-- all of these in combination will extend, perfect, and implement this plan are bill. it is not perfect. there are problems with that. rather than turning it back and repealing and going for another year or two of partisan bickering, this is a landmark legislation. >> we are now to be part of the discussion on it. the issue was brought up about malpractice reform. democrats had been accused of being too close to trial lawyers. republicans say that is why there has not been any opportunity for reform in this area. if he were elected, would you inude malpractice reform in the bill? >> i think it is critical that people be able to stand up and take on powerful interests. if they are able to go into court and sank -- since seek redress.

-- seek redress. i do not support putting caps on liabilities because i think in our current system is only the threat of the significant recovery that allows protections for consumers, for patients, for investors -- that is an important part of the american legal system. there are significant advances in this bill that allows us to make health care safer, a stronger, and more transparent. if i have a major concern about this bill, it is that it would reduce costs. >> that is what i was trying -- ok. you say you are concerned about reducing cost, but reports say this bill has caused costs to skyrocket? >> i do not know what reports you are reading? >> some democrats have gone on record as saying they oppose obama care and that they made a bad mistake.

this bill gives a maive uncle sam has noe business coming between you and your doctor. >> that is a great slogan. utah sit around everywhere you go. uncdoes this bill put of operation the room? >> many branches of the state level, including here in delaware, say we do not support what the nationa office has done. it gives the government the ability to say what kind of treatment a doctor can and cannot do, to have to comply to the standards. there are many businesses here say they cannot afford to do it. >> the state chamberf commerce

-- >> we are down to the last 30 seconds of this discussion. >> the state chamber of commerce posted a debate earlier today. you chose not to join. it would havbeen great to hear your response to the physicians, the nurses, and the hospital administrators to your suggestion that they did not support this bill. >> you opposed the government mandating that everyone must purchase health insurance. is that right? >> yes. they are confusing coverage with care. our goal is to make health care affordable. >> let's say someone decides not to purchase health insurance. they make a conscientious decision, even though they can't afford health insurance. this person is critically i and is worse -- and its rush to the emergency room. should we, the people who pay for health insuranceprovide him or her with that kind of treatment where should we take them out of the emergency room?

>> if we do these things that i said it will help to address what i am proposing that will help to address the issue of health care, then that person can't afford to buy a catastrophic only policy from across state lines. >> what that person does not want to buy it? >> we have to adjust that. anything that they do when they have another bill that they cannot pay, they can pay it. all them accountable for that. right now -- that is up to the hospital. right now we are forcing them to. we are forcing that they have to give care to illegal aliens. that is something we are already doing. what i am is proposing -- you are also talking about a small hypothical, using scare tactics to make people support this health care bill. what i am proposing will help address the situation and help alleviate the situations. nobody should be forced to pay

for anyone else's health care. that is what obamacare is doing. >> before the health care reform bill passed, all of us -- all of us have been bearing the cost, paying the freight for those who do not have insurance and do not have coverage. they are getting health care to emergency rooms now. that is partly why small- business employers, like new castle county, have faced increases in our insurance costs year after year. that is how we provide care now. it is inefficient, it is inhumane. >> one in four democrs agreed with me. >> this question will be for mr. coons. do you support a pathway to citizenship or iegal immigrants? >> no. >> what is your position on a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants? >> we have roughly 12 million

illegal immigrants in the united states today. this is a huge problem. immigration is a federal responsibility. i think we should look to the federal government to step up and fix it. the federal governmt has failed states like arizona. there are whole industries that rely on the labor of those who are here illegally. there is a long history of failing to deliver border serity. we have stepped up and invested millions of dollars in additional support at the border. i would strengthen the borders and make it tougher for people to come here illegally and increase the penalties when they do. second, hold employers accountable, particularly those routinely hire people here illegally. and then, allow those who are here illegally and do not commit further crimes to come out of the shadows that they will pay

taxes, learn english, pay a fine, say i committed a crime and pay a fine, and get to the back of the light behind those who applied to come here legally. i would give them a pathway toward legal residents. i respect the tradition of those who serve our nation and overseas, for example, b offered a chance at citizenship. the pathway i am suggesting is towards legal residents. i want to see us refocus our law enforcement resources on finding and employing - finding an deporting those who threaten our neighborhoods. that should be our top priority. >> again, he is backtracking on things he said earlier on the campgn trail. i would ask you when you say that you support border enforcement, this administration recently stop the effts to put a virtual stance on our border.

when barack obama is standing with you on the campaign trail this friday, are y going to say that you disagree with him on his immigration reform efforts? i believe, however, the securing our borders should be our first priority before getting any -- before getting into any discussion about getting social security benefits to illegal aliens. america is a magnet for those all over the world that believes that america does stand as a beacon of hope and justice for the world. therefore, i support a legal pathway for those who are coming over here, especially for political asylum, to seek a better life in this country, and reward those who under our laws. this is not a message that our federal government -- >> use a that you agree to the pathway for citizenship, but you do not want to provide amnesty? >> i do not want to provide amnesty. we have to get rid of all the

bureaucratic mess is that make the legal pathway difficult. when someone willingly breaks our laws, that is something that domestic debt -- do not worry about the laws that we have set up. do not wry about those who have a long waiting list for political asylum. break our laws and will give you these benefits. it is sending the wrong message. it is a national security issue. i do support responsible guest worker programs. that is the difference. >> if you can reconcile all those comments, you are a more talented reporter then i think you are, nancy. when challenge we have for getting past a partisan divide and the bickering -- john mccain had been a real advocate for working with the business community, working with democrats in congress to find a path forward. as years and years have rolled by, the number of people here illegally answer -- and propose

a threat to our community is beginning to grow. we're not taking the actions we need to. i would rather began to provide a path said that those here illegally can stand up and take responsibility for that or be deported. that we can make progress. >> you just took a hard-line position. again, what are you going to tellresident obama? but we have to keep in mind that when we try to understand, it backfires did it only increases the problem. we have to address the issue of securing our borders. that is something the president obama's administration stock this year. we have to secure our borders first and then begin a disk is -- begin a discussion on a guest worker programs and help to eliminate some of the bureaucracy that keeps the legal

pathway to citizenship so difficult. >> i want to clarify one thing on the national security front on china, which is a huge issue right now. in 2006, correct me if i am wrong, he said that china has a carefullyhought al and strategic plan to take over america and as they pretend to be our friend, it is because they have something up their sleeve. he also said it you wish you were not privy to some of the classified information i am predicted -- i am agreed to. >> i was talking about when i was working with a group going to china. we were given some security briefs about china's positions. we do have to look at china very seriously because they owned some much of our debt. it prohibits a lot of decisions

that we need to make in regard to our caller policy. no. 1 is iran with nuclear weapons. china stands in a big way there. the sanctions are not enforced as they should be because we have our allies participating in the gasoline embargo, but china comes in and swoops up all that business. we need to be putting sanctions on these chinese companies. iran is getting nuclear weapons is the biggest threat to our national security. when we get to china and ask them to stop the companies, they probably smart. we are not economically in the position to hold them to that. china could be a bigger ally to us, but they are not. they are not putting the pressure on north korea. we have to tackle that national debt. we have to stop things like reckless spending bills coming

from washington that only coribute to further our national debt because it is -- >> on the specific work that you say china has a plan to take over america, do you know about this plan? >> look at what is going on. right now, monetarily, china could take us over monetarily before they could militarily. >> the 1 to respond? >> it is hard for me to respond effectively to all the different issues my opponent has raised. i would just let that stand. i do not have any classified information about china or its plan. what i think we need to focus on in this debate on this particular question is the steady degradation o our security policy in the pacific rim. we joined -- where this excluded from military at exercises. it the chinese had become economicly stronger, and are

seeking to become militarily stronger. they are pushing the envelope on issues like taiwan. they are a profound threat, not just to theitality of our economy, but also to our safety and security. they have widespread counteeiting of everything from pharmaceuticals to garments. >> we areut of time. are you saying that china has a plot to take over america? >> and move on to the student questions. we dwant to involve the university of delaware students. a student brings us an issue of don't ask don't tell. >> i was wondering if you're going to bring up the issue on don't ask don't tell as a possible bridge -- repeal? >> i would moved swiftly as a senator to repeal a don't ask don't tell. it is discrimination plain and simple. i've spoken to veterans in

delaware, several with top- secret clearces, who could only do the work by denying he they were. we should be making progress in this country towards recognizing the full range of human experience and repealing the don't ask don't tell is an important next debt in the civil-rights movement. >> a federal judge recently moved that we have to repeal don't ask don'tell. judges should not be legislating from the bench. the military says the policy that they believed espy in the interest of the military resident -- military readiness. it does not allow affairs to go on within your chain of command. it does not allow it you are married to have an adulterous affair within the military. the military already regulates personal behavior because it feels it is in the best interest of our military readiness. i do not think that congress should be fair -- forcing a

social agenda on the military. it should be left to the military to decide. >> with the question on embryonic stem cell research. >> what is your view on the federal use of funds for stem cell research? >> i support federal funding for medical research that includes embryonic stem cell research. i think there are critical advances that are being made and can be me in addressing the most difficult diseases that affect many americans. if it is possible to do so, we should be investing in this critical area of research. >> look at the research that has been put out there. you'll see that there are incredible advances with adults stem cell research, not as much as embryonic stem cell research. that is in the private sector. that is where investors should be putting their money. the federal government should not be in the business of creating life simply to destroy

it. when it comes to the issue of medica waste, i would point to a program called the "snowflake baby." they had used human embryos that were going to be discarded as medical wae. they had given and for all couples the opportunity to have babies. it is a wonderful program. >> our next to that question brings us the issue of abortion. >> what is our stance on aborti, including in cases of rape and incest? >> i believe there has been a profound loss of respect for the dignity of human life and that is reflected in a lot of our policies, whether it is cutting tax exemptions for disabled, low-income citizens in new castle county, or with abortion. i respect the human dignity all levels. my opponent and others to use

the scare tactics about raping and ince, that is less than 1% of all abortions per -- performed in america. i strongly support a woman's right to choose. it is federal constitutional law. i personally am opposed to abortion, but i do not think it is my place to put that view on women. i think abortion could be safe and legal. >> let's get into some of tse issues and we will go back to more students questions. on the issue of gays serving openly in the united states military, almost all nato allies allow gays to serve openly in their militaries. israel allows gays to serve openly in the military. why, specifically, do you believe gays should not be allowed to say openly in our military? >> it is a military policy that our military set forth. it is the same thing i said about adultery not being allowed in the military. it is a military policy that

