united states. and why did i do that? because i understand the value of the american worker and how it's much better to have high quality and great american workers, instead of low cost labor. >> mr. benero? >> i'd like a rebuttal. >> yes, absolutely. >> look, as far as gateway, either he lied to the sec or he's lying here tonight. he signed off on 10-k forms to the sec clearly approving and certifying the outsourcing that took place. as far as discera, it's on two web sites that they are expanding in china. their own company, discera, that he's on the board of, put out a press release saying they're moving r&d overseas to china, and the specific quote is "we're helping chinese businesses complete and win in the global marketplace." now, it's astounding to me that somebody would run for governor of michigan, when we have so many people unemployed, when we need to be promoting our technology and getting our businesses on

the cutting edge, to think that you're investing this kind of time and money in china. what about michigan? what about workers here that need work? the evidence is clear, we need somebody who's going to stand up for michigan, fight for michigan jobs, that's what i've been doing. when i was fighting for the auto industry, you were busy sending jobs to china. it's incredible. where were you to stand up to the auto industry? >> we're going to go right to the first question of the debate now. the current governor and legislature are leaving a little gift for the next governor, a $1.6 billion dollar structural deficit. i want to know what sacrifices you will ask of michigan residents to help you fill that hole. will government provide fewer services or will michiganders pay more taxes? mr. snyder, you're first. >> in terms of what we need to do, i've talked about this consistently. we need to put in a new budget system, i call it value for money budgeting, that gets to outcomes and results instead of the broken model today, which is simply about spending

billions of dollars on activities and such. and as part of that we're going to have to look at some tough issues. and one of the toughest issues the next governor is going to have to address is public employee compensation. and we need to do that in the light of understanding we're talking about people and their families. so it needs to be done in a very thoughtful way, with a shared sacrifice with people. we also need to do a number of things in terms of service consolidation, between all our jurisdictions. to set the framework for this, i called that a real balance sheet be done for the state, so we can address these questions and get the facts out to the average citizen. no one knows our facts today's,

and what i'd love to do is get an opportunity, in plain language, to get a balance sheet out to all of us, so we can see how far beyond our means we've spent. >> mr. benero, what sacrifices will you ask of michigan residents? >> well, it's easy to talk about balanced budgets, it's another thing to deliver it. i've delivered every budget in the city of lansing on time, balanced, with no tax increase. i've got a aa plus credit rating. my running mate, brenda lawrence, the mayor of southfield, nine times balanced budgets on time, no tax increase, no layoffs, and an aa plus credit rating. that is not easy to maintain in tough times. we did it by setting priorities. we measure outcomes, we know where everything is going, we know where every dollar is being spent, and we're going to do the same thing in the state of michigan. we're going to set the right priorities. we also had to have sacrifice. there was sacrifice all the way around. the workers have given up, they sacrificed. i led by example. i cut my pay, i cut my benefits, i gave up the city car. it's important that sacrifice be shared from the top. you know, when times got tough in lansing, i led the way, i sacrificed. i've asked mr. snyder, when times got tough at gateway, i know 20,000 people lost their jobs, the workers, what did you give up? i know you became a multi- millionaire at that time, you cashed in your stock options, but what did you give up? i know the workers, they had the option to stand in the unemployment line, but what did you sacrifice? >> that's time, mr. bernero. i've got a quick follow-up to that question. do you think you can make expenses match revenues in lansing, in other words,

eliminate the structural deficit in the first year that you're in office? mr. snyder. >> that's absolutely a goal. to say it's a certainty, until you get a chance to dig in it would be difficult to say that. because my view is, it's only when you get there will we get to the full extent of all the issues. if you looked at the last budget, there's a lot of concerns about the budgets that are there, are those numbers really even going to happen. so not only is next year a problem, i'm still concerned about whether we're going to have a hole for the current year when we reevaluate revenues and expenses. >> mr. benero. >> we can and we will, we can and we will balance the budget, without gimmicks. and we're not going to rob peter to pay paul. if money is set aside for one thing, like the school aid fund, that's what it will be spent on. again, i've got experience doing this. i've done it when i was in the legislature, i balanced the budget on time with the legislature, we actually met our obligations. and as mayor, five times in a row balanced budgets, no tax increase. every year i had people saying we need to increase taxes, we tightened ourbelts, we're delivering more bang for the buck, and what we've done in the city of lansing, we can do in the state of michigan. >> gentlemen, this issue of outsourcing jobs to china is now dominating two elections in michigan. mr. benero, i want to ask you first, can michigan and its

businesses play in a global marketplace without engaging china? >> well, engaging china is one thing, and shipping jobs and r&d -- the important thing about this discera position is they're shipping r&d, they're actually helping vital r&d, moving that and helping china to be on the cutting edge, not just shipping jobs there. look, it's a global economy, we have to operate as a global economy. in lansing we are competing and winning. we've grown manufacturing, advanced manufacturing , every month this year. we've recently, in fact it will be voted on monday night at council, secured 160 new jobs for a medical manufacturing company, symmetry medical. we were competing with indiana and malaysia, indiana and malaysia? but we won those jobs in lansing, michigan, so i know we can compete and win. now, regardless of the fact that rick snyder, my opponent, told the grand rapids press that manufacturing should be put to bed, i don't agree with that. i think manufacturing was a great part of our past and also a vibrant part of our future, the green automotive future, the green technology, wind turbines, you name it, we can be in the business of manufacturing, we can win, we have to use the incentives, we have to use every tool in the tool box.

we're doing it in lansing, michigan, we're proving it every day. >> mr. snyder, same question to you, can michigan and its businesses play in the global marketplace without engaging china? >> well, we absolutely need to play everyplace. that's how you succeed in a global economy. and we've got the core to do that. and to go to my opponent's comment there about manufacturing, manufacturing i've been a big advocate of. in fact, the michigan manufacturers have endorsed me. and so that just shows, i mean, the distortions, again, that we have to suffer through in terms of the important issue. the other thing i would share with you is going back to the other points, on gateway and all these kinds of charges, actually i will give you a quote from the michigan truth squad on mr. benero's tv ad called tough. "its attacks on snyder for being responsible for gateway's outsourcing are simply untrue." it's too bad that we can't talk about the real issue, which you're getting to, nolan, is jobs, jobs, jobs. we need to stay focused on that, and we need to be looking at how we can export products out of

michigan all over the world in terms of opportunity for the future. >> a rebuttal, mr. bernero? >> yes, please. >> okay. >> the truth of the matter is, that the economic development that mr. snyder engages in is primarily for himself and his friends and his pocketbook. another company that he list s on his web site is one that he promoted, handylab, just recently was sold. and it was sold to you, i think, for the price of about $275 million dollars. i don't know how much of that you pocketed from personally, but 50 people are now unemployed in ann arbor, because those jobs are going to another state. meanwhile i just won a medical technology company, symmetry medical, in lansing. so i'm fighting and winning, i'm fighting for my people, i'm fighting for residents of the state. he's fighting for his own pocketbook. and at gateway you signed off on those documents. look the folks in the face, look the michigan residents in the face and tell them that you

didn't sign those documents to the sec, rick, that you didn't sign off on them, and you were responsible for them. you want to play this shell game that you were ceo or coo or on the board, the point is, you were in a position of responsibilities, why didn't you exercise that responsibility, why didn't you fight the outsourcing? i was fighting general motors, fighting to keep our jobs here, fighting for the auto industry. why didn't you fight against the outsourcing? >> mr. snyder, would you like to respond? >> well, yeah. there he goes again. i mean, he's being very consistent at least. i think if he says it enough times it will become true. i mean, these allegations are just incorrect. that's why i talked about the michigan truth squad and such as a third-party source of that. i mean, we need to be talking about the job of today. the real issue that matters here is we've lost a million jobs in michigan. let's put michiganders to work. that's the environment. i'm the proven job creator in this race. >> well, i'd like to ask a

follow-up along those lines then. mr. benero, how do you create a job? >> well, you set the table for it. that's what government does. that's what i've been doing in lansing. i have $500 million dollars in new investment in my city, i have cranes in the air, we have a great economic development team. we've laid out the red carpet instead of red tape, we've cut the bureaucracy. city bureaucracy is down 20 percent. we've put out the welcome mat for business. that's how government can be involved in creating jobs. and we've done it, we're getting results. the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. we have cranes in the air, we have people coming to lansing. we've laid out the environment. and we need to do that in the state of michigan. i think i'm the one who's equipped to do that. >> mr. snyder, how do you create a job? >> well, you don't do it by being in government. government doesn't create jobs. government creates an environment where jobs can flourish. i know what it takes to create jobs, i've done it many times, and i know what it takes during tough times to keep a company going. one of our companies came to a point where the lights were going to go off. and the other co-founder and i wrote personal checks, talking to our spouses, seeing what we could do to keep that company going. and it later went on to be a success. but it's by that determination.

it is hard work to creat jobs. and let's get our government out of the way. we have a closed for business sign up in michigan right now. we need to be open for business. >> well, mr. snyder, steve asked you all earlier about sacrifice, and taxpayers in michigan, many taxpayers in michigan would like a lot of that sacrifice to come from the public sector workers who have seen their incomes grow 15 percent over the last decade, while per capita income in michigan fell 21 percent. how much can public sector workers expect to get back under your administration? >> well, there are two parts to that. the first piece i say is we need to look at what's comparable with the private sector, and then secondly we need to ask what's financially affordable. those are the two benchmarks. but we also always need to remember, we're talking about people and their families. this is a serious issue. and so we need to come up with a solution to last for the long term. how we've done it lansing the last few years is a failure. it's a piecemeal approach. it's talking about retirement one year, healthcare the next time, it's the death of a thousand cuts. my view is, let's get compensation on the table to see how we do shared sacrifice, including the governor being part of that process. it's all sharing in what needs

to be done to get government on a positive path where people don't need to be looking over their shoulders to be tapped on again, and they can focus on being more productive, more excited and looking towards the future instead of looking over their shoulder all the time. >> mr. benero, what sacrifice can public workers expect? >> well, if you want to know what a person's going to do, the best thing is to look at what they've done. and when times got tough in lansing, i led by example, i cut my pay, i doubled what i paid for health insurance, i gave up benefits. i didn't just ask the workers to sacrifice, and i'll do the same at the state of michigan. i asked mr. snyder to say what sacrifices he made at gateway when we became a millionaire

while those jobs were outsourced, i didn't get an answer. i asked how many millions he made when handylab was sold to him when he was president. he talks about jobs he's created, that must have been in the distant past. because the only jobs we can find that he's creating now are in china, are overseas, or in another state. we need somebody who's going to create jobs here in michigan. that's my track record, that's what i've done, and that's what we need to be doing, is growing our economy for michigan people, putting michigan people to work. that's what i've done. know we can compete, because we're doing it, and we're competing using economic incentives. my opponent has said he's against the use of economic incentives. i say we have to use every tool in the toolbox, we can't afford to be hamstrung, to tie our hands behind our back, when we're in a global economy, we are in a battle for our future, we've got to use every tool available. >> mr. snyder, you've indicated you want to rebut? >> yeah. well, i wanted to give virg credit. i mean, he's a great talker in terms of he gets several points in for every one i have a chance to respond to because of speed. that doesn't mean there's substance there. so that's one of those things we need to look at. in terms of gateway and my success there, the success i had was due to the building of the company. that all happened before any jobs and the collapse of the company. the company went through extremely difficult economic times. when i got out of the company -- actually it's interesting, the mayor doesn't realize i used to set up two venture firms in our state. most of those proceeds came back to build businesses in michigan and create jobs in our state. and that's what we need to look

to do in the future. it's about having success, and taking that success to build the next success. >> if i may have a quick follow-up. mr. snyder, will you follow detroit mayor dave bing's lead and forego your salary as governor. >> nolan, that's a very good question. i haven't answered that when people ask me for -- i intend to make some sacrifice, and i should. that's only part of that. but the reason i haven't answered that question is i didn't want it to be viewed as pandering, i didn't want people voting for me just because i said i wouldn't take the dollars. so i will clearly take same major sacrifice, because it's the right thing to do for our state. >> mr. bernero, will you forego your salary? >> well, you're kind of hilarious, nolan. i'm not a multi-millionaire like my opponent. i'm sure that i will cut my pay, as i said, i'll sacrifice along with the other state workers, but i can't simply reach into my pockets from years of corporate gains and stock shares that i've cashed in on, so, no, i'll need a salary to support myself and my family. >> okay. next question goes to mr. bernero first. for years our chief strategy for creating jobs in michigan has been to buy them with tax incentives, which is one of the things we're seeing with the very popular film credits right now. is that the right approach, and if not what other things would you do as governor to encourage business growth?

>> well, i wish it was that we didn't need tax incentives. my opponent has taken kind of a philosophical approach saying that we should do away with tax incentives. i disagree. think that would be unilateral disarmament. i may not like the global economy that we're in, there's a lot of things i'd like to change about it, but it's where we are and we have to compete and win for those jobs today. we're doing it in lansing. so i believe it's a question of math, and not of politics. if the economic incentives are working, we're going to use them. and we have used them very effectively to pull down $500 million dollars in new investment in my city, 6,000 new jobs. it is working. as far as the film tax credits, i hate to pull the rug out from underneath them right now. i'm starting to see some real investments of infrastructure in our state, but we need to see those investments, and we need to look at the whole picture. we need to look at the actual dollars brought, and the

economic impact, the ripple effect, the small businesses that are being attracted and so on. if it works, financially, if it makes sense, we'll keep it. if it's not, we'll throw it out. we can't afford to be ideologically based in terms of bias one way or another about these things. if they're working we keep them. if not, we throw them out. >> mr. snyder, you've been a critic of the film tax credits. would you keep them, and what other things would you do to try to create economic growth? >> well, let's take about the incentives for a minute. and it is a math problem. and the math problem is, you don't create jobs by buying people into our state and giving huge checks out to people. you create jobs by having free enterprise work. and you have free enterprise work by having the most level competitive playing field you start with. why do we have these massive incentives? it's been in large part because we have a broken tax and regulatory system. so instead of putting a band-aid on something, instead of addressing a symptom, let's fix the underlying issue. it is time to eliminate the michigan business tax. it should be replaced with a flat 6 percent corporate income tax. our regulatory environment's also messed up in this state. and if we get our act together, there should be much fewer need for incentives in general. the incentives have largely been a political gimmick.

the idea that we're going out to bring in a few large out of state companies here with massive incentives is not the answer. the comeback of michigan are michigan businesses being started right here in our state with michiganders. >> okay. as you both know -- this question goes to mr. snyder first -- i solicited free press readers for questions. the one i chose came from a young man named daniel o'connor, who's a graduate student at michigan state university, and he lives in royal oak. he asks, "the growing section of our economy is services and the growing section of our population is retirees, yet under the current tax system both are largely shielded from taxes. as governor, would you support a revenue neutral structural tax reform bill that shifts the burden towards services and retirees and away from other job providers who would entice more professionals and young families to michigan. mr. snyder? >> that's not how you address tax reform. in terms of going after it, the starting point in our state, given the environment we have, is we have to get rid of the job killer, and that's the michigan business tax. it is fundamentally unfair. it simply needs to be replaced,

and i propose replacing it with a flat six percent corporate income tax. that would take the business burden off of most small business, because they're not even corporations. that's the right altitude. we need to go from job killer to job creating. it would make us among the most competitive in the country. the next tax on the list after that that is creating havoc is the personal property tax. and that's the environment that i'm getting recognition from across the state when i go to town halls. people want to see the mbt go away. as i said on the campaign trail, they when brought it in it replaced the single business tax. it's just like lansing went to the video store and rented dumb and dumber. >> mr. benero? >> it's funny that my opponent talks about dumb and dumber. he's got one of them working for him. one of the guys who authored the michigan business tax that he wants to eliminate is actually brian calley who's the lieutenant governor. so i guess if you don't want

dumb and dumber you better not vote for the republican ticket. look, we need real reform, there's no question about that, and we're going to get that. we need make michigan the number one place in the country to do business, and we can do that. of course, the mbt surcharge is going to go. brian calley helped create it, and i'm going to eliminate it. i'm going to come up with a fair, equitable, and predictable tax system. and we're going to work with the business community to do that. but i'll never increase taxes on small business, which is what his six percent would be. for a lot of people a lot of businesses were paid 1.8 percent, 6 percent would merely treble their tax bill. i'll never do that to small business. and yes, we need to reform the tax system, but not with a regressive system. i'm afraid the proposal that came in from the reader would be regressive, and so i couldn't go that way, and i can't increase taxes, at a time like this it's the last thing we need to do is to increase taxes on small business for folks that least afford it. >> do you want a rebuttal, mr. snyder? >> well, sure. i think it's appropriate. i mean, it's one thing how you address things, it's another to be negative on people. and to make a comment about my lieutenant governor candidate, i mean, that's just not the

right way. brian calley actually fought hard to put in that provision he talked about, the small business credit, to really bring down the burden on small businesses. he was a leader in doing that. and to put it in perspective, your comment about increasing tax liabilities is inaccurate. because, again, it's getting to the facts. it takes that burden out of proprietorships, s corporations, and sole proprietorships. they wouldn't pay any tax under the system, because they're paying a double tax today. so we don't need to get bogged down on taxes, other than to say the mbt is really bad. and simply reducing the surcharge is not the answer. if you have a dumb tax and you reduce it by 20 percent, you still have a dumb tax. it fundamentally needs to be eliminated. >> mr. benero, you've called for a moratorium on mortgage foreclosures in michigan. are you worried about the unintended consequences of such a measure, such as more people deciding not to mail in their monthly payment? >> i'm worried about the consequences of the fraud and the problems, the mistakes that are happening from wall street that's pressing down on our people. we need to stop that immediately. i'm delighted, pleased that bank of america has said they're

going to stop in michigan immediately. we need the other wall street banks to follow suit. we need a moratorium for all the people in michigan, so that they can review their practices and know what they're doing. i say, nolan, we should err on the side of the homeowner. let's err on the side of keeping people in their homes. the vast majority of people, nobody's trying to trick the bank, nobody's trying to hold back. people are good people who are going to pay their bills. but, you know, i just find it interesting, my opponent is willing to side with the banks, to immediately assume that they're doing everything right. i can't assume that, i've seen too many mistakes. we fought to keep thousands of people in their homes in michigan, in lansing, through a program called holdontoyourhome.org. i've seen how people have been treated by the big banks, they can't even get through. we need to err on the side of keeping people in their homes. it will help not only them, but all the other folks who are struggling, all the other folks

who are impacted by it. when one person, when a home goes down, the property values of all the others suffer. >> thank you. mr. snyder, next question to you, you call yourself -- i'm sorry, we missed you? okay. we don't want to rush. >> no, that's fine. i appreciate that. in terms of the issue of a moratorium and such. first of all, people are suffering. this is extremely difficult economic times. but a blanket moratorium isn't right, and the mayor had called fro a two-year moratorium across the board on mortgages, i believe. i believe president obama came out today and talked about now that would not be a good idea. and in fact if you looked at the moratorium idea, the last time that was done was back in the depression, and that led to the bank holiday and the bank being closed, when 34 states did the same thing. we have to have good programs to help people that are suffering. they're there and he need to deal with those appropriately. the other thing is that if any bank's doing anything wrong, there are rules to deal with that. and we need to strongly enforce those rules. because if someone's out of line, particularly when you're talking about someone's home, we need to stand up for those people and deal with the banks that are doing the bad things. >> you want a rebuttal? >> um-hum. >> we have to remind, gentlemen, under the rules you two negotiated, you each got