they regulate because they believe is in the best interest of unit cohesiveness and our effective military. >> if the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff says he believes days should be allowed to serve in the military,ould that be ok with you? >> if the heads of all four branches of the military said that, then it would be up to them, not me as a u.s. senator to oppose -- to propose my moral agenda. >> what it the respective germans said, "you know what, we would do whatever the commander in chief tells us to do, but we do not think it is a good idea because of these issues that mrs. o'donnell resist peer "what would you say then? >> when my heroes is hay truman. he made the difficult decision to compel the adoration of the u.s. armed forces at a time when most of the generals said, are the exact sameeasons, unit

cohesion -- we should not have a racially integrated military. that was an important decision. the ultimate long term and that has made our military was the most progressive in terms of promotion and advancement opportunities. as you said earlier, most of our nato allies long ago realized that we are giving up on the service of thousands of potential volunteers who could be serving our nation at home and abroad. i do not think it makes any sense to continue to exclude them from open service in our military. >> we are not necessarily going to open discussion on that, because we want to get tested and questions. this comes on the issue of campaign finance reform. >> what is your position on campaign finance reform and what is your reaction to the recent supreme court ruling allowing corporations to donate to political campaigns? >> mr. coons, you have one

minute. >> i believe it was in default -- it was unfortunate decision that opens the floodgates to increase corporate contributions that could have an unintended consequences of distorting our electoral process here in the united states. i would support reforms that further disclose who is behind these groups, whether individuals or corporations who are trying to influence our elections by pouring money into it. it is best for us to disclose as fully as broadly as possible who is making contributions. >> yet the legislative efforts have failed to do that. harry reid has put out there to do just that has exempted the major corporations from disclosingt. instead, it only serves to

entrench of the first amendment rights of private citizens. i use my own campaign as an example. by supporters have been getting haraing phone calls, not just from reporters, but from all kinds of people who oppose my candidacy. they are using intimidation tactics because we are forced to disclose it is contributing to my campaign. this so-called campaign finance reform is exempting the corporations whether on the left or the right. it is those who are in washington already those who are over 10-years old who have over half a million members and are playing in the back room deals -- this is a misguided attempt. >> to the american people have a right to know where this money is coming from? >> yes and no. i believe there are ways to do that where we can report to the sec. we do not have to make them public unless there is the question of corruption. that would prevent a lot of the

harassment that my supporters are getting. that would prevent a lot of the discussion about our first amendment rights. we can't disclose that to the sec, but they do not have to put it on the website that makes anyone vulnerable to further fund raising calls. that is a repeated violation in many campaigns, not my own. even my own party has said look on somebody's at sec report and called in for a donation. at is against the law. it is being abused. >> i don't know. [laughter] frankly, i support full disclosure of campaign contributions. i think it ishe best way to ensure that we have fai open, and clean campaigns. people should know who is contributing to campaigns. it is an important way to hold candidates and elected officials accountable. >> we have another student question about the sensitive issue of religion in america. >> in light of the ents of the

past decade, islam has been viewed as extremists. muslimsan attest that as long as far from that. there has been much controversy about the mosque being built in the vicinity of grounds he wrote. my question to you is, as senator, where is the line between the freedom of speech and the respect for other or -- for other religions, both of which are found in the first amendment of the constitution? >> that is a great question and a difficult one. the florida pastor at 212 bundy crime -- the floor that pastor who wanted to burn the koran deserve our condemnation. at that sort of pastorate wanted to make the right point, he should have threatened to burn

the teachings of a son of bin laden or other parts of the extremist group. it is an important challenge for the supreme court to continue to drawhe line between those who would do the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theater and thoseo pass up scripture, religious traditions that are deserving of broad support. those are difficult lines to police. that is t role the supreme court place in our democracy. >> the supreme court has said that there are restrictions on our first amendment rights. you cannot go into a crowded theater and yell fire. you cannot stand up on a plane and yell hijack. you cannot libel someone. however, where the question has come between "what is protected speech and what is not protected speech, the supreme court has alwa ruled that the local community has the right to decide.

the issue of the 9/11 mosque, that is where the battle is being fought -- by the community. i support that. >> the committee members, at least the city council, mayor, and elected representatives, support this mosque, a community center. >> a lot of the people on the ground do not. they will have a lot to face from their constituents. maybe there reelection will be jeopardized. >> should this cultural center and must be built? >> there is already mosques in many locations in manhattan. the people collected by that committee should make the decisions. i do not think it was a wise choice of locations, but i cannot stay here and say that we should prevent people from practicing their religion anywhere in the united states. to say you cannot build a mosque here violates one of our most fundamental principles.

>> what opinions, of late, that have come from our high court do you support? >> give me a specific one, i am sorry? >> i need you to tell me which one you object to. >> i am very sorry, rht off the top of my head i know that there are a lot, i will put it on my website. i promise you. >> we know you and disagree with roe vs. wade. >> she said a recent one. >> roe vs. wade if that were erturned, would not make abortion illegal in the united states. it would put the power back to the states. >> is there anything else? >> there are several. when it comes to pornography, when it comes to court decisions -- not the supreme

court, but federal court decisions to mirandize terrorists. this california decision to overturn don't ask don't tell. i believe lots of federal judges are legislating from the bench. >> which supreme court decisions do you disagree with? >> the most recent one i have been engaged in is citizens united. it takes a logical extension in the law and takes it to a ridiculous extreme. corporations are not entitled to these same free-speech rights as people. but they would be fighting for the rights of corporations, but in terms of political contributions and freeze break its rights of contributions i do not think deserve -- free speech rights of corporations i do not think is free speech. that is the most important.

>> plastic another question for the students on energy. my question is where do you think funding should be placed doors in decreasing our carbon footprint? >> the most effective investment in reducing emissions of things that cause greenhouse gases forming is energy efficiency and conservation. there was a significant investment in the stimulus bill in getting municipalities and local governments to invest in efficiency and conservation. those would reduce emissions, put people to work, and develop cutting edge technologies that help our systems operate better and to reduce the emissions and the operating expenses. in new ctle county, which that money from the grants and combined it with $4 million of our own. we retrofit 20 county buildings. we reduced our emissions. as you look at those kinds of

investments around the country, they are the most important. they have amassed an act of anything -- they have the most impact. >> i tnk the best way to address it that is most relevant to this race is to talk about the issue of cap and trade. the winnerf this race will be immediately sworn in and will vote on gatt and trade. i do believe that we have to be good stewards of this earth. we do not nd to do it at the expense of our citizens. cap and trade will do that. whether it is farmers, senior citizens, or realtors. this bill is a national energy tax that will ration energy use and increase our utility bills. senior citizens are concerned about the cost of their utility bills going up. we are concern about the green compliance standards and be raised utility bills shutting

down operations. realtors are concerned about the standards hurting an already hurting housing market. i have to ask my opponents, speaking of cap and trade, your family business stance to financially benefit from some environmentalists. would your -- >> a fascinating question that really makes no sense. what are you talking about? >> i would like to know if your family business stance to have a financial gain from cap and trade? >> a fasnating question. no, to the best of my knowledge there is no direct financial benefit. it is important for those in public office to be transparent and accountable for decisions that they make. i am someone thathings that greenhouse gases or a concern for the long term. i think we need to take steps to rein theand then deal with

the embargo consequences they might present. >> but me ask miss o'donnell, what evidence do you have any family business that he has would and to gain from cap and trade? >> they make fuel cells. do is they? >> they make some of the things that will be required by these busisses to regulate cap and trade. >> is that true? >> that is quite a stretch. we make over 1000 products. it was difficult for me to understand from your question what she was talking about. we make lots and lots of products from medical devices to some membranes that go into fuel cells. fuel cel are not currently used broadly in the united states. it's sunday as the promise of being a significa contributor toaking a more energy efficient, planar transportation future. to me, the impact is so distant

from any proposal on capt. trade, it took a couple of minutes to understand what she was talking about. >> yesterday the obama administration announced it was lifting the moratorium on deep water oil drilling in the gulf of mexico. do you support this kind of offshore oil-drilling? >> that has raised the issue of whether we support it here in delaware. that move by obama would allow that. nope. i do not want to see oil rigs all the coast of delaware. however, it should be up to the states to decide. if the governor passed legislation for that, i should not as a congressman overstepped a states' rights. not only that, we have g to begin to wean ourselves off of foreign oil. we are dependent on potentially hostile countries like russia and venezuela while our own homeland is rich with natural

reurces. there is oil and natural gas. there are states that want to begin exploration. we as the government be to support the states that do what it. >> if you agree or disagree? >> i oppose the president's proposal to open up the continental shelf off the delaware to oil drilling. i thi that delaware's world- class beaches should not be at risk for being spoiled by oil spills. we depend on tourism and our fisheries. i do not think it makes sense for most of the atlantic coast. i think there are natural energy resources in this country that we should begin to explore more fully. i also prioritize investments in alternative energy tenology. we have been a leader in solar power and can make wind power real. these are the sorts of areas where i prefer to see federal investment and new innovative opportunities that could create new jobs for the long te. >> we have one more issue.

we are going down on time. this is an issue i think can illustrate the differences between the two of you. what specifically would you and could you do to actually help and any of the bitter bipartisan not partisanship in washington? what would you be able to do once you arrive in washington? >> i have had to fight my party to be here on the stage. to some extent i am still fighting my party. when i get to washington, might allegiance will be to the voters of delaware, not any special interest. my whole campaign has been about returning the political process back to the people of delaware. to me that is a great thing. i would stand strong on legislation that benefits the interest of our citizens, not the special interest in washington, d.c. i would stand there to vote against the legislation and make

the floor speeches that would try to convince my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have lost their way and given in to partisanship so much that it has caused stalemates, as to why it is in the best interest of their constituents. i would stand firm in doing what is right for the people of delaware, not the interest in washington. >> i do not think my opponent can or has cite one single example where they supports the current administration or the democratic party. i had a real practical record of having reached bipartisan cooperation. i have eight real hands on record here in the private sector and in light service in partnership with the private sector of reaching out to people from different political backgrounds, from different political experience, and different world views. i think that is the kind of

record the people of delaware will look at in judging if i had the capacity. >> miss o'donnell raise this issue earer. all give you a chance to clarify and explain. harry reid has told youis pet. >> i do not know why harry reid said that. i am nobody's pat. i am running to represent all the people from delaware. i have a significant amount of support from dependent -- from independence, up from republicans, and from democrats. i have a record for fighting for the public interest. i will continue that in washington. >> just to clarify a point from earlier, you said you did not want to have to talk about comments he made years ago about witchcraft and stuff like that, but in this commercial, you begin this commercial with the words "i am not a which." >> to put it behind me.