three rebuttals and this will exhaust those rebuttals for both candidates. >> well, i just wanted to give a news flash to my opponent that in fact the banks have done plenty of things wrong, and the rules aren't working. this might come as a shock to you, i know it doesn't so much affect the people at the top, but regular folks are being put upon, the banks are getting way with murder. i'm here to tell you. we see it every day. there's an example of it in your newspaper, stephen. there's -- just read the free press if you want the evidence of it. and i can give you a whole lot more from the folks at holdontoyourhome.org. i'm sure you can talk to your folks in ann arbor. there's plenty of abuse going on all around this state, with people being kicked out of their homes. it needs to stop now. and so yes, i say err on the side of keeping people in their homes, don't err on the side of the banks. they've made plenty of mistakes, they've hurt plenty of people and thrown them out when they didn't deserve it. clearu can see there's a difference here. my opponent says the rules are working fine. if you think the rules are

working fine and the banks are treating people fairly, he's your guy. i don't believe that, i'm going to takes action, i'm going to use my position as governor to protect regular folks who are being put upon by wall street. >> thank you. now for that next question. mr. snyder, you call yourself one tough nerd. the nerd part we get. but are you tough enough to play political hard ball when the situation calls for it? >> absolutely. i'm proud of my track record. as a successful business person you need to learn how to deal with people, both in terms of dealing with customers, suppliers, all those kinds of situations, and i've been very successful at working through those. and in fact, one illustration i'll give you from the gateway experience was we had to negotiate patent licenses with people in order to be able to sell our products. and the companies i had to negotiate with were people that wanted for put us out of business, compac, dell, ibm, very adverse situations. and i was able to work through those effectively and make situations where we could respect one another, we fundamentally disagreed, but we were able to come up with tough conclusions. also i've got a great track record in the community setting. i helped build ann arbor spark, i wrote their business plan and was their founding chair. and that was educating. so not adversarial situations, but by bringing the community

together, of the universities, the private sector, the public sector, and create a partnership that led to many jobs being created in our community. >> and, mr. benero, you've called yourself the angry mayor, is anger an effective tool for building much needed bipartisanship in lansing? >> well, i was dubbed the angry mayor by fox news or cnn when i was fighting for the auto industry. and i don't mind that, because i think a lot of people are angry and a lot of people are hurting. it's not enough to be angry, it's how you use that anger and that passion, and i've used it to stand up for working people, and i'm produce of my record. and, you know, look i've had to fight people that wanted to increase taxes in lansing, i've gotten the job done. the proof of the pudding is in the tasting, and i've gotten the job done in the city of lansing. it's tough to govern, it's touch to be mayor of a city. it's going to be even tougher to be governor, so you better be tough. and you better be able to channel anger and passion. my opponent says he's tough enough. he's certainly tough enough to profit and send jobs overseas and to send jobs to other states, he's tough enough to stand up and pocket money even when people here are losing their jobs. so he may be a little tougher than me in certain regards, but i put my anger, my passion to good use, i think, and i'm ready to do the job as governor, to

lead this state forward. >> next question to mr. benero first. the recent documentary, waiting for superman takes a pretty hard swipe at teacher tenure. and of course, here in michigan we have some of the strongest tenure laws in the country. you have the strong support of teacher unions in this state. if you're elected, can you stand up to them and ask them to take another look at tenure and maybe revisit whether it's time for reform? >> i haven't seen the movie yet, but, stephen, you may know my wife is a 20 year plus public educator, and my heart goes out to all those educators out there, especially the first educators, the parents, who are doing the job with our children. i appreciate what you do day in and day out. education is near and dear to our heart. we think every child in michigan deserves a quality, top quality public education, and i'll work hard every day with my wife at my side to make sure that happens. teacher tenure, i'm happy to revisit that. i mean, who better to do it, to talk to the unions about it, than somebody who's been

working with them? you know, if you look at my record as mayor, i've stood up, i haven't always been able to say yes to the unions. i appreciate their support, but they've had to make concessions, they've had to sacrifice, just like the uaw at gm, my uaw at the city has made sacrifices. again, i made sacrifices. do we have to change the way we do things? absolutely. we're all going to have to change. we've got to compete and win in today's economy. the teachers i know want those kids to compete and win, and we'll do what it takes to make sure that that happens. >> mr. snyder, is it time to revisit teacher tenure? >> absolutely. that and many other things. we have a failed education system. the kids are not the goal anymore. it's too much about spending money when you go to lansing. all they talk about in lansing is this funding level or that funding level. the fundamental question behind it all is what we need to do to get our kids an education each and every year that's very successful. and we need to look at tenure, we need to look at merit. there are many things we need to look at. but we do want our frontline teachers to be successful. it's not about being hard on them, it's about creating an environment for success, and

letting them win and feel empowered. now, with respect to the dollars and how that works in terms of are you being influenced, i'm the candidate that stood up and said, last year before i became an announced candidate, that i wouldn't take a dollar of tax or special interest money. i'm proud to say i can look anyone in the eye and say i have no baggage, i'm a self-made person. i have no special interest ties. my only interest is to represent all the people of the state of michigan. >> the next question goes to mr. snyder first. michigan's troubled urban centers need help, and typically the discussion about that in the state centers around revenue sharing, which we all know has been dwindling in recent years. i'd like both of you to talk about ways other than revenue sharing that lansing might be able to aid places like detroit or lansing or saginaw or flint. mr. snyder? >> sure. if you look at one of the roles as governor is not to run the cities, but to be their best partner. and i'll use detroit as an illustration because i've said the only way michigan can be a great state is if detroit is on the path to being a great city. and the right way to do that is to partner. and mayor bing is an outstanding illustration and the city council there. we've got a great opportunity, but on their own they're going

to run into structural barriers. and the state should be there to help break through those barriers, to do what needs to be done. and that gets to things like value for money budgeting. let's take a new approach on how we allocate our dollars where they actually show meaningful, legible, tangible outcomes that positively impact real people instead of simply sending dollars. the other is, is we should be looking at our communities on how we engage the neighborhoods more. it's not about lansing doing everything. one of the words i really don't like is, i'm here from landing, i'm here to help. that make me nervous. so how do we engage our communities, and really do public, private partnerships where we do things on the ground, with the people there taking the charge and making the difference. >> mr. benero, what about help from lansing? >> well, as you know, brenda lawrence and i are mayors on main street, we are two mayors from main street. if anybody knows what our cities are up against, it's us. we face it every day. we're on the front lines. we make sure that the 911 calls get answered, that the potholes get filled, and that the garbage gets picked up. we're also working with small

business everyday, negotiating with small business, medium business, and even big business. we're negotiating in lansing with gm for a new global platform, a $200 million dollar expansion that will be 640 jobs. so we're on the frontlines doing it. our cities need to be the hub of the wheel and not the hole in the donut. detroit is the face of michigan. anybody who believes that we're going to move michigan forward and leave detroit behind is kidding themselves. we need to look at economic development policy, education policy, transportation policy, yes, revenue sharing policy. we need to look at all those in terms of how it affects our cities. the fastest growing states have the fastest growing cities in them. and we ignore that at our own peril. that's not just coincidence. we need to pay attention to our cities, we need to do a better job, and look at my economic development plan at votevirg.com. i've got specific strategies and an urban agenda to help bring back our cities. we must do this. >> okay. mr. benero, the census numbers released last week drew a direct link between a state's

educational attainment and its prosperity. what would you do to fix the public schools, to support the universities, and make michigan smarter? >> i appreciate the question, nolan. you know, we've been talking about economic development as

. ÷???ñ?

>> washington journal continues. host: another campaign, another season of television adds. now spawning off into a number of different states around the country, thanks for being with us. guest: thanks for having me. it's an effort to broaden fact checking the way that we do it, where we rate things on a truth meter from true to false to our lowest rating, pants on fire. we've partnered with newspapers around the country i sen states to do the same fact

checking that we do. we train them, we host their content, and they put the truth meter to politicians in their states. and it's been very successful. we've done more than 600 fact checks in those states since we started earlier this year. and i think it's really been good for voters. voters now have a better sense of what's true and what's not. host: one of the ads that's been getting attention, harry reid and sharon angle will be debating and we will cover it this week. did he? guest: we rated this barely true on our truth meter. this is one we did on friday. this is an ad similar to some scomplinets that have been made about democrats in oth states. we check this at first in one of their races and what we

found is that indeed the congress did pass when it passed health care reform it rejected an amendment that would have put some restrictions on health care coverage on things like viagara. but in this case, it's not the case that harry reid or anyone was out saying we've got to make sure th there is viagara corage for convicted sex offenders. and indeed, during the debate in the senate one of the democrats said, well, all you're doing here is creating material for a campaign commercial. to one of the republicans. well, that was true. they cated good material. we rated it barely true. there is truth in the sense that that coverage exists. but it was not an affirmtive effort by harry reid or other democrats to do this. and they have opportunity before that provision of the law kicks in to correct it. host: a lot of attention on

cross roads gps. this is a group put together by karl rove and ed gillespie. is this one example of what we're going to see this election and in 2012? guest: we've seen an explosion in the ads from these independent groups thaare maybe not as independent as t law might suggest. andhat's happened is a lot of the corporate money instead of aca company or a big corporation advertising under its name, the corrate money has gone to these groups that depending on how the group is set up, whether regulated by the commission or under the tax laws, the group can operate without disclosing its donors or at least in not disclosing its donors initially. and so they can spend tens of

millions of dollars without us knowing who is behind the ad. and in many cases these ads repeat the same points that are being made by the republican or democratic candidates, i guess it's important to point out that the spending has been very lop sided in favor of republicans, that groups like cross roads are affill yated with republicans spending much more money. and their record for accuracy is not very good. i think we've rated five or six ads for cross roads gps or its affiliated group and i don't think they've gotten bette than a half true on our truth meter. host: let's look at some of the ads. in the california senate race, the first, a republican 527, if you want to call it that and the response from barbara boxer. >> california seniors are

worried. barbara boxer voted to cut spending on medicare benefits by $500 billion, cuts so costly to hospitals and nursing homes that they could stop taking medicare altogether. boxer's cuts would sharply reduce benefits for some and could jeopardize access to medicare for others. and millions of americans won't be able to keep the plan or doctor they already have. check the facts and take action. call boxer. stop the medare cuts. >> as c.e.o. she laid off workers and shipped jobs to india. >> i know precisely where those jobs go. >> because she shipped them there to shanghai instead of san jose, banglor instead of bur banks. 30,000 workers gone while she took 100 million for herself. outsourcing jobs, out for herself. >> i'm barbara boxer and i approve this message.

guest: we've looked at both of those claims first in terms of the claim about medicare is one that we've hrd in aot of congressional races, not just in california. and this isnteresting an attack from republicans. republicans have never been totally comfortable with medicare, the whole idea that government would run a big health insurance program like that but they have used it often in this campaign to go after democrats. and what they're saying is that by voting for the health care law that democrats, in doing so, voted to cut medicare. and they're trying to give the impression, particularly to seniors, that their medicare benefits might be jeopardized. in this case and in many others that we've rated, we rated the claim barely true. it is true that barbara boxer and other democrats voted in favor of the medicare law which does reduce the future growth

of medicare spending by about $500 billion. but it is not the case that that would cut medicare benefits, which is the implication by the add. and likewise in the case, and i don't remember our ruling on the attack on fiorina, we have found many exaggerations particularly on issues where the republican candidate ran or helped run a company and the democrats will seize on that and try to say that the republican in some way eliminated jobs, and particularly sent these jobs overseas. there's a front page story in the "new york times" today about this pattern particularly as it relates to china. in ohio, we have in several cases rated claims by lee fisher, the democratic candidate where he has tried to blame rob portman, the republican candidate, who was

president bush's trade representative for shipping jobs to china. and we have ratethose in one case i think half true and in another case false because i think in many cases here the democrats are exaggerating the impact that the republicans had on where the jobs have gone. host: so who is css roads gps? that's a question our twitter page. guest: sure. cross roads gps is one of the two groups, and you mentioned rlier, that fair affiliated with karl rove and ed gillespie, very prominent t ten years,nd it is a group tt is funded to a l corporate donations from what we've been able to tell. we don't know a lot about the donors because particularly for cross roads gps they don't have to reveal the donors. cross roads gps operates as an -- under the tax code as a nonprofit 401, not c but 401

something organization, and so we don't know who the donors are. we do know that it is republicans who are running it. and in many cases they're repeating the talking points that the republican candidates are using in those races. now, last week a couple of groups, democracy 21 and another group that's concerned about spending money and politics, they asked the i.r.s. to investigate cross roads gps and questioned whether it is truly operating under the tax laws properly. host: our next call is dar lean from dallas. good morning. caller: goodmorning. thank you c-span. calling to reference to the ladies you had on earlier, ms. cheryl and also ms. maria. i enjoyed watching them. please have them on more often. and also, with the sites, i

didn't know we had one here in texas. that's wonderful. and also, we are excited and we start early voting at the end of the week. so we just wanted to let you know that we are actively ready to go and we are fired up and ready to vote again. host: thank you. let me bring up her point because she talks about early voting which in many ways is changing the dynamics of these elections as more and more people vote by mail. guest: it really is. there were questions about the concerns about the sanctity of the voting booth and what happens when people vote early. on the other hand, it's very coenient for people working during the day and can't make it to the polls in florida where my news organization is based, a huge percentage of people are going to vote early. so it raises some interesting

issues. it also changes the dynamic of some of the last minute ads and things which aren't necessarily going to be just the week before the election. i think it sort of moves everything forward. host: let's look a the florida race, where cri is running against meek. and according to the current polls here are some of the ads in that race. >> work longer, get by on less. that's the rubio retirement plan. rubio wants to raise the social security retirement age. that means you'll work harder and longer for your money. and rubio wants to cut benefits. it's already tough enough to make ends meet. there's a better choice. charlie crist is against raising the retirement age. he'll protect social security because ousrs have earned it.

>> the choice is clear. marco rubio stood up for taxpayers by saying no to the failed obama stimulus. charlie crist embraced it. marco rubio opposed obama care. charlie crist has flip flopped. marco rubio says no to obama's energy tax. florida needs a strong leader to put a check on obama's agenda. that's marco rubio. >> i'm kendrick meek. with three of us running you should know what makes me different. i'm the only one who has fought against developers draining the everyglades. the only one against privatizing social security. the only one who is prochoice who took on george bush, who fought for tax cuts. i'm the only one who can approve this message.

>> a little bit of humor but also some pretty sharp attacks in that race. >> we've been very active in florida. we're part of the st. petersburg times so naturally we've been doing a lot of fact checking there. we operate plit fact florida as a partnership with the high pressure system herald and we're getting help -- moim herald. the press is helping us. and we rate that first ad that you showed, the charlie crist ad that had those very unflattering black and white images of marco rubio. this is partf the art form of these campaign ads. i always think it's funny how thake -- they can find the least flattering photos, and they show themselves in living color. in this case charlie crist was making a claim about marco rubio in social security saying that marco rubio wants to raise the retirement age for social

security and some other things. we rated that half true. we -- it is true that rubio has talked about that. we gave it a half true because we felt that crist was leaving out some important information. that being that rubio has said, like many other republicans who have talked about making changes to social security, that he would protect current retirees and people who were close to retirement, and that these changes wouldn't occur immediately d they would somehow be phased in. the other ad that you showed, the across roads gps ad attacking crist, we haven't looked at that particular ad but we have looked at several others with some of the same changes, some of the same charges about crist. his support of the stimulus. and he was indeed, and that shows the very famous hug that he gave president obama when obama came to florida.

and we've looked at some of those, too. it's interesting when you watch these ads all day long like i do and you just hope that voters look beyond the ads because they're giving such limited amount of information about what's happening in these races. and i hope that they go to a site like ours or to other news sites to find out what the truth is about these things. because if we had to look at the overall accuracy of ads in this campaign, i would rate them as barely true. having a germ of truth, i would say most of the chges that we see here on these ads have some grain of truth, but they are twisting it, distorting it, exaggerating it in some way. host: our conversation is with bill adair, the editor of pliti fakt, which he is keeping track of these ads. you can check it out. and what is the liar, liar, pants on fire, which is my

favorite at the website. robert is joining us from tennessee. republican line. good morning. caller: hello, gentlemen. i was wondering what the gentleman thought about maybe a state-run fining system for these politicians who are not quite fully honest with their ad. guest: in other words, fining them for notelling the truth? caller: yes, sir. guest: i don't thinkhat would be a good idea. we have freedom of speech in this country, and i think it's important to allow our elected officials, to allow anybody to say what they want and then to allow a free and independent press, like ours, to help you, the voter, understand what the truth is about those things. and you can take that information and do something with it. but i don't think it would be a good idea to get government involved and have the government deciding what's true and what's not.

host: sasha asking the question gues no. we have groups in various states, and even with all that we have sort of the equivalent of two to three full-time fact checkers in each state plus three full-time fact checkers for our natnal staff. we're getting a relatively small portion of all the ads. we are, though, i think getting the majority of the points that are being made. for example, that claim about medicare that we heard in the ad against barbara boxer has been made repeatedly in many republican races, and so i think we're getting the main themes. and if you come to our search box by topic, you can probably find that we have rated the

claim that you're interested in. host: we have a compilation of ads as well on our site and a lot of debates coming up in the week ahead. we encourage you to check it out on our website. tomorrow night, the kentucky senate live here on c-span getting under way at 7:00 stern time. that will be followed by an indiana senate debate. and later in the week, the only debate wednesday in that delaware senate race. and on thursday evening, live coverage between senate democratic leader harry reid and sharon angle his republican opponent. that gets under way at 9:00 eastern time. you can see it all this week here on c-span and on c-span radio. john from huntington, new york, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to mention about what you said about the medicare thing. i was -- my supplemental was

canceled last week and i was on the phone all week and nobody wants to accept me. and it's scary. it's scary stuff. so i don't think the republicans are lying so much about it. guest: i'm not sure how much individual cancellation for supplementry medicare would be a factor of the health care law. are you sure that's a function of the new law? caller: well, it seems to be, because nobody wants to accept me. and they're saying that they're not going to take the medicare. and i'm trying to stay with my heart doctor because i had a buy past and because i'm trying to stay with him i'm having a really hard time. guest: i think what i know about the law, and i'm not an expert in health care coverage, we have a reporter on our staff who really to focuses on health

care. the core benefits are not being changed. the impact from the law is going to be felt more by patients who use medicare advante programs and if you use the medicare advantage program it's likely that some of your sort of extra benefits, things like vision care, health care club memberships are likely to be affected. but the law is not supposed to change the core health care benefits. now, supplementry insurance is a different thing. i know you're going to the private market to nd of fill in the gaps that medicare wouldn't cover. i'm not sure how much that is covered or not covered by the new law. host: in the knows senate race, an open seat and cgressman blunt is vying for it as the republican nominee being challenged by robin carnhan, one of the well none families in american politics. >> our bill is up for a vote.