we are moving past that. we are talking about the issues. i would like to address what my oppone just said about the bulldog for delaware, yet in a letter he proposes to support the obama, pelosi agenda. why is the democratic party pulling out all the stops to get him elected? because they see him as a rubber-stamp for their agenda. there are many things i have publicly said that i support the obama administration on. i support his decision to send troops to afghanistan. i support obama's decision on drones. i support obama's decision to treat americans -- i support the decision for our intelligence agencies to do whatever it takes to take them out. i will promise support when it is in the best interest of the people of delaware. i believe a lot of the policies

coming from this administration are not in the best interest of the people of delaware. most of them are the failed stimulus bills where we had been promised one thing and it received another. breaking promises is something that might open that is comfortable doing. >> even local party leaders have questioned her candidacy, especially after the primary. he criticized the man you beat in that primary for being someone who wentith what he felt was in the best interest of the people of delaware, for being someone who is borrowing republican principles, but going with the democrats. >> what i did in theepublican primary and what i will continue to do is expose the back room deals. a lot of our leader seven obnoxious sense of entitlement about who should be in office and who should represent them on the ballot. we have to get the closing statements. >> we will begin the closing statements, but the deal will

have a chance to make your final comments. >> once again, i would like to thank the host of this debate and i hope now that the delaware of voters better understand the clear choice they face in november. my opponent has a record of ising taxes and date record of wasteful spending. like so many career politicians, he says he did one thing and all the breaks his promises. my opponent will rubber-stamp the same failed policies that have caused unemployment and our national debt to skyrocket. he is in lock step with barack obama and harry reid, and that why harry reid has told him his pet. i am not againstets, but i know what is happening in this country right now is not what my democratic friends voted for when they voted for change in 2008. washington needs new voices and new ideas that speak for the people and not for the government.

my opponent is an addictive to a culture of spending, waste, fraud, and abuse. whether it is spending tax dollars on fashion shows, where paying off his cronies. we already have enough politicians in washington like that. i want to be the voice of the people of delaware, not in a party of special interest groups. i want to go to washington and represent the people who put me on the stage tonight and you are willing to work hard to get our country back on track again. it will not be easy, but i do believe that america is the greatest force of good in the world. i have never questioned whether america is a beacon of freedom and justice. we will get our financial house in order. we will cut spending. we will reform our government and we will defeat our enemies and achieved a tryout over freedom. i hope he will cast your vote r me. god bless you and g bless

delaware. >> i appreciate your attention to tonight's debate. i thank you for the tough questions you have asked them for the top oft -- for the conversation we have had. there is a real a clear difference between my opponent and made. our values are our experience and approach. mrs. o'donnell has the experience of running for office, but not really running anything. frankly, she sharpens the partisan divide, and not bridging it did she has focused too little on the issues that matter to delawareans. i think what delaware means and what delaware deserves is someone who has real, hands-on experience. experience solving problems, fixing what is wrong, here in our community and in washington, and tackling the real problems that face us in america. i am the only candidate o the stage tonight with experience working in and with the private

sector. i would be grateful for your vote. >> time is up. it has been a pleasure. for all of you are watching, thank you for joining us. good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> it delaware voters go to

calls on november 2. there was one man who thought that a 911 call should be taxed. one man that wanted to raise its 50%. hide, you wil. r lights.' coons is the tax man. >> i spent eight years working

with one of the most innovative companies in the world. i know what it takes for the businesses to create jobs. we have to invest in training. we have to stop subsidizing companies that ship american jobs overseas. we should do more to invest in companies that invest in us. if we do not fight for this economy or good jobs, we are not fighting for the future. >> you can watch many more campaign advertisements on our politics website. you'll find videos of the day and other campaign events along with an analysis from other reporters. visit us online as c- span.org/politics. between now and the november 2 elections, we will bring new campaign debates from key elections. now, more campaign 2010 coverage

with the debate between california's gubernatorial candidates. that is followed by the hawaii gov. debate. later, it is washington journal, live with your phone calls. c-span's debate coverage continues tomorrow night with the only plan debate between harry reid and his republican challenger. and opinion research poll shows that she has a 42% to 40% kead,'another debate from nevada. the republicans is seeking to unseat the incumbent democrat. that is at 11:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> "q&a" on sunday, the justice

stephen brier. >> of this some time to avoid your basic values. how you see the country. how you see the relationship between the law and the average person and what you think the law is about. it is those basic political values that are a part of view. they will sometimes influence an approach where the question is very open and where it admits that kind of thing. stephen breyer and his book sunday on c-span. >> counseling has candidates for governor -- california's candidates for governor met on wednesday. jerry brown was a leading member whitman 50% to 43%.

they had a hourlong debate etched dominica and university. dominican university. now, tom brokaw. >> good evening. welcome to the third and final debate of 2010, the race for governor. a crucial election at a crucial time for this state and the mate -- the nation. the winner will face daunting issues on the economy and jobs, the budget come in pensions, immigration, education and health care. we will get answers to those questions all these topics and more. from the democratic candidate, attorney general jerry brown and the republican contender meg

whitman. let's review their rules of engagement. each candidate will have 90 seconds to answer each question. rebuttal and follow-ups will be allowed at my discretion. there will last for 30 seconds. there is a great deal of ground to cover. the candidates have agreed to for growth opening statements and a coin toss was held to determine which gets there first question. that will go to meg whitman. jerry brown will get the last question. welcome and nice to have you with us. let me remind you of something that you were familiar with that one point. 50 years ago, this january, john f. kennedy at his inauguration said ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. modern campaigns and doors is no exception spent most of their time telling voters what they

can do for them. tonight, i would like you to begin by looking into the camera and saying to the voters of california as citizens of the stake, this is what you must do for california at this crucial time. to dominican fo university. i am delighted to be here. i will tell you why i came to california. my husband and i moved here as newlyweds. my husband wide to be a doctor and i wanted to be in business. everything was possible in california. i was very lucky. i ended up running one of the great internet success stories and lived in the california dream. i did nothing my story would be possible in any other country or any other state. when i see as the california

dream is broken. not everyone has a chance to live their life to raise their children and send their kids to public schools, to be successful. that is why i am running for governor. i want to bring that dream alive. what people are going to have to do is support the next governor in making some tough tradeoffs. we have a government we can no longer afford. we continue to spend more money than we taken. there will be some tough tradeoffs. everyone will have to make a sacrifice to get california back on track. if we do that, i can tell you, we have an incredible opportunity. this is a great stay with tremendous people. more compassionate, more courage, more innovation than any other state. we will have to pull together. what we can do together, none of us can do alone. there will have to be some shared sacrifice. >> thank you. i think the sponsors -- thank the sponsors of the debate and

allowing us to come into your homes. john f. kennedy did ask americans ask not what you can do for yourselves but what you can do for your country. i have to tell the people of california, we do have to make some tough decisions and live within our means. we cannot point the finger or scapegoat. whether it is government employees or immigrants or neighbors down the street or the opposite political party. we will have to rise above the poisonous partisanship and our comfort shoezone. we have to think for the first time as californians. as californians first, as members of these other categories second. we are great state. we have tremendous potential. well people on the east coast say this is some kind of a

failed state, it is not. the wealth created by the people and businesses of this date = $1.80 trillion. more than most of the countries in the world. this is a wealthy, a fabulous place with a great environment. i love california and i have lived here all my life. i want to say think i can fix it. that is what i want to do. >> the pew organization polled the voters in california. 40% said you can cut the state budget by 20% and not affect the services they have gotten used to. someone did an analysis and to make that kind of cut, you have to give up the business system, transportation, and welfare. the voters become utterly unrealistic about the realities of their situation.

>> the voters of california have the right instincts. they know the government is not run efficiently and effectively. the first thing we have to do to get this budget on track as we have to put californians back to work. for families, the solution is a job. that is the solution for the budget. i have identified $15 billion worth of savings i think if we achieve that, it will make californians stronger, not weaker. we need to have fewer people working and we need to use technology to do more with less. we have to make tough reforms. to the public employee pension system. cannot be afforded any more. it is an unfunded liability. the taxpayers owe more money than they can afford to pay. we have to reform welfare.

we have become the welfare state. 12% of the population lives here and we have 32% of the welfare cases. we have the longest time on welfare. it is not the right thing for our budget but it is not the right thing for our communities. we have to run the government more efficiently and effectively. the bay bridge is a perfect example. the seismic repairs were supposed to cost $1 billion and it cost $4 billion. overbudget, simply not acceptable. the parties blame each other as opposed to taking accountability. >> the voters have become unrealistic about the hard choices they have to make? >> we are unrealistic when it comes to pain or sacrifice. we do not like to face the tough choices. i said government was facing an era of limits. people did not like that.

they misinterpreted and ignited. it is true. we have limits and we have to recognize them. we make choices. you choose one thing over another. with the complexity of this government, i decided the budget process has to start not in january and dawdle along until june and october. i want to start this process in november. i will do it in sacramento and then to southern california. i want to go to the central valley. i want the people of this state to reflect on what is their state government is doing. how much of this to the one and how much does it cost and how much do they want to pay? we're suffering from a gap. it was caused not just by overspending but also the wall street mill down, by the washington inability to regulate the banks. we have received a lot of good

judgments. here we are. we can return power to the local level where people can judge more quickly. we're going to dig into where we can and those at the top should cut first and lead by example. i will do that if i am the next governor. >> let me raise what has become a holy grail in the state, proposition 13. i was here when it was passed and it put limits on property- tax as. a lot of people see that as a boulder in the road to reform and others see it as a sacred heart of the telephone -- california tax cut. can you achieve the goals he have outlined without reforming in some fashion proposition 13 which has been in this state for almost 40 years? >> proposition 13 is absolutely

essential to the future of california. i want to defend proposition 13. what it does is keep a lid on property taxes. i was in diamond bar in southern california. within the home of an older woman. if this property taxes had escalated without proposition 13, her taxes would have been $6,000 more per year. one of the reasons i am running is to defend proposition 13. the only sustainable way to increase tax revenues is create more jobs. the more jobs there are, the more companies are paying taxes, more individuals are paying taxes. the only way we will do that is we have to reduce taxes and decrease -- streamline regulation which is struggling businesses and we have to compete for jobs.

it is not ok that many big companies are leaving california for neighboring states like arizona or colorado or utah. the headquarters of a health- care services company in l.a. announced they are moving to denver. it is simpler and easier to do business in neighboring states. we have to compete by having competitive tax rates and being held to small business and big business as opposed to putting a stop sign in their way and saying doing business in california will be harder than it is in neighboring states. >> is proposition 13 sacrosanct? >> there is no sacred cows over the long term. i support the implementation of proposition 13. i once opposed it. howard jarvis, the author of proposition 13 voted for me because he said even while he created 13 to my was the one who

made it work. i built up a $5 billion surplus which did not exist when i became governor. we were looking at recession. i held down spending. there is a couple of myths. the actual business side of the [unintelligible] their assessed values have grown. we have to find ways to live within our means and make tough decisions and return the authority to local level. a lot of the problem is because the state provided bailout and money, the state took over more power. micromanaging the schools and sending more controls down to cities and counties. i would do my at most to return authority and decision making to local communities where it is closer to the people. one that would not do to compound the budget, i would not totally eliminate the capital gains tax which my opponent

wants to do. that benefits mostly millionaires and billionaires and would add 5 billion to $10 billion and a lot of that money would have to come from public schools. >> jerry brown is wrong about this. the capital gains tax, the taxi like so much is a tax on jobs and job creators and a tax on investment. we compete with other states. washington, texas, and nevada have no capital gains tax. if we eliminate this what you will see is more jobs, more big -- businesses and tax revenues. we can -- we're not competitive. to the recovery i have planned, tax cuts are not part of it. >> 82% of the benefit will go to

people making $500,000 a year. there is not one guarantee it will spend that money. how much money would you save if these tax breaks were in effect this year or last year? >> i am an investor. investors will benefit from this but so will job creators. i was a job creator. we have to get someone in office who knows what the conditions are for small businesses to grow and thrive. my track record is creating jobs. my business is creating jobs, your business has been politics. you have been doing this for 40 years and you have been part of war on jobs in the state for 40 years. you have increased regulations and increased taxes. you have made it more difficult for small businesses to grow and thrive. >> those last three statements

are false. pointed out by a hometown newspaper. taxes went down when i was governor. jobs were 4.9 million. i had not been in office for 28 years. there were three republicans. you can call those people to account. [applause] >> i have to answer that if that is all right. >> what you just heard is a classic politician's answer. a half answer and dishonest. jerry brown talks about having created these jobs when he was governor. unemployment nearly doubled to what was then a record 11%. there were 400,000 more californians without a job at the end of this term. that is the kind of half answer and the reason people do not

trust politicians. spending went up. deficit went from a $6 billion surplus to $1 billion budget deficit. you need to be accountable. >> two points. your story on pensions is 0-- will get to that. you know about the business cycle. we get booms and busts. unemployment goes up. we have come back. seven times since world war ii. we did create new jobs. two years later, california was booming again as we will. if we make the tough decisions and live within our means. >> i looked up the numbers at the end of mr. brown's term and it was in the middle of the ronald reagan recession.

there were four republican states, illinois, ohio, michigan, and -- indiana and tennessee. they had higher unemployment rates. let me get back to you on the budget. we have been through a torturous process. it took 100 days for the legislature and the governor to reach what everyone agreed is a budget of smoke and mirrors. the numbers do not hold up. you have said that the process is the plan. you have outlined something similar to what they went through to this -- to get to a balanced budget. has the experience undermined any authenticity to the plan you want to put forward to the voters of california? >> i will tell you why it is different. i have done a budget.

four of them were on time and a couple were a few days late. i have done this before. my plan is not to have the governor of present a budget and everyone sits around until june and get serious around august and september. two weeks after this election, the next governor should call the legislature's -- legislators into the room and start going over the budget in detail. i want to work on a budget and i want to take it on the road. you said earlier the people who have certain ideas about the budget may or may not be true. we have to articulate what is -- where dawan in our schools and prisons and highways and water works? that intense of conversation, not the 4000 bills for the fund-

raising, not the gimmicks and perks we see in sacramento. i want something entirely different. i want to start at the top. i want to see the governor cut 10% to 15% out of his budget. >> taking the budget that was just passed, in your first 100 days, what alterations would do make in the budget if you are elected? >> the next governor has to have a plan. attorney general brown said the process is the plan. if you like the process we have in sacramento, if you think this is working for californians to light you should select jerry brown. it will be the same old same old. i bring an entirely fresh approach and a detailed plan that will engage the legislature. when governor brown said he will start by cutting 10% to 15% of the budget, do you know how much

that is? >> it was bigger than when i was there. >> the budget is $18 million. if he cuts 15% out of the budget he will save $2.7 million. less than one one-hundredth of 1% of the $20 billion budget deficit we face. if that is your plan for fixing the budget, we have big problems. i have a detailed plan. that is part of leadership. you have to say what you think is the plan to give californians back on track. we have to engage the legislature and make sure you have the right appointments. the governor has got to have a plan and a way forward. if you do not know which way you're going, any road will take you there. that is the problem with the dysfunctional government we have in california today. we need a fresh approach, a different approach. and have 30 years out experience. when we have a problem in

silicon valley, we figure out how to go after. you figure it out using technology. in sacramento, they hunker down and do the same thing over and over and it will not work in the future. >> let me move onto another subject. >> i know what the budget of the governor is. it is a fraction of what it was when i was governor. i want those in power at the top to lead by example. i want to see them feel some of the pain and the sacrifice. it is hard to ask those below you to have a plan. 40,000 people, she did not say where or what departments. you have to get the legislature on board or nothing happens. [cheers and applause] >> let me come to you. the 100,000 pound gorilla is

pension programs. it is being compared to greece in some sectors. you have 12,000 state employees more than100,000 g $100,000 a year. any form of the pension program, what is the role of current pensioners? should they be required to start cutting back on the imm after a day feel obligated to receive -- on the money they feel obligated to receive? >> i have a detailed pension reform plan. you can go to jerrybrown.com and see it. you asked about existing employees. they can contribute. you can increase the amount of money contributing. that is the quickest way to

inject money into the pensions. the pension systems have been telling the politicians you can keep expanding it. when i left the governorship, i put in the budget act. they ignore that. we need a two-tier pension system and we need to bargain collectively and you sit down with the labor groups that are old has. he has gotten some significant concessions. it is based on actuarial data. well the stock market give us, what we can expect and what is made up by the employee or the employer. if employees do not kick in, the employer will have to lay people off or reduce wages. a knowledgeable governor can get the kind of pension compromises that the actuarial numbers required. i pledge i will do precisely that. >> does that mean that those or receiving the pensions now are taken off the table? >> the existing pensioners we

cannot touch. they struck a deal and they are retired. they need to have what they have burned. you have to listen to what jerry brown says. it is due as i say not as i do. when you look at oakland, the highest-paid city manager was his city manager. there were 1100 employees who make over $100,000 and the number of employees who make $200,000 has gone up by 740%. we have to take this on. here is the problem with the system. if you are a rank-and-file civil servant, you can retire at 55 with much of your salary and much of your health care benefits till the day you die. virtually no one in the audience near the deal. fees have gone up and at csu.

the pensions have got so big for the faculty and staff is squeezing out the students. if we do not resolve this pension issue, it is going to cause california to run out of money. just to give you some perspective. we spent $300 million a year supporting the public pensions. it is $3.90 billion today. new employees have got to come in under a different deal. if 401k style plan. for those who defend our people, they need to stay on a defined program. the rank and file deal has to be different. we cannot afford [unintelligible] >> i was looking at the retirement plan -- they retire

on pensions down to $150,000. a four-star general retires at a number lower than that. the city of los angeles will be on the hook for $2 billion in pension programs. that cost will come to sacramento at some point. should there be a state law as well that oversees the municipalities and county governments and the pension programs they have? >> here is where the governor needs to exercise true leadership. one-third of the city of los angeles budget could go too often. . we have a 60 billion-100 [unintelligible] sets the table for the rest of the unions. jerry brown is beholden to the public employee unions. they have paid for his entire

campaign. they're paying for the independent expenditures that are going to attack ads against me. i am spending my money in this race but it gives me the independents to go to sacramento. i will not owe anything to anybody except for the voters and i will have the independence to take on this serious problem. we have got to find a solution that is fair to government workers but fair to the hard- working taxpayers. i fear for people to retire at $300,000 a year when i four-star general retires at a fraction of that. >> we're doing pretty well on time. we have to keep track of the lights. >> go to the internet and look at the oakland tribune where some of the comments she made about what i did or did not do at oakland are refuted. the endorsed me and made the

point that she distorts the facts. there is one unexplained elephant. she will exempt fire and police from her pension reform and they are 25% of the pension costs. everyone has got to sacrifice whatever union there and i and and whatever service and we have to make it fair to the workers and taxpayers and actuarially sound and i will do that. >> let me answer that. i did not exempt public safety from pension reform. we have to take the age from 50- 55 for retirement. you have to extend the individuals who will contribute more. public safety officials have burned a defined benefit program. i am not exempting the public safety part. one of the biggest lovers is the

number of people who work for the state. that number has increased by 33,000 over the past five years when the revenues were about where they are today. we have a government we cannot afford and we have to shrink the size of government to make california stronger to get us back on track. >> you attempted to reach out to the police union. the telephone message was left on is a notorious part of the campaign. someone referred to meg whitman as "a whore". we have heard no average from you about that language. have you been in charge of the investigation to find out who was responsible? >> i do not agree with that comparison. that was a private conversation

picked up on a cell phone with a garbled transmission. this is not -- i do not want to get into the term and how it is used. the campaign apologized and i affirm that apology tonight. >> you are repeating it to ms. whitman. >> i am sorry it apologize -- and i apologize. >> the people deserve better and it is not our better selves. people know -- every californian and especially women know what is going on here. that is a deeply offensive term to women. >> have you chastised your chairman who called the congress whores to the public sector union? >> that is a completely different thing. the fact that you are defending your campaign for a smaller -- a

slur and personal attack is not befitting of california and the office. >> a private conversation, i am not sure it is legal. you have to get the consent of all the parties and there were lots of people talking. serrie it happened. that does not represent anything in the campaign. the issue is pension reform. you got the endorsement of that union and i did not. they said i would be too tough and i will take that. >[cheers and applause] >> please, we have a lot of things to cover and we would like you not to be as demonstrative. >> that union knows i will be tough on crime and jerry brown has a 40-year record of being soft on crime.