just hours before, roy blunt secretly inserts language to benefit tobacco giant. blunt's girl friend and son are lobbyists for the cigarette companies. the the consummate washington insider. roy blunt. what's wrong with washington. >> they promised jobs. instead, we got genations of debt. where did our money go? are ask robin carnhan. her brother's wind farm got over $100 million stimulus dollars. robin carnhan campaigned for obama and the stimulus. >> her brother lobbied for the special deal. >> the payoff? over $100 million. >> they get a real windfall. >> we get the bill. >> and no jobs. >> i'm roy blunt and i approve this message. >> bill.

closely watched race. >> it is. we rated that first ad about roy blunt and tobacco, and we rated that one mostly true. the ad pretty much gets it right in terms of blunt's role in getting an amendment passed in a bill. now, the reason we gave it a mostly true is there's a couple of mitigating factors. one is it reasonably could be put in a national security bill because there were some concerns that tobacco, products were being used by groups associated with terrorism and so it wasn't that big oa stretch to put nit that particular law. it also wasn't done secretly. the ad says it was done secretly. this was, as things are in congress, done largely in the sunlight. but otherwise, in terms of

capturing the role of the girlfriend and the lobbying, that was correct. so we rated that one mostly true. the other one we didn't rate. and it makes me want to fact check that one. i'd be curious to check the wind farm claim. guest: don't tell my boss this, but i have the best job in american journalism. this is the most rewarding job in journalism because you get to blow the whistle on falsehoods, you get to help people make a decision on democracy. it doesn't get tiring. and, if anything, we could do it 24 hours a day because there's so many interesting claims being made. and that's really the nice thing about our state

operations. having us in these growing number of states, we have more fact checking being done than ever before. i don't think that there's a new organization that has ever done as much fact checking than we have this election. and i can the result is voters have lots more valuable information to make their decisions about who they're going to vote for. >> the web site is politifact.com. new jersey, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. my question has to do with a sweeping generalization statement of fact that is made in political add ver tiesments as well as in talking points for the democratic party. and it is that president clinton left a huge surplus to president bush. but president bush left a huge

deficit for president obama. in the panel this morning with ms. jack oby and ms. car donea, ms. car donna made the statement that he left a huge surplus. i don't think that was a surplus of monetary value, i think it was a projected surplus which never materialized. host: we should point out also that the republicans were in control when bill clinton was in the white house. the democrats in control of congress during the last two years of the bush administration. guest: that's correct. i think that's a really good point. and that gets to, i should explain how we might fact check something like that because i think it shows the different elements of a claim. the call ser exactly right that this is a common talking point. you hear this from democrats over and over again. and as you noted, steve,

remember, it was not just bill clinton who came up with a balanced budget agreement. it was bill clintonnd knut gingrich who came to an historic agreement that ultimately led to the surpluses that were there at the end of clinton's presidency. and the way that we would fact check something like this is we sort of break out the parts of it. so one part is what are the numbers? what, was there indeed a surplus at the end of clinton's presidency and what was the deficit at the end of bush's presidency? and then we would attempt to, in talking to experts, try to sort out well who is responsible and try to figre out within the bounds of objective journalism can we call it bill clinton's surplus and george w. bush's deficit? or to what extent do you hold them responsible? and we've done this not just at e federal level for a claim

like that b we've done it for claims at the state level and congressional races where someone will say since so and so was governor,ur state lost so many jobs. and so we'd check the nber of jobs. but then we'd also look at, well, how much can you hold the governor responsible for that. host: one other set of ads in florida. congressman gracen who is seeking reelection and his challenger is dan webster. >> washington backers are attacking aln sponsored a bill to create a form of marriage that would trap women in asive relationships. webster is an advocate for a group that teaches mothers should not work outside the home. webster would force victims of rape and incest to bear their attacker's child. don't let daniel webster make the laws we will have to live with. >> you want to know why

washington is broken? here are three numbers. 4 billion. that's what they're borrowing every day. 2.6 million. that's how many jobs we've lost. and 98%. that's how often my opponent has voted with nancy pelosi. together we will cut spending, jump start the economy, and restore the promise becse america is not broken. washington is. host: the house race is getting a lot of attention. guest: it is. allen grayson, democrat in the orlando area, it's a seat that had been held for man years by republicans. it is very much a vulnerable seat. and allen grayson is a really in your face colorful character in the democratic party saying things that many democrats in difficult seats are not saying. he's very outspoken. so he put out an ad a couple

weeks ago that was called taliban dan, that tried to really portray dan webster as an extremist. and we looked at a couple of the claims in that ad and rated them, i believe, false and barely true. and then so this add that you just showed from alen grayson was in many ways the response by grayson to the backlash that came out of that ad. grayson's attempt to actually give the facts. oddly, the ad is called the facts, which i thought was sort of funny, suggesting that maybe the previous ad wasn't. and so we looked at two of the claims there. the claim that daniel webster is an advocate for a group that teaches that mothers should not work outside the home. we rate that barely home. we found there is a religious group that he is affiliated with where the leader has talked about that. but that's not like that's one of the basic tets of the group.

we looked at the other claim that webster had sponsored a bill to create a form of marriage that would trap women in abusive relationships. indeed, webster was a supporter in the early 90's of a law that actually, a bill that didn't pass in florida that would create covenant marriage, which would be a more restrictive form of marriage that couples could opt for. and indeed, the only way out of that, out of a covenant marriage would be in the case of infidelity. and so because of that, because it would have allowed, because it -- people who were victims of abuse or something would not be able to get out of their marriage under the way the law was written, we rated that law true -- that claim true. host: what will people find when they go to your site? guest: we have two main features. the truth meter section where we post the latesttems that

we've done. we also have the owe bomb ter, which is a feature where we've tracked president obama's campaign promises, all 508 of them, and we rate them as promise kept, promise broken, stalled or in the works. and so it's a good way to get an independent look, because we're not affiliated with either party, we're a news organization. it's a good way to getet an

.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> eugene robinson on the splintering of black america and sam harris on science and human values. throughout the weekend, panels on medical mysteries, capital punishment and infamous fugitives. get the entire schedule on booktv.org.

kentucky's u.s. senate candidates, democrat jack conway and republican rand paul debated monday evening. mr. conway was first elected in 2011. they are running to replace republican senator jim bunning, who is retiring. former president bill clinton campaigned for mr. conway and sarah palin campaigned for rand paul last month. this is an hour. >> live from the campus of northern, kentucky, university, this is the 2010 kentucky u.s. senate debate. >> good evening, everyone and welcome. i'm welcoming you to the campus of northern kentucky university. for the next hour, i will be

moderating tonight's debate in the kentucky u.s. senate race between democrat jack conway and republican rand paul. we will bring the candidates out in just a few moments, but first a little bit about them. jack conway is a democrat. he is 41 years old. he holds a bachelor of arts degree from duke university sand a graduate from george washington university law school. banking committee as w as former kentucky gov., he also practiced law in louisville. in 2007, he was elected kentucky a pretty general, the office that he holds today. his wife and he had been married and they have one daughter and they live in louisville. republican rand paul is 47 years old. he attended baylor university and earned a medical degree from duke university.

he is an ophthalmologist in private practice in bowling green. he is also chairman and founder of kentucky taxpayers united. dr. paul has never held political office. he and his wife kelly had been married for 20 years. they have three sons and live in bowling green. the audience here has been instructed to remain completely silent with one exception. that is right now when they join me in welcoming jack conway and rand paul. [applause] >> questioning the candidates tonight is our panel of

journalists. they are scott reynolds, amanda from the kentucky enquirer, and mr. key from nine news. the debate will be carried out under a format and rules on agreed to by the campaigns. here they are. each candidate will have two minutes to deliver an opening statement. then, the questioning began. each cat will get a 92nd response for each question with the first candidate having 30 seconds for rebuttal. all questions will be at the moderator's discretion. each and it will receive 30 seconds for a response. each and it will then get two minutes a piece for a closing statement. -- each candidate will then get two minutes a piece for a closing statement. >> is up to me to strictly enforce time limits, a job which i relish. the order of the opening

statements as well as the questions has been determined by a coin flip prior to tonight's debate. mr. conway is first. you now have two minutes for your opening statement. >> thank you, clyde. thank you to the northern kentucky chamber and northern kentucky univ. for hosting this debate. this election for the united states senate presents a fundamental choice between what is right for kentucky and what is wrong for kentucky. as attorney general, i have taken on the position of crime and drugs. rand paul has said that drugs are not a pressing issue and that nonviolent actions should never be criminalize. rand paul is wrong. as attorney general, i have tried to stand up for our seniors when they have been skimmed or abused. rand paul supports a $2,000 deductible that our seniors cannot afford. as attorney general, i have

taken on pharmaceutical companies when they lied to us about prescription pill prices. i have taken on the oil companies when the gouged us at the top. rand paul is not believed that those companies should be held accountable whatsoever. in fact, he has even said that going after british petroleum is an american. rand paul is wrong. what concerns me the most is that rand paul has said that we haven't followed the constitution in this country since 1937. that date was not selected at random. that is the year that the u.s. supreme court upheld the constitutionality of social security. i do not know whether he thinks that social security is constitutional, but he has also questioned medicare. he questions medical -- minimum- wage laws. he has questioned the americans with disabilities act. he has question fundamental provisions of the civil rights act of 1964. he has questioned worker safety

protection even federal mine safety protections. rand paul would undo all the we have fought for since the great depression. rand paul is wrong, fundamentally wrong. count on me to protect kentucky. this is a choice between white and wrong. mr. paul, you now have two minutes. >> i am a physician, not a politician. i have been married for 20 years and i have three teenage boys that are with me today. i decided to run for office because i became concerned about the mounting debt. i became concerned because the republicans were doubling the debt and the democrats came into power and they tripled the debt. i became concerned because of the rise in spending. the government became the answer for everything. i became concerned that president obama's agenda would support entitlement programs. i became concerned that president obama's agenda was to

raise taxes in the middle of a recession. i became concerned that president obama's agenda to bring cap and trade to kentucky would be disastrous for kentucky. it would cost us tens of thousands of dollars if not hundreds of thousands of jobs. our vision for the country and america is so much different than their vision. president obama's vision is that government is the answer to every economic bill, to every social ill. our answer is, as ronald reagan said, the government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem. i believe in the individual. i believe in you. i believe in individual to open doors. i do not -- onto penurious -- business owners. our national defense and social security, those are things that government will do.