he appointed judges who were being appointed by the judges, he is against the death penalty. that union knew exactly where i stood on pensions. i put out a detailed plan in march and that decision was made in late summer. they said i would be a better defender of the death penalty and i will be the friend of law enforcement and that is where i got the endorsement. [applause] >> i have received the endorsement of the california police chiefs, the largest organization of the management. also several deputy sheriffs organizations and they know i am tough on crime and i have defended the death penalty as attorney general. probably more than anyone in the state or perhaps even the country. >> the contest between ab 32 and

proposition 23. rolling back carbon levels to 1990 levels by 20/20. it is supported by gov. schwarzenegger and by george shultz. one of the most distinguished californians. you said it was a job killer. you said you would suspended for a year and examine it. i you saying that george shultz is wrong when he claims proposition 23 will kill a bill that creates a green jobs for the state of california? >> let me tell you where i stand. first, ab 32 was signed into existence in 2006. could we stimulate green jobs and that was the plan. we had a 12.4% unemployment rate. here is what people need to

understand. today, only 3% of jobs are green and 97% of jobs are in the other part of the economy. 32 will do damage to the 97% of the jobs in the rest of the economy. it is not fair to the employees in trucking and packaging to drive those jobs out of state. i called for a one-year moratorium. which was built into that law. there is a provision to freeze it and fix it. that is what want to do. i want to freeze the implementation for year and fix it to see if we can nurture green jobs but not drive 97% of the other economy out of the state. that is my plan. with regard to proposition 23, that would have eliminated ab 32. i thought a one-year moratorium on the implementation was a better way to go. that is where i stand.

we can be green and smart. we cannot be -- jeopardize the unemployment -- the jobs of people who are working hard and barely making it because we have 2.3 million californians who wake up without a job. that has to be our first party to keep people unemployed. >> it has turned the clock back and it is stop and start encourage regulatory uncertainty. the california resources board has adopted a requirement that one third of our electricity use before renewable energy. i have a plan to reach that goal. 40,000 megawatts by 20/20. when you stop the requirement as she is advocating, you create uncertainty. you create doubt. another part is the low fuel low carbon fuel standard. that incentivizes biofuels and other substitutes for oil.

you do not want to pull that incentive back. the people who are crying are well companies in texas and a big petrochemical conglomerate. they're putting up the money and they do not want to do with it. one of them said they will use less oil in california. you bet. we will use more california sun and wind. we will get it done. [applause] >> let me answer that. he did not answer the question. what is he going to do about the 97% of jobs that will be hurt by ab 32? there was a provision. in times of economic press when we have citizens without jobs, i was in lancaster the other day and a woman came up to me in tears saying her husband had lost their jobs and they were not sure they would hang onto their house. what is wrong with taking a pause, what is wrong with being

smart and green and protecting the 97% of employees that are vulnerable to a blind implementation of this bill? >> there is no credible study that says 97% of the rest of the economy will be hurt. there was an economic study out of -- that has been debunked. the oil companies are screaming. if you put thousands to work, retrofitting buildings so they do not burn as much energy, that will put people to work and save money to consumers. i adopted those fuel efficiency standards. it saved californians $50 billion and created 1 million jobs. i want to do that again. >> i want to move to another area. what has been the role of the teachers' union in the state of education in california currently? >> it is an important role.

there represent through free elections hundreds of thousands of teachers in california classrooms. they are a strong advocate for more money for schools. that is important when you have people like meg whitman coming around wanting to cut the capital gains tax. the teachers are a powerful union. arnold schwarzenegger learned that. you do not go to war with all the major elements. she has raised $30 million from the people who will benefit from the capital gains tax. i am getting support from many unions as well as business. you have to be tough. i've read of the pay raises of the state employees not once but twice. i was the one who said we have to have a two-tier pension system 20 years ago. i feel i have got what it takes to do the right thing to work with people and to stand up when they resist things that we need

for california. >> jerry brown needs to get out and campaign more. every campaign stop by have -- i have, i hear a story about someone who was in jeopardy of losing their jobs because of ab 32. let me turn to the california teachers association. we have a mess on our hands in the k-12 public system. we are rated almost at the bottom. in a who was part of the problem and not part of the solution? the bosses of the california teachers association. we have to change how we do things and have more charter schools and pay the better teachers more. we have to read every single public school. the union fights change. there is apparent and teacher association and the california teachers association. there is no kid association.

i want to defend the children. we're going to have to make radical changes. [applause] >> this brings me to something else. you are spending $120 million of your own fortune on this campaign. money that you learned and you have a legal right to spend it in this campaign. a lot of people wonder if you were so interested in california, where you did not vote to all those years were get involved in state commissions or other parts of public life? is there something about how you have used your fortune for the good of california in other causes we do not know that you would like to share with us? >> let me talk about voting. i have a lot to say. i am not proud of my voting record. it was wrong and i take full accountability and responsibility for it and i apologize to the people of

california. you are right to look at that. every candidate is a package of strengths and weaknesses. i have a lot to offer. the reason i have invested my own money is i think we can make california a much stronger. i think we can revive the california dream for every single californian. i am against some big entrenched interests. the public employee unions have poured money into this campaign. they have poured $300 million to control politics in sacramento. that expenditure allows me to be independent, to go to sacramento with no strings attached. if jerry brown gets to the governor, there'll be a meeting. he talks about bringing people together. there will be a meeting of the union bosses who are there to collect the ious for them having funded jerry brown's entire campaign. that ability to invest my own money allows the independence.

we have a family foundation that supports higher education and health care. my focus now is turning the state of california around. i bring tremendous expertise from the private sector. i know how to balance budgets. i bring a common sense approach from the real world. this was supposed to be a citizen democracy. you would be anchored in the real world having faced challenges and that is what i bring to this race. [applause] >> first, my campaign has been supported by many businesses and individuals. we have raised $2 million on the internet alone. ms. whitman raise $30 million from the executives that will benefit from her economic plank which is not to invest in schools but to take money and invest in her rich campaign

contributors. the people ought to take that into account. when i ran for attorney general, the california teachers association osupported me. i created two charter schools and they are doing well. my family foundation put in $1.10 million in these charter schools because they needed the money. i learned a lot about how schools work and i appreciate charter schools. i appreciate the fact that 95% of the kids go to regular schools. that is where we have to put our attention. not by changing the numerical grade to a letter grade but by recruiting the best teachers weekend, taking control from sacramento, moving it down to the districts and the schools and teachers, letting the people close to the students have the power and authority to make the tough teaching decisions. [applause]

>> mr. brown said something he knows is not true. i have never said i want to cut spending on education. i want to continue to invest in education. i have a different plan on how we spend the money. of all the money we spend, $70 billion, only 60 cents of every dollar goes to the classroom. 40% goes to the bureaucracy. we're starting the students to force feed the bureaucracy. that is why the next governor cannot be beholden to the teachers association because they want to protect that bureaucracy. the no. 2 contributor is the california teachers association. >> let me move on if i can. let me go back to immigration. there are a couple of unresolved questions. businesses and households want to be held accountable for employing undocumented workers as they're called in california.

you said that businesses, three strikes and you're out. you discovered you had an undocumented worker with good documents she had who worked for you for nine years. if you could not find someone in your home who was undocumented or illegal, how do expect businesses to be able to do that? >> so. we went through an employment agency and looked at three forms of id and our housekeeper falsified them and came to a minute. i had to let her go. this is why we need a good system that allows a business of every size to look at the documentation and know whether it is real or not. we have to hold employers accountable for hiring undocumented workers. illegal immigration is a huge challenge. $6 billion to $7 billion goes to

services for illegal immigrants. what want to do is secure the border. the border patrol agents need more resources, more border patrol, more technology, hold employers accountable, eliminate sanctuary cities. we have to have a temporary guest worker program that allows people to be here on a temporary basis and work in all kinds of different industries, whether it is agriculture or hospitality. i did not think the arizona law was right for california. it was divisive and be caught up in the courts and i have a better plan. we have to solve this problem. it is one of the major challenges facing california and i think i have a great plan to do it. [applause] >> mr. brown. you are the chief law- enforcement officer. why should not businesses be held responsible and pay a

penalty if they continue to do so? >> this is a federal government responsibility. almost every police chief i know does not want to be in the business of [unintelligible] i have signed agreements with the federal government so those illegal immigrants who are arrested, their fingerprints are sent back to washington to my office and if they are illegal, they are subject to deportation. the biggest problem, we have millions who are here illegally in the country and california. there in the shadows. is she going to deport them or will we leave them there? we need a comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level. i support that. without a path to citizenship, we have no way to deal with the people who have been here for years and have kids going to schools and have not broken laws. we need to think about this carefully from a human point of

view. these are real people. mothers and dads and kids. they have this fear, the fear that her housekeeper had. i do not want to get into that story. it is kind of a sorry tale. after working for her nine years, she did not even get her lawyer. i can tell you that could be done. that sounds like the old bracero program. what the people want is temporary workers who of they do right by the employer, they can get citizenship. that is treating mexican people as semi-serfs. i do not think that is human and i do not think that is right. [cheers and applause] >> let me move on to another dimension of the relationship between california and mexico.

mexico is in a state of near anarchy because of drug violence. the blame is always focus on mexico. that violence is a result of the enormous purchasing power of drugs in states especially like california. i have heard neither one of you talk about cracking down on illegal drug consumption in california which would go a long way toward helping mexico, our southern neighbor, do something about drug cartel violence. you're the chief law-enforcement officer. that has not been a high priority as far as i can tell. >> i have to differ with you. as part of my department, we have the bureau of narcotic enforcement. we have had several take downs of cartel inspired drug operations. in prison convicted drug operation in salinas, atwater, stockton, in the imperial

valley. i have been there myself to see it. it is tough and dangerous. the cartel's are beginning to infiltrate. not a lot but the specter is there. we have gang task forces. the legislature cut that. i found funds to restore most of it. i feel strongly that this operation connected to mexico and gangs is a high priority. i have made it a high priority. >> let me give you a different spin. you are opposed to the proposition that would legalize marijuana. what would happen if tomorrow, marijuana or legalized, license, and controlled by the state because it is no secret in this state and across the country, people can get it whenever and wherever they want to. >> i am firmly opposed to proposition 19, the legalization of marijuana.