let's keep it to a minimum. let's recognize that we are running out of money. as we run out of money, we have to have solutions and we cannot simply stick our head in the sand and say that we will keep passing out checks because that is what we are supposed to do. thank you very much to allow me to come to this debate. >> we will get to the questioning now. we begin with scott reynolds. he will have the first question tonight and it goes to mr. conway. >> before all the political, something a little more personal. mr. paul, you have no political experience and you have radical ideas. for mr. conway, it may be the opposite. here comes another smooth talking lawyer that wants to climb that lock -- that ladder and become a career politician. can you tell us why people should give you their vote as a candidate? >> scott, thank you for the

question. this race is not about me. this race is not about dr. paul. it is about the people of kentucky. they are hurting right now. in a way that i have never seen in my lifetime. families are being ripped apart. they are worried about whether or not they can educate their kids or keep their jobs. i remember talking to a hardware store owner on the campaign trail who told me that his hardware store is paid for but he has been turned down for a loan of 22 times in the past 18 months. 15 years ago, 90% of what he had on his shelves was made in america and now 95% is made overseas. i think about the elderly woman who looked at me and said she was an in -- a retired bank teller and lives on a fixed income. she cannot afford a $2,000 deductible. i think about the mothers who have cried on my shoulders as i

travel for eastern kentucky that have told me how their daughters overdosed on oxycontin. is about people. it is about who would put kentucky first. i am asking for your vote for the united states senate because i want to put kentucky first. i have earned your trust and it is about people. it is not about me. >> my apologies, mr. paul, you now have 90 seconds. >> i think that my greatest attribute is that i never have held office. people who have never been in the business world that do not know how to run a business do not know how to meet payroll. i think that being an ounce after -- an outsider is a wonderful actor do. so often, we develop such bland candidates because they talk in circles and they do not present solutions for the demagogue the issues. i think people are ready for solutions.

our country faces grave problems. they want somebody that will discuss these issues and the other free to present solutions. when people say that this could be extreme, i say that what is extremas what is going on in washington. a $2 trillion deficit is extreme. hundreds of billions of dollars in interest is extreme. if interest rates rise 4% to 6%, interest will consume the budget. we must elect people who will tackle these problems, not people who will simply demagogue them, take things out of context and run on something that is not real or not true. i am proud of being an outsider and i am proud of the things that i stand for. term limits, balanced budget amendment, this hardly sounds very extreme. >> mr. paul, thank you.

mr. conway, you have 30 seconds for a bottle. >> dr. paul says that he is for term limits. he is for term limits, but he told a reporter that he would not apply them to himself. i would say that dr. paul's position on the civil rights act of 1964, i think that is extreme. saying that he wants to do away with the americans with disabilities act, that affects the disabled veterans, i think that is extreme to say that soldiers -- i think that is extreme. >> our next question goes to amanda of the kentucky inquirer. >> mr. paul and mr. conway, both of you have said that you are concerned about the federal deficit and that we need to reduce spending. will you tell me three specific ways you would cut spending if you're elected? >> mr. paul, your response. >> first, we need a balanced

budget amendment to force them to. both sides have proved themselves and work -- untrustworthy. we will be forced to make the -- difficult decisions. in kentucky, we have a balanced budget amendment and we have to make decisions. that is what we need. the second thing is we need a compromise between republic tens and democrats that republicans and democrats. we cannot make entitlements off limits. we cannot make discretionary spending off limits. the entire budget has to be looked at if we are serious about balancing the budget. we have unspent tarp items and unspent stimulus items. we have $100 billion and accounted for. the list goes on and on. we spent 2.6 million last year studying why pigs stink. the earmarks are outstanding. do not give me three, did a thousand that we can list. the waste goes on and on.

we have to start the real cost the will part of the insert is that they have been undependable. they have declared everything an emergency. within three weeks, everything was an emergency. rules will help the system. we need rules that say you have to balance the budget by law. >> mr. conway, you have 30 seconds. >> rand paul's solution will not help us in the short run. to pass a constitutional amendment, it will take years to pass. we have to get about the business of balancing the budget. this is an area where rand paul talks the talk, but he has not walked the walk. as attorney general, i balance my budget eight times in the past few years. rand paul says that he is going to balance the entire federal budget next year. he is just not going to tell

anybody how he will do it this year. if you balance the federal budget next year, you will end up cutting 40% in spending. if you receive social security benefits, your average benefit might go from something like a lot hundred dollars down to $700. -- like $1,100 down to $700. with the proposals i am talking about. i am talking about allowing medicare to purchase in bulk, to negotiate prices just let medicaid and the v.a. can. we need to attack medicare fraud. i support closing these offshore tax loopholes and special interest provisions that allow us to shift our jobs overseas to places like china. we could save $130 billion there. i support a bipartisan debt commission. those are five specific steps right there. >> mr. conway. thank you. mr. paul, you have 30 seconds or

bottle. >> if you are serious on balancing the budget, you have to set rules. the rule goes a long way. 32 states have a balanced budget amendment. we do not know whether it takes or five years. if the country is up in arms and goes for this, we could pass it. we could pass it like we pass term limits on the president. we passed it relatively easily in the early 1950's. in regards to term limits, he is against term limits completely. i am for mandatory term limits. >> all right, mr. paul, thank you very much. >> amanda, you have a follow-up question. >> can you be more specific about what cuts are needed in spending to help balance the budget? >> we mentioned $200 billion left over in the top fund. -- tarp fund. we should make private workers .

we spent $120,000 for the average federal worker. let's bring that in line with private pay. let's try it the federal work force. i think there is an enormous amount of solutions. >> all right, thank you. mr. conway, you get 30 seconds to follow what -- to follow up. >> i am looking for the specifics on balancing the budget. he supports a $2,000 deductible for medicare. that seems callous to me. he has called social security a ponzi scheme and will seek to privatize it. i will never balance the budget on the backs of our seniors. >> tom now has a question for mr. conway. >> farmers throughout the commonwealth are concerned about changes coming in the estate tax or the death tax on

january 1 with the million- dollar exemption. with agriculture so important to -- to the kentucky economy, what can you say to kentucky farmers about this issue? what i understand the commonwealth of kentucky very well and i understand that we have 80,000 farms in the commonwealth of kentucky. i am a kentucky democrat. i have broken with my party when a profit. i have taken on the pharmaceutical companies. i have taken on oil companies. on the issue of taxes, i am not like typical democrats. i have said that in a time of recession, it is not a time to raise taxes. s.t's extend the bush tax cut small family farms and small businesses throughout the commonwealth of kentucky need to have some assurance from the federal tax code that they can pass down a family business or

passed out a family farm to the next generation. -- passed down a family farm to the next generation. farmers want to know that the department of agriculture will them. my opponent has said that he favors abolishing the federal department of agriculture. if you abolish the federal department of agriculture, you abolish a sustainable for a comedy from your to your -- system will economy from year to year. rand paul is trying to pull one over on you. three-quarters of the farm bill goes to school nutrition programs for it that is 500,000 kentucky kids on free and reduced lunches in public schools. i am not for that. >> mr. paul, you now have 90 seconds. >> is hard to find out what his position on the tax. he was for them before he was against them before he was for them.

he came out and told the press that he was for bringing back the death tax. he was for bringing back the estate tax. he was one to have a few exemptions and it would not be quite as bad as what we have before, but he believed in the concept of bringing back the death tax. in a major paper in our state, he told them that he was for letting the majority of the bush tax cuts expire. i have no earthly idea what his real position is. kentucky cannot stand to have this kind of ambivalence. you need to know where people stand. i have taken a pledge to permanently repeal the death tax, not for a year, or two years, but permanently repeal it because i do not believe you should tax people simply for the act of dying in regard to all of the other allegations, all of these imaginary positions come forward.

getting rid of the department of agriculture is not my position. i never said that. these positions come up because he wants to run against something but he does not want to run and talk about president obama. he does not want to talk about his support for president obama and all of president obama's initiatives. that is what this election is about and he is trying to run away from it. >> mr. conway, you have 30 seconds for the bottle. >> not only is rand paul -- in 2002, i supported president bush's tax cuts and i am for extending them now. i am not for extending the special interest provisions. the tax cuts that send our jobs overseas. i know that he wants to talk about president obama, but he is want to have to say that a bunch to catch up. >> just a reminder, we are

encouraging you to remain silent so that this process can proceed unimpeded. >> scott has the next question for mr. paul. >> mr. paul, congress has done -- has tried to make it easier for businesses to get loans to purchase equipment. i talked to a couple of business owners that said that they do not want the loans. they are not buying the equipment right now. they are worried about taxes and added regulations on their businesses. what is going to get the unemployment rate back down to the 5% and 6% level? >> the first thing that we have to realize is that we're doing the wrong things. it has been called an uncertainty premium. they passed a bank regulation bill, which jack is for, with 533 regulations on kentucky banks.