i do not think it is the right thing for our young people and community. do not ask me to ask law- enforcement. every single law enforcement official is against proposition 19. i will make one other comment. jerry brown says he is tough on drugs and drug crime. the narcotics officer association has chosen to endorse me. they know i will back up public safety in california. this is one of the biggest differences between me and the attorney general. our point of view on law enforcement. jerry brown has been soft on crime for 40 years. he has been against the death penalty and has appointed judges, rose berg who fought 60 cases of capital punishment. she was recalled. you have to look at the

california peace officers association who endorsed me, the cops of the police protective league of los angeles. there is no more front-line organization then the cops in los angeles and they know i will back them up and fight drugs in california. >> let me ask about another proposition. proposition 8, banning gay marriages. how important is that to california and to you personally on a scale of 1-10? >> i am running for governor because we need to do three things. we need to jump-start our economy and get californians back to work. we have to cut wasteful government spending and our k-12 education system is a mess and we have to turn it around because we are denying children a chance at a great education. proposition 8, i was opposed. i think that term marriage needs to be between a man and woman. i was in favor of the progress

of civil union laws. the question is, what is the obligation of the attorney general to defend proposition h which is part of the constitution of the u.s. so it can have its day in court in the ninth circuit court of appeals and the supreme court. the chief law-enforcement officer needs to defend that lawsuit regardless. 52% voted for that amendment and they need to have their day in court. it needs to go to the appeals process. jerry brown has refused to defend that and i think it is dangerous. you cannot have a governor or attorney general who makes a decision of what part of the constitution the will and will not defend. i do not think that is the judgment call want being made. we have the governor and attorney general who will defend the constitution of the state of california. >> the prior attorney general

did not want to defend a discriminatory initiative. the 14th amendment bans this kind of discrimination. i am not entering the court and diei will not appeal it. it can be appealed. when something is so fundamentally wrong as -- after a long trial, the judge said this violates the 14th amendment, i will not be the one to take that up. one more thing on the cops. i have the police chiefs backing me. they know i am tough on crime. >> he was going to say he has the police chiefs in his back pocket. >> unaccustomed as i am to politics, i stumbled in one of my phrases. i have their backing. they know you will not be as

tough. one said brown will be too tough on unions and that is why we are supporting meg whitman. i have been a tough attorney general and i support of the three strikes. i will support some reform. since i left the governorship, the bel20 to prisons and they have been adding to the problem. we need criminal justice reform, reentry and we need to be tough on crime. [applause] >> thank you. we're closing in on the final questions. let me try to get a couple of quick takes. what do you think of the job president obama is doing and would you like to have him campaign at your side? >> he is coming to campaign for me. i am happy with that. this man has created stimulus and help stabilize our banks and we have a health care plan that

people since harry truman have been tried to get enacted. not perfect. he is facing tremendous and and reasoned opposition by a small faction of the republican people in washington. i think obama is doing a good job. [applause] >> ms. whitman, a force in your party is sarah palin. she has been the governor of the big western states. are you going to see current vice after her experience in alaska? >> >> sarah palin has a real following in the republican party. i have supported john mccain or mitt romney. i will be out with voters and talking about the things that matter to californians and that is jobs.

if we do not cut taxes, streamlined regulation, there is no way we will get out of this financial mess. think about a family for a minute. what a job does is put the family budget back together. what more jobs in california will do is put the california budget back together. i have to say one thing -- the notion that jerry brown will be tough on unions is just a fairy tale. he has been joined at the hip with them for 40 years. >> we have two minutes left. i want to get from each of you a question that is central to california. in the 21st century, does it california have to reform its political structure, referendums, 2/3 votes on any budget. do you have to go back and build a state politically from the ground up? >> i think there is a way forward with some fundamental reform. and the budget plan that i have

is a first to increase tax revenues by more companies, more jobs being in california. we have to get our hands around government spending. we spend more money than we take in. but there are three reforms i would be interested in it. first is a two-year budgeting process. the one-year budgeting process does not work for us anymore because it does not allow you to make the investments you need or have a long-term perspective. >> i know. you're at the red light. mr. brown, less than a minute. >> look, i am going to take the world as i find it. we need to -- i hope we get a majority vote for the budget, not for taxes. another part of my proposal is a pay-as-you-go requirement. everytime you propose a bill, tell us how he will find it. i want to say something about unions and businesses.

they are all influencers, they are part of the democratic process. i have been in the kitchen. i have taken the heat. she has been in the bleachers looking at what is happening in the government. i love california. i know how it works, and i have the intestinal fortitude to do what it is -- what is right. >> thank you very much. jerry brown, the attorney general, meg whitman the ceo of?

.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> in particular, a couple of programs that i found essential to helping to address these -- this issue of meth amphetamine. one that we're doing now is called access to recovery. this is where we have support systems out there, where we use vultures, people who are coming off of their treatment program are able to get the support services that they need. the other is a program i worked with senator baker here. we didn't quite get the funding that we wanted but she

understood this programming. treatment assessment. get our people at the most vulnerable point in emergency rooms and trauma centers and give them a quick assessment and then we make a quick refer ell in regards to getting treatment. we catch them at that moment and this is where we can nip it in the bud. it is all about being proactive and preventive. >> neil abercrombie? anything to add? one minute. >> i think we can make better use than we have of federal dollars in this area. this is where i think the choice has to be made. are we going to invest in ourselves? aren't we going to utilize the power of the government in a positive way or not?

if we take the position that everybody is on their own, if we take the position that government can't do things or if we take the position that i espouse that the government can be a catalyst, to help individuals to help themselves not as a statement of welfare but as a statement of preservation and resurrection for themselves so that they can reclaim their lives. when it comes to drugs, the government needs to be a positive force. i think we should support the programs that allow that to take place. >> ok. moving on to the next question in the human needs and proserving local culture category. what would be the role of neighbor island representatives in your administration? >> when you say neighbor island representatives, you mean like senator baker? our good friend senator baker. our dear friend. >> you know, we're talking

about bridging the islands, water doesn't separate us. it joins us. >> that's what he said. >> i don't mean to quote anybody in particular. >> i'm serious about that because if you -- i mean senator baker has their own constituency. do you want me to bring them into the -- constituency. do you want me to bring them in to the administration? is that what you're saying? >> no. how large a role, could you see an expansion of their role? could they have more influence in your department? >> that would be a brand new concept, no doubt about that. in all honesty, i didn't understand the question that way. >> i don't understand it that way either. i understood the question to me, how reward neighbor island legislature in terms of

cooperation and reaching out. >> can we agree on that, that that is the question? >> who said we can't work together? no question about that. in fact, i have an opening in my cabinet. [laughter] i need wisdom. >> does that mean you're starting alphabetically? >> it is all about relationships. when they talk about ok, how are you going to be different from governor lingle? i always say governor lingle is governor lingle and duke ai-on-a is duke ai-on-a. i have a different style. a style about me how i deal

with people and collaborate. i want to make it as exclusive as i can. make sure we have that situation. we're not going to agree with everything. obviously we don't. you can have that dialogue and transparency. that's exactly what we need. i'm open to always anyone coming into my office and having any type of dialogue with anybody, it doesn't matter if you're republican or independent or democrat. it just doesn't matter because i serve all the people of hawaii. >> thank you for that clarification. mr. abercrombie, your response and interpretation of that question. >> well, i would like to refer to my opening statement where i indicated that we literally began our campaign on the neighbor islands. we started outcoming here to say because we didn't want to

be perceived as a campaign that was oahu centric or honolulu centric as such. i would like to refer you to my records in that regard. i remember being criticized when i was chair -- not criticized. critiqued is closer to it. when i was chairman, in the state senate, they said you're from another island. i said because it is a university of hawaii system. yes, it costs a little more. if we're going to be -- sometimes you have to invest a little more. kids have different situations than they do in an urban context. i'm very pleased to say that i believe i've had an excellent relationship over the years

with neighbor island legislatures and that they could look forward and i certainly look forward to the opportunity to continue that relationship in the future. >> duke yoin, you aiona, you have one minute to add to that or rebut. >> i'm ok. >> hi, nice to see you. >> ok. we are doing very well on time. i do have some questions prepared that pertain to topics that we posed tonight but were not necessarily put in the script so i would like to take an opportunity to do that. pertaining to education as well as other areas of our economy, the community has this question for you. hawaii has missed out on several federal funding opportunities including accessing matching grants. how will your administration position its department to aggressively seek federal grant?

we will begin with mr. abercrombie. >> when i first made this tour, if you will, of this conversation, on the different islands, i mentioned that i thought one of the strong points that i could make in terms of trying to get your favorable attention as vothse and citizens, across the state, was what i called the abercrombie advantage. what i meant by that was we do have access to the administration, to the obama administration, i have some access in a personal way. it doesn't mean that the president is more favorably inclined towards me or anybody else or hawaii for that matter. but he was born and raised here. he understands hawaii and it helped to form the foundation of his character. hawaii doesn't have to be explained to him. he understands as secretary duncan did as secretary of education that we were a

special place and they can act accordingly. my friends in the congress both republican and democrat are -- stand ready to help us. the third part of that triangle is the governorship. i intend to utilize and leverage my relationships in washington and my relationships in the state legislature and the county councils to the advantage of all in this respect. i can assure you there is an advantage and the abercrombie advantage will work to everyone's benefit. >> thank you. mr. aiona? >> i think first and foremost we need to understand we can't put all of our eggs in one basket and rely on federal funds and relationships that we have. there are going to be changes in in the congress. we don't know what the makeup is going to be. to say my relationships and connections are going to be there two years from now i think is a little hastey. i think we have done very well in terms of getting grants. we just got one of the biggest

parts, race to the top funds. it was a collaborative effort on everybody's part. the administration, the department of education, the universities of hawaii systems. we did well and we got it on our second try when a lot of other states have not even been there. there are reasons why grants are not attained and why we don't get certain grants and i don't know what the reasons are for some of these grants that didn't get approved but i know one thing. i know that many of these grants, it is program staff that know exactly how to work these grants, how to make it happen. it is much more direct. the last thing you want to do is to remove that from any of the staff members within these departments. so as such, what i propose is obviously just working together like we did for race for the top funds and we will be successful, as successful as we can. >> mr. abercrombie, one-minute

rebuttal. >> well, the race to the top funds are federal funds. i mentioned that earlier in our discussion these are tax dollars that you have sent to washington to be spent for national purposes and education and the improvement of education across the board is a top priority to the president and a top priority of the congress at this time. so it turns out that we are making use of federal dollars, aren't we? it turns out that yes, these dollars are limited. they are not going to be there forever. they are here to form the faugs of the progress that we intend to make -- foundation over the progress that intend to make. i'm content to say if we can threverage federal dollars that are there, then we should do it. two years from now, i hope to say if the change is meant by the lieutenant governor that we're going to have a congress that is not going to support education and funding for activities like race to the

top, then we want to make sure those people don't get elected i'm in favor of taking every advantage. >> thank you very much. mr. aiona? >> i'm fine. >> all right. next question. maui county veterans are proud but underserved members of the community. what will your administration do to streamline and coordinate their access to benefits and services? >> i'm very grateful for the service that our veterans have given to this country and i think in this election period they should be concerned that we have such an abysmal turnout in regards to voters. that's what their service about. to give us the freedom that we have and the opportunity to vote. i have always been a supporter of veterans. i will continue to be one. if we need to make changes within our office, so be it. i think we have made great

strides in outreach and educating our veterans and we will continue the do so and continue the seek whatever funding we need so they can attain what they have and that is to be recognized for what they have done for our country and our people here in the state of hawaii. >> mr. abercrombie? >> i realize there has been some difficulties and challenges particularly on molakai and veterans facilities. i think that has primarily been a question with regard to county permits as such. so i don't know if the question was directly related to that or not but what i can say is as a former member of the armed services committee, that we're very, very fortunate to have now as the head of the veterans administration general shinseki of kauai. i had the good fortune to work with him as a member of the

armed services committee and general wesley clark when he was defense chief for the entire country. the entire country was a beneficiary of shinseki's leadership. we're fortunate he is chairman of the government affairs committee in the united states senate. he has been involved in seing to it that services for veterans have been improved enormously in terms of funding ond authorization and prope rations not administered by general shinseki. if there are any veterans out there who feel at the present time that more emphasis could be made here on maui or elsewhere, they have only to let us know and we'll work through the congressional delegation and the veterans administration to address any deficiencies. thank you. mr. aiona? anything you would like to add to your statement? >> no.