the banks that failed were fannie mae, freddie mac and bad policy by the federal reserve. they hate all of these regulations on banks. that is making it harder to get a loan. obamacare, 2500 pages. nancy pelosi says that we can read it after it is passed. how appalling. once it is passed, it is not done for. they will write thousands of more pages of regulations. regulations cost businesses $1 trillion. you wonder why businesses go overseas. we tax them to death and we regulate them to death. we have the most business on friendly association have ever had. this election will be about do you want someone to support this president and his plan or do you want someone who will support the market place. support the individual. support capitalism.

support freedom. that is how we get jobs. send less money to washington and keep more in kentucky. >> mr. conway, your response. >> this election is not about president obama. at this election is about jack conway versus rand paul. do you want someone that understands that our disabled but -- what our disabled vets need? rand paul is wrong on a lot of issues and he was just wrong here again. he said that no banks failed in kentucky. that is not true. on top of that, a number of them got tarp funds. there was not enough accountability in not for me. when they say to give us money and give us money, there is no accountability and you cannot look at the bonuses that they took. that is outrageous.

here is what happened, scott. the government bailed out a bunch of big banks on wall street. they came down really hard on our small community banks. it is the $200,000 loans that the small community bank makes that is the lifeline to people like my friend, the hardware store owner. the thing that is troubling about rand paul is that he does not seem to understand the concept of accountability. it is ok to have bailouts, but those banks that were too big to fail have gotten even bigger and now rand paul does not believe in holding them accountable and he does not believe in preventing abuses in the future and he does not believe -- >> mr. conway, i am sorry but i have to interrupt. mr. paul? what do you know who the chief law enforcement officer is in kentucky? drugs are a bad problem in our state. they are getting worse. he has been raking in so much

campaign cash in california, he has not been able to do his job. methamphetamine labs have doubled. prescription drug abuse is up. we have five counties where the average person in the county has for narcotics prescriptions. >> mr. paul, i will have to interrupt you as well. >> command as the next question -- amanda has the next question. >> kentuckians have benefited from a local voice in jim bunning who secured funding for northern kentucky university where we are tonight. if elected, how would you work to protect northern kentucky's interests? would you be an advocate for nku? >> i think he for the question. before i address it, i want to

point out that the allegation that dr. paul just made about methamphetamine labs going up, that is disrespectful to the kentucky state police. they are the ones that have the ability to go after methamphetamine labs. one of his friends try to put up an ad with those allegations and to stations have to pull it down because it was proven to be false. now to your question, i love coming to northern kentucky. i love the spirit of the people out here. i have a dozen members of your cincinnati bengals that have formed beagles -- for a special group. -- formed a special group. i always try to get behind northern kentucky. while working as an aide in gov. patten's office, i helped write the higher education law that gave status to northern kentucky

university. we have to look at this issue. there is a lot of infrastructure at the airport. if you honor me by electing me as the next united states senator, i will come up with ideas to try to get more traffic to that airport. we have to make certain that it is safe to cross that bridge. >> mr. paul, you have 90 seconds. >> i would advocate for bridges for northern kentucky and level and wherever we need them. for roads where ever we need them. i will not simply promise that here is the money and there are no conditions for it that is our problem. do we want someone who simply will pander? here it is, here is the money, there are no consequences. there are consequences to having a $2 trillion debt. this needs to be within the

confines of a balanced budget and not to be earmarked process. the earmarked process has been a stay on our history. people stick things on in the dead of night that are unrelated to the bills. mr. smith gave a lot of money to a representative. that is the kind of thing that the taxpayers are upset with. they want more accountability. when things go through the committee process, we will ask what the cost benefit analysis is. we will ask when was the bridge last repaired. we will make rational decisions on rebuilding our infrastructure. you cannot do that if you are in favor of a trillion dollar stimulus. if you are in favor of a $1 trillion health care plan, that is money that we do not have to fix bridges. you can't be pie in the sky with everyone. you need someone who will have an adult conversation. >> thank you, mr. paul.

mr. conway, your bottle. >> this issue, like so many others, is about standing up for northern kentucky. i would stand up for northern kentucky, central kentucky and eastern kentucky. i am looking for statistics where prescription pills went down. my opponent can't cite what ever statistics he wants to make up. >> sorry to interrupt, but your time is up. we will now go to tom a key who has a question for mr. paul. >> the international airport has lost 50% of its flights since 2007. it has affected passengers, businesses and others. what can you do at the federal level that will reverse this trend?

>> we have to leave more money in the state. that would allow for more businesses to thrive and more people to travel. the airlines do face a lot of hurdles and they are on the edge. one of the things that they are concerned about is forced unionization. they are worried about the secret ballot and expanding the unions were only 20 people can decide about the unions. this is coming out of president obama's of administration. we need a competitive labor, but we need labor that can succeed in our market. toyota it thrives with non unionized labor. gm is failing. we need to realize that we have a marketplace out there and we encourage people to come to our state and that they can hire people for a reasonable wage and businesses will succeed. >> mr. conway, your response. >> i believe the question was about the international airport

and what we can do to make it thrive once again. this is an issue that is important not only to northern kentucky, but important to all of kentucky. my wife and i make our home in louisville and i fly in and out of covington all the time because it is convenient. one of the reasons that toyota came here was because it was a convenient source of international flights. if you honor me by electing me to the united states senate, i will work on this issue. we have a lot of infrastructure there that is being unused. we have to look at getting maintenance hubs brought in for regional aircraft. we have to look a what happened in pittsburgh and the loss of their regional hub. -- and they lost their regional hub. is there something that we can do to make sure that more carriers have access to more gates of that we use all the dates that we have. -- all of the gates that we have.

you need an advocate to bring people together in the senate. we need to figure out this issue. if you honor me with your vote and sent me to the united states senate, i will put together a task force and bring everyone together, democrats and republicans, the way i have done on my cyber crimes legislation, and say that we need to figure things out because there is a work force out there and cannot waste it. >> mr. paul, your bottle. >> it is about a fundamental decision. government says that capitalism failed and they want new regulations. our businesses go overseas because they are regulated to death. they are taxed to death. even in europe, the taxes are lower. we need more taxes and less regulation. we do not need to send a

supporting voice, we need to tell them they are wrong. >> thank you very much. we solicited questions online for tonight's debate. here is one. it has been said that every community hates your marks except their own. -- earmarks, except their own. mr. conway, your response. >> i am against earmark of uses. it should be placed in the bill -- abuses. some your marks affect infrastructure like the bridge project in northern kentucky, like projects in and around bowling green and the army depot that senator mcconnell is filing -- is fighting. i think it is about being responsible and making sure that wit has transparency and make

sure we know how federal dollars are spent. the choice in this campaign, he will continue to say obama, obama, obama. it is about putting kentucky first. we need someone who will fight against a $2,000 deductible for medicare. here is what -- rand paul is for all of these agencies in the government. he said he would not eliminate the agency that pays doctors for medicare because he wants to make a comfortable living. you pay more, he gets more. that is not the kind of representation we need to send to washington. if you send me there, i'll always put kentucky first. >> mr. paul, you have 90 seconds. >> when you talk in circles, someone has to interpret for you. he is against your mar -- but he is really for

them. you have these earmarks. i have talked about medicare running out of money. so social security, running out of money. in the future, we will have to do things. there will have to be changes made. i did not cause the baby boom. a lot of babies were born after world war ii. i did not cause the baby boom, but i am willing to deal with it to figure out how to fix social security for the future. social security spends more than it takes in. it is going bankrupt. we cannot do the same old, same old. we cannot promise how we will pay for them. we have to figure out how to pay for them. alternately, maybe people have millions of dollars and they may have to pay more of a cost for medicare.

that is part of what the debt commission is talking about. step up and be a man and take a chance. say that you are for something. >> mr. conway, you have 30 seconds to bottle -- for it rebuttal it -- for rebuttal. >> mr. paul, i am not want to balance the budget by calling social security a ponzi scheme. i do not know what he just proposed there. he talked about a resource. he was either saying for me except in medicare or a tax. i guess you'll have to answer that. >> scott reynolds as the next question for mr. paul. >> 10,000 miles away, about 100,000 america's finest are in a war in afghanistan.

that is something that congress will have to deal with as well. i am wondering, should we have gone into that war, and what does victory look like? is it just getting out of there as long as there is no huge television -- taliban stronghold? >> this election has been primarily about financial issues. i tell people that the most important vote that i will ever take is whether or not to go to war. i will take that vote and treat it seriously. i will treat it as if my children or -- are going or i am going. i think that we should go to war reluctantly. when we go to war, we should go constitutionally. we have not declared war since world war ii. i think that as a mistake. as a consequence, many people like john kerry say that they

voted for the use of force before they voted against use of force. mandy pandy, either you were for or against going to war. i do not think that our national security was threatened in iraq and i would have voted against the declaration of war. with regard to afghanistan, i would have forced a vote on declaration of war and i would have voted for it because i don't think that we can allow people to train in terrorist bases to attack us. in regard to how long you should stay and when your actual departure should be, ultimately, troop movements are made by the president and his generals and not by congress. i do think that we need to have a national debate over how long is too long. i think that we are very good at winning war, but we are not good at building nations of nations that have never been true nations. we need to debate and discuss. >> mr. paul, thank you very

much. mr. paul -- mr. conway, your response. >> thank you very much. you are right. our finest are serving 10,000 miles away. we have lost about 70 kentuckians in the war in iraq. we have lost 30 kentuckians in the war in afghanistan. just last week, we lost a gentleman named matt jackson. i believe that our families are paying a big price. this is a solemn decision. this is where i felt comfortable breaking with our president and said that he made -- he did not make a case for the surge. afghanistan was the right war to stay focused on going after terrorism and the seeds of it. my concern with the surge in afghanistan is that the true definition of victory in afghanistan will be leaving a nation that is better off than we found it and making sure that