>> ok. i would like to give gentlemen an opportunity to expound upon one of the questions that were asked during this debate. is there something you did not get to say and i can remind you of the categories if you would like. we had education, environment, infrastructure, economic development and human and cultural concerns. one minute if you would like to please expound upon anything you did not get to say. we will start with mr. aiona. >> well, there is so much really to discuss which is why i want to take away the time limit that we have and make it a reasonable time limit. in regards to economic development, we understand, when i say we, i'm talking about myself and my running mate lynn finnigan.

we need to make sure that we have businesses out there that can do the job for our people and maintain those jobs. that's why i'm so humble and appreciative. today i received the endorsement from the maui chamber of commerce because they represent thousands of small businesses out there who really are the backbone of the state of hawaii. they are the ones that create jobs. they are the ones that bring the wages to our people and understanding that, i want you to know that i will do the best that i can to facilitate. >> thank you, sir. thank you. mr. abercrombie >> i respect what the lupet governor has done. he has outlined very, very clear in his philosophy and approach. we are island people. we have to see the limits and

the capacity to control our own destiny. we can see the sea and the mountains. we are not the masters and ministers over the universe. what we have to understand is this the principle that i think reverend abraham put forward to us many years ago if the canoe to co-reach the shore all of us have to paddle together. otherwise we flounder and will never make it to the shore. basically we have a philosophy that is going to be decided on november 2. are you on your own or are with all in this together? i think we're all in this together and i hope i have the opportunity to work with you on that proposition. >> thank you. mr. aiona, is there anything you would like to say in response or follow up on something else you did not get to say. one minute. >> as far as the contrast between myself and neil, i think it is clear on a couple

of aspects, one of them is our fiscal policy. i have stated many times and it is in my platform that we will be disciplined. we will be fiscally responsible. we will spend within our means and i'm ready to submit a budget when i'm required to do so. everybody should understand that we get elected on november 2. we get sworn in on december 4. two weeks after we get sworn in, we have to submit a balanced budget thruss a six-year plan for the legislature and their review and ratification. i'm ready to submit . i will tell you this. it is going to be a tough budget that requires discipline. we can't expand government as my opponent is proposing and if you look at his new day in hawaii, you'll see many new programs and departments and that is a basic difference between myself and my opponent. so the choice is rather clear. >> mr. abercrombie, one minute.

>> thank you for that introduction, lieutenant governor. new day in hawaii, the follow-up to our vision plan, recovery and reinvestment plan. that's what we proposed to do. we are going to reorient and reproducersize. we're going to reallocate. this makes the initiate i ever and leadership. it takes the idea that we can do it. we shouldn't spend our time figuring out reasons why we can't get things done. we have had that for a number of years now. we are being told constantly why something can't be accomplished. i'm much more optimistic. i don't have that dark view. i'm heading for light. i'm not going r a advocate or prophet of doom. i'm a prophet of optimism i know we can accomplish t. if the philadelphia phillies can make it all the way to the world series, i know hawaii

can't be behind the viket renos and maui. >> this focus 2010 on hawaii public raid yes. we're broadcasting from maui. this is sponsored by h.p.r. and the economic development board. ok, gentlemen. we're now on our closing question. which was sent to you in advance of this debate. st it is, if you are elected governor of hawaii, what will be your biggest challenge and how will you meet that challenge? you each have two minutes to respond. there will be no rebuttal. we begin with duke aiona. >> first of all, thanks begin for this opportunity. thanks to all of you who have stayed throughout and those watching on television and listening on radio.

there are many challenges but the challenge that we face coming up now and in the next few years is to strengthen our economy, to make sure that our people have jobs and are able to keep their jobs. the way we're going o do do is by empowering you, the people of hawaii and small businesses. small businesses are the backbone of our economy. 99% of all of our businesses are small businesses. 68% of all the jobs that we have come from mibs. 64% of all the -- small businesses and 64% of all the wages that we have come from small businesses. we're going to have to make sure that our small businesses are firm and ready and able to do what they need to do. i had the opportunity to visit with 120 businesses in 100 days to get the recommendations how i could help them create jobs because really that is what government is all about. the fundamental difference between me and my opponent, government doesn't create jobs. if you look at that plan of

plans, you'll see that he is creating jobs within government. he is growing jobs. not sfrenging our economy or creating any private jobs. what we're going o to have to do is empower those who do create jobs. that's what government is all about. we need to create a business friendly environment. we reduce the financial burden and make sure we have a qualified workforce and make sure they have confidence, confidence in the leadership that they have in government. so that's why i'm again very grateful and humble that the maui chamber of commerce has endorsed me. obviously they understand what my position is, what my policies are and where my leadership will take them in these next couple of years. i want to thank you all. have a great evening. >> thank you. >> i think our greatest challenge is to restore

confidence in government. we need to restore public confidence in ourselves. this is what is necessary. this is why i think this campaign has been such a marvelouse experience. people ask me how is the campaign going? i can't tell. my experience has been one of uplift and encouragement. my experience has been one of optimism coming from people that we can make a change and get control over our own destiny that we haven't had for a number of years now. that's what people are looking for. they want a can-do attitude. they want to see a government that is representing the best that we can bring from ourselves and to the young people that we see coming up in hawaii. that's what this is all about. and government, of course government can create jobs. government needs to be able to create jobs. that's precisely what the stimulus what the recovery program is all about. that's what this new day in hawaii is all about.

first we go through recovery and utilize the federal dollars that are out there and the grant resources. the university of hawaii president was in a discussion with me just recently. we're going to be bringing the institutes of medicine here, the national research and energy council here, we're going to be exing in january every every opportunity to use the capital. you can see how energized i am to what we can do. i wants indicate to get start. i'm not a prophet of gloom. we can do this. a new day is coming to hawaii. a better way forward is here. i know we can accomplish this. i'm looking to do it with you, for you and let's all get together. >> thank you very much. thank you to our gubernatorial candidates, duke aiona and neil abercrombie.

thank you to the maui arts and cultural center for providing this wonderful forum. we hope you all go home tonight feeling more informed and prepared to vote november 2 in the general election. the archives of this forum will be posted o the radio website. this is hawaii public radio khpr 88. 1, honolulu 401 (k) ua 98.7. i'm kayla rosenfeld. good night and thank you. >> aloha. [applause] >> thank you.

>> come up next on c-span, last night's delaware senate debate and then today's "washington journal" live with your phone calls and later a live news conference with defense secretary robert gates and secretary of state hillary clinton from the nato conference in brussels. >> hey miled and high school students, get ready working on those videos for student cam. there is $50,000 in prizes. this year's theme, washington, d.c. through my lens. for complete rules and information how the upload your video, go to studentcam.org.

>> c-span, bringing you politics and public affairs. every morning it is "washington journal". on weak i days watch live coverage of the u.s. house of representatives and nights congressionals policy forums. news make rs on sundays and q & a on sunday night and also the popular prime minister's agrees the british house of commons. our programming is also available any time at c-span.org and searchable at the c-span video library. created by cable, provided as a public service. >> delaware's u.s. senate

candidates, christine o'donnell and chris coons met in the first televised debate last night. christine o'zonl supported by the tea party express. this is an hour and a half. >> good evening. i'm wolf blitzer from cnn. thank you so much for joining us for what is certain to be one of the most widely watched events of this, the 2010 midterm election season. >> let's introduce the candidates. democrat chris coons and republican christine o'donnell. welcome. >> thank you.

>> we also want to thank american cancer society for their support making this debate possible. >> let's go through some of the rules for this 90-minute debate. it is divided into two parts following a two-minute opening statement from each candidate, nancy and i will pose questions. responses to that initial question is limited to two minutes with a one-minute rebuttal from the other candidate and then there will be an for all of us to mix it up a little bit and get into a discussion. that is the first hour, the first 60 minutes of this debate follow bade 30-minute segment where we turn to the students here at the university of delaware. they have questions, responses to their questions will be limited to one minute. each candidate will also have two minutes at the end for a closing statement. our live audience here in mitchell hall understands we hope there will be no applause during tonight's debate.

we want everyone to be quiet and listen and learn from these two candidates. a coin toss determined earlier the order for this evening. we begin with two minute opening statements from each of the candidates and we begin with chris coons. ates, and we bh chris coons. >> thank you to our moderators and our host. there is a great deal at stake in this election for our state, our families, and our country. all of us, regardless of our political leanings, recognize that washington is broken. as i have traveled up and down the state listening to voters talk about the issues facing them in their daily lives, i have heard again and again their frustration with washington and with elected officials are putting narrow partisan agendas ahead of the good of our country and do little to help millions of americans out of work or on the verge of losing their homes and who are anxious about their futures.