it does not harbor terrorists. i did not hear enough about pakistan in that equation. i did not hear about how regional partners will help us make that a reality in the future. it is pakistan that harbors the most dangerous terrorists and nuclear material in the world. i am not only concerned about declarations of war, i am concerned about nuclear material. that is what is so disconcerting to me that my opponent said in october 2007 that it would not affect our national security if iran acquired a nuclear weapon. i will make sure that iran is not acquire a nuclear weapon. >> mr. paul, it is rebuttal. >> when you are on both sides of the issue, he was for the iraq war before he was against it. at least stand up and make a stand for the believe in something. if you were for it, stand up and say it. tell us what you are changing your position. if we ever turning this

over fast enough to the afghans to patrol their streets. >> mr. paul, i am sorry. i will have to answer a. >> amanda with the kentucky inquirer has a question for mr. conway. >> this is for both candidates. october is breast cancer awareness month. dr. paul, i know you were criticized for commenting on breast cancer. i will be the chance to explain that. to each of you, i would ask, do you believe that funding for cancer research should be handled on the federal level? if you are elected, would you support federal funds for cancer research? >> i will get to that in a second. he is trying to make fun of my answers. notice what happened is an ago. on october 1, 2007, rand paul

said it would not be a threat to the national security of you not state's -- of united states if iran got a nuclear weapon. that.ld not rebut i was pleased to go with my wife to waterfront park and participate in the wall for the susan coleman foundation. breast cancer research is very important. dr. paul's comments were to take everything down to the local level. he says we should fund breast cancer at a local level. a conference call was held that said that he does not get it. that is exactly what i am saying to you tonight. he just does not get it. he wants to rail against health care. i understand that. some of the health care changes that we have made have put

screenings in place. people like my friend who has had a kidney transplant and had trouble getting health insurance, he cannot be denied under this new health care plan. rand paul is for repealing everything. he also seems to have this fundamental view. goes back to what i said tonight. he says we have not all the constitution since 1937. he does not think the federal government is involved. the federal government can do too much. the federal government should be in the business of sending money to places like the university of kentucky for breast cancer research. >> mr. paul, your response. >> it is hard to argue with somebody who oversimplifies every issue. not all federal funding for breast cancer is local. it is the same for the drug issue. it is not all federal or all local. it is a balance between state and federal.

the more we do federal with every issue, the more distant it comes by she becomes from the people. with regard to iraq, -- iran. iran is invalid -- emboldened. iran is a threat with their nuclear threat to the middle east. i have never said otherwise. >> mr. conway, you now have 30 seconds rebuttal. >> first of all, you have said that otherwise. he said that on october 2007. i want to go back to dr. paul's philosophy. he talked about not following the constitution since 1937. he says that we need a health care system that we have before

world war ii. i guess he wants to barter for health care and go back in time. >> it is time now for a question submitted on-line. a viewer writes to us -- the bush tax cuts are about to expire. what is important, reducing the national debt or reducing taxes? >> both. part of the problem that we have had as republicans is that we have often done a good job cutting taxes. the bush tax cuts came about when republicans controlled all three branches. they were the right thing to do. they give predictability to business. they get more capital funds to business. they should have cut spending. i ran in my primary and stood up and said that we as republicans did not do a good enough job. the democrats are doing worse, but we as republicans did not do a good enough job to cut spending.

it is not a revenue problem. it is a spending problem. we have to cut spending. we have to be serious about it. we have to look at every program in the budget. all across the board. does that mean we will eliminated or cut social security by 40% or whatever he is the one on about? no. look at every program and see if it can be done at the federal level for the local level. this test needs to go through every individual program in the budget and we need to be serious about it. it is the only way we will ever get our house in order. >> mr. conway got you have 90 seconds. >> thank you. i have said that raising taxes is something that we should do in a time -- is not a thing we should do in the time of recession. we need to get back to the rules that were in place in the clinton years when a democratic president actually turned out to republican president and said

that there is a economy. that is what we need to get back to. we also need to have a jobs plan. i am a different kind of democrat. i actually have a jobs plan for it if you go to my web site, you can see me and you can look at us talking about it. the difference between the two candidates appear tonight is that i actually have a jobs plan. rand paul has no plan whatsoever my plan calls for a 20% tax credit. the college a hometown tax credit. estimates are that that would create jobs. rand paul's plan for jobs, here is what he said. he said that some people are just want to have to get a job with lower wages and we will have to have some tough love. that -- those are his words, not mind. that is not a jobs plan. that is callousness. at the same kind of callousness that would call for a $2,000

medicaid deductible. i will stand up with a real jobs plan and get this country and as commonwealth back to work. >> mr. paul, you now have 30 seconds. >> i want to understand where we are on this issue. you are for the -- you were for the tax -- of the bush tax cuts originally. you wanted to make sure that they knew you were the liberal democrat to support obama. you were against the majority of them. your exact words a couple of months ago. now you are for some of them. i am not sure exactly what is going on because i know that he specifically said that you were for bringing the estate tax back. >> all right, gentlemen, thanks. because of where we are in the debate at this point, the next question is posed by tom a key and each of you will have 60 seconds to respond. >> residents continue to

struggle with unfunded mandates in the no child left behind legislation what should be kept in? what should be kept out? >> mr. conway, your response. >> first of all, i want to go back to dr. paul's last answer. he said i want to be a liberal democrat terry i do not want to say that drugs are not a pressing issue. he said that states should be able to legalize marijuana. on the issue of education, the federal government makes up about 20 percent of our education budget. i do not want to do away with the federal department of education as my opponent wants to do. if i were to ask the audience here tonight to raise your hands if you know someone who has further their education with a pell grant, i think many of you would raise your hands. dr. paul does not seem to understand that.

he doesn't seem to understand kentucky. he doesn't seem to understand what it is like to struggle to further your education. we need to stand up and help some of our failing schools, but i am not for being callous and letting the federal farm of vegetation. >> mr. paul ? >> no child left behind was a huge mistake. the republicans passed it, but it really went against our philosophy of believing in more local control of schools. interestingly, the teachers hated it. many teachers will hear that i am opposed to no child behind. -- no child was behind. -- no child left behind. it took control out of the local hands of superintendents and principals and teachers and parents. we need to take control of our schools locally.

someone threw up their arms and say that he is want to get rid of federal involvement. there still might be student loans at the federal level, but should we have more federal control or less. >> mr. paul, thank you. 30 seconds, mr. conway. >> his view of the future is that there might be federal loans at the federal level. i am asking you, think of people who needed federal loans and federal help to further their education. doing away with that, doing away with helping people further their education, that will never be an option with me. we have very different views about what it means to put kentucky first. >> mr. conway, mr. paul, thank you both. we are at the point of our program where we will turn to

the candidates for closing statements. they each have two minutes for their closing statement. we begin with mr. paul. >> if you, very much for having me. i am proud to be a kentuckian. i am proud to be american. i am proud of the american way of life. what does that mean? it means our way of life is different than other countries. i am not proud of the cuban system. i am proud of the american system. people fly from all around the world to come and have their health care and our great country. we need to be proud of the system that created that. we need to not have a president who flies around the world and disparages america, disparages our way of life. america is of freedom. government is restrained by the constitution. not meant to restrain you, is meant to restrain your government. franklin once said that those who give up their liberty for

security will have neither. we need to remember that. we have a lot of problems. at every turn, there is a fork in the road. you can go one direction or the other. you can go the direction of more individual freedom, of less government, of more individual or say thatrial shship the government has the answer to everything. government does not do things well. when they passed the stimulus plan, it was reported that 77,000 dead people got it. does that not just a paul us? we run these massive deficits and are struggling -- aulos -- appaul us? if your mother got it and she was deceased and you wanted to send it back, there is no provision to send it back. 17,000 criminals got checks from the government. we need more local control.

is it going to be all local vs. all federal? obviously not. >> i am sorry, we need to turn to mr. conway for a two-minute closing statement. >> thank you, clyde. thank you panel and thank you for the american people. this election is about who is one to put kentucky first. i appreciate the discussion of cuba. this is about who is going to put the commonwealth of kentucky first. the special interests in washington have enough people standing up for them. you need a united states senator that has experience, as i have, a holding people accountable. we need to hold wall street accountable. my opponent has a world view where he says that the constitutional does not allow the federal government to do all

these things and the end result is that he would have no federal government holding the bankers on wall street accountable and making certain they never do this to us again. as for attorney general, i have gone after the drug problem. i have gone after the pharmaceutical companies that gouged us. i have gone after the oil companies that gouged us. i want to take that record of taking a public office and treating it as a public trust and i want to do that as your next united states senator in washington. do you want the united states senator who understands that drugs are a pressing issue? do you what the united states senator like me who understands that sometimes when activity is nonviolent that it ought to be a crime? do you want the united states senator like me who will stand up for people who cannot stand up for themselves like those people who benefit from the civil rights act? i ask for your vote because i am not for a $2,000 deductible for

medicare like my opponent. i will never balance the budget on the backs of seniors. thank you for having me here. i ask for your vote. >> mr. conway, mr. paul, thank you very much for agreeing to be with us tonight so that the voters might assess you vote. things as well to our panel, scott reynolds, amanda, and tom a kemckee. i also want to thank our sponsors, the northern kentucky chamber of commerce, northern kentucky university, the kentucky inquirer, [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> the candidates for u.s. senate in kentucky, jack conway and rand paul debate again next sunday at the university of louisville live sunday at 7:00 p.m. on span. mr. paul won the republican primary with nearly 60% of the vote. our coverage of campaign 2010 debates continues with a debate between candidates for senate? indiana. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 weiner segments on the midterm elections. we'll have more senate debates tonight. a cole