the partisan gridlock in washington has real implications for us here in delaware. there are more than 30 rock thousand delawareans out of work in nearly 3000 families have faced foreclosure this year. these are not just numbers. these are our neighbors, and we cannot stand by and watch washington ignore them any longer. delaware voters face a clear and important choice between my opponent, a candidate who wants to take our state and country back to the failed economic policies of the past, who values partisan bickering over compromise and solutions, and who of late has extreme positions that threaten vital education programs and would abandon our commitment to our veterans. in my case, a candidate with a proven track record of balancing budgets, finding bipartisan solutions, working with delaware's businesses, large and small, helping to create jobs and spur growth. over the next nine in it, i look forward to the chance to share my ideas and values that i

learned growing up and working with one of delaware's manufacturing companies. this campaign is a job interview, and tonight's debate is about giving delaware's voters and insight into which candidate has the experience, values, and ideas to best represent them and do the hard work of fixing what is broken in washington. thank you. >> thank you to our host and for everyone being here tonight. i am running because i am concerned about the direction of our country. the america we knew and grew up with is being written in the most serious way. three years we will be paying $1 billion a day on the interest alone on our national debt. the common sense men and women in this room and across delaware know this is not sustainable, get my opponent wants to go to washington and rubber-stamp the failed spending bills that have cost us 2.5 million jobs.

this is wrong. of all sam needs to be cut off. with your vote in support, i want to go to washington to create jobs based on private business, not new tax dollars. i want to fight to have our nation become debt-free. i want to stop the tax hikes that are coming in january and reach sustainable energy independence, support the military, and strengthen the security of our homeland. i want to fight to safeguard social security, improve education, and protect our constitutional liberties. in an election year when summoned is at stake, just about every candidate says this. what distinguishes one candidate from another or the proposed solutions to reach these goals. i very much look forward to getting down to brass tacks with all of you over the next 90 minutes. i believe there is a clear choice in this election. a vote for my opponent will cost the average delaware family $10,000 instantly between the january tax hikes and his vote

for capt. trade. most of us cannot afford that. if you think that government is too small and that you are taxed too little, if you never questioned whether america is a beacon of freedom and justice, then he is your guy. but if you want a senator who will stand up to the washington elite and put your interest ahead of the special interests, and make the tough decisions needed to rein in and out of control washington, then i humbly ask you devote a model for u.s. senate. >> -- ask you to vote o'donnell for u.s. senate. >> americans voted overwhelmingly for democrats during the last election because most felt that the democrats would be able to fix the failing economy. unemployment is at 9.6%. almost three-quarters of americans in the most recent cnn opinion poll said that the economy is still in a recession. why should the voters of

delaware trust a democrat this time around? >> i think the voters of delaware should trust this democrat because like combination of experience, working in and with the private sector. helping one of delaware's most innovative companies expand and grow jobs and working with the chamber of commerce, our business roundtable, lots of groups to represent businesses large and small to effectively grow the economy. i have also presented concrete and real ideas. they are on my website, but i look forward to a chance to grow them in some detail tonight. i would advocate for research and development tax credit that combined with a new manufacturing tax credit, advocates for companies that invent and make things here, getting an extra incentive. we need to change the crazy tax policy in washington that gives an incentive to american companies to shut down operations here and ship jobs overseas.

there are the things i have proposed, expanding the home office tax credit, a tax credit for starting a new business that employs both within the first couple of years. biting harder and trade policy to make sure we are not letting our trading partners taking advantage of us, do more in investment and innovation. at the end of the day, i think delaware has a long tradition of advancing world-class products. the best way to get out of the recession is through growth. the best way to grow is by taking event of the skills and resources of a world-class university like this one where we are having this debate this evening, and tying that to a stronger, more capable workforce, giving it the resources and energy it needs to be the leader in the world and creating high-quality, high value manufacturing jobs. those are some of the ideas i look forward to discussing more of this evening. >> we have to keep in mind that my opponent has a history of promising not to raise taxes on

the campaign trail and then breaking those promises as soon as he takes office. unemployment almost doubled in the last two years under his watch as the county executive. he will continue to rubber-stamp the spending policies come in from washington. we were promised that the stimulus bill would create jobs, but instead it cost as 2.6 million jobs. we were promised it would keep unemployment at 8%, but we see unemployment at 9.7%. the democrats are bragging that uncommon has leveled out, but while it has leveled out, more people than ever are on food stamps and our welfare spending is higher than ever. this is not the right move. this is not a move toward real economic recovery. this is a move toward creating a culture of dependency. i believe the best thing the government could do -- >> that is time. now we can open it to discussion.

>> what would you do specifically to create jobs? >> the best thing the government can do to get our economy back on real economic recovery is to get out of the way of the small business owner and the entrepreneur. the way to do that is make sure these tax hikes don't come in january, to begin to roll back some of the regulation and forced them to close -- that has forced them to close their doors. a temporary two-year tax holiday to give owners of the ability to reinvest in their businesses. it will create 1.5 million new jobs. >> we are in the discussion portion, so you can interject here as well as we continue to discuss that point. x i am not sure i'd interest in what ms. o'donnell means when she says it is simply creating cultural dependency, and her primary objective would be to end all the less regulation and

red tape. just a few weeks ago, a new bill that would provide expanded sba loan capacity, $30 billion worth of new lending capability, car czar funds that have been repaid and are being read purpose toward small and midsize banks, real and concrete steps are being taken. i cannot imagine where she found the numbers that unemployment doubled in the past year under my watch. i suspect we have to keep a close eye on the numbers we will find this evening. >> we will have the statistics on our website by tomorrow. i want to point out that he said we are not creating a culture of dependency. how would you explain what is happening when unemployment has leveled out, but more and more people are on food stamps? we have to ask ourselves, what do we want delawareans to be receiving, food stamps or paychecks? >> obviously paychecks. we would like to have americans able to receive the benefits they need to get through

incredibly difficult times, but to simply denounce people as independent is they are replying -- applying for and receiving food stamps -- >> that is not fair of you to say that. that is not at all what i am doing. i am not the person who would cut tax benefits for disabled and low-income senior citizens, as you did as county executive. what i am proposing is to give these -- to make sure the tax cut for all delawareans do not expire this january. you have said that he will stop the tax cuts for the so-called rich. what you fail to realize is that the so-called bridge or the small business owner, the dry cleaner owner down the street, the pizza shop owner who makes $300,000 before they pay their for employees. >> we are boring to try to have a conversation rather than just a diatribe -- going to have a

conversation. >> it is important for folks to look closely at some of the things she has thrown out on her new website. most of them are untrue. some of them are just flat-out lies, some of them are just factually untrue. i am not going to stop every single time there is something she throws out that i disagree with or that is factually untrue. most of what you put out an the way you characterize my record is untrue. >> the support keeping the bush tax cut for all americans, or only for those making under $250,000 a year? >> i support extending the tax cuts for the overwhelming majority of americans. the value i will apply in deciding how much to extend, whether it goes up to $1 million or five men in dollars. we have a tough choice to make. every extension that is given is going to increase the deficit

and add to the debt. in deciding whether to extend all the tax cuts and for how long, i think we should do the tax cuts that have the best chance of getting our economy going again. >> you will have an opportunity to get back into this discussion. this is easy number one, jobs, jobs, jobs. also the deficit. i want to get into the deficit right now. you have made the point that the national debt is exploding right now. i want some specific, meaningful cut. if your elected senator from delaware, what would you cut in the federal budget, and don't just say waste, fraud, and abuse, because everybody says that. what would you cut specifically? >> first of all, we have to tackle the deficit and the debt. our deficit is almost becoming equal to our gdp. when a country's deficit equals

your gdp, that is when your currency and market collapses. glaxo what would you cut? >> first of all, canceled the unbent stimulus bill. second, put a freeze on discretionary spending. put a hiring freeze on non security personnel, and then when we are talking about cutting government spending, we have to talk about waste, fraud, and abuse. a recent report came out that we spend over $1 billion in medicaid waste, fraud, and abuse. we are talking about pharmacies billing for prescriptions given to dead people. we are talking about home health-care companies billing for patients who were in hospital. senator coburn put out a report that disclosed millions of dollars that were supposed to go to education funding that instead went to special favors.

special favor something my opponent knows very much about because he created 12 contingency funds so that he could pay out favors to special interest groups. the courts forced into close 11 of them, but the one that remained open paid $53,000 in a men's fashion show. he paid more than $50,000 to appease liberal special interest groups, at a time when he brags about balancing the budget by raising our taxes, cutting police pay, this is how he chooses to spend our tax dollars. we have to ask, do we want to send this gentleman to washington, d.c? i would say no. he is a career politician who has proven he knows how to play the use correct my back, i'll scratch yours game. >> and get back to the bogus of the question, which is what would you do to tackle the deficit and the debt. we have some large challenges in

front of us. federal the spending is made up federal defense spending and interest on the debt. i would consider supporting a freeze on non-defense discretionary spending for three years, which would achieve significant reductions. i have also identified a series of reductions are would support. some are in agricultural price supports. several of them are in defense programs. defense acquisitions at the pentagon is already said. there is a variety of platforms and programs that i think we can simply do away with as we invest in making our defense and our military more modern, flexible, and responsive to the real threats we face in the modern world. >> let's open the discussion on correcting some of the financial issues here by talking about some of your own personal

financial problems. most people know about it by now. there was the 2008 mortgage default judgment on your home. you just received a bachelor's degree and into the decade to pay off the tuition. the question then is, how can voters relied upon your thoughts on how to manage the deficit if you are having such personal financial issues of your own? >> first of all, the irs tax lien, the admitted it was a computer error, and my opponent should not be bringing that up. i have discovered there are thousands of delawareans who have faced the same thing. an irs mistake that cost them greatly, which is all the more reason we need to reform the irs, not put them in control of our health care. you mentioned education. i don't have a trust fund. i did not come from a privileged background, as my opponent says

he did. >> is a matter of paying bills and managing finances. >> i paid for my own college education. i know how hard it is to earn and keep the dollar. one of the reasons why the delawarean should be able to trust me is because in this economy, i work for nonprofit groups. when i fell upon difficult times, i made the sacrifices needed to set things right. i sold my house and i sold a lot of my possessions in order to pay off my personal debts and to become in a stronger position. i have worked hard in order to get to the position that i am. so i can relate to the thousands of delaware families that are suffering right now, and i am stronger for it. i made it through to the other side, and that is where leadership does not count in whether or not you fall, it counts in if you have gotten up, and that is what i have done.

>> i frankly think that we need to focus in this debate this evening and in the campaign not on personal financial difficulties are background issues, but on the issues in front of us. the things that delawareans are concerned about. how do we tackle the deficit? how do we get delawareans back to work? there has been a lot of discussion that i think is a distraction from the core issues that delawareans asked about. >> let's go through some of the accusations and we will give you a chance to respond. >> on the idea that somehow i was the one responsible for being sued for -- she is convincing me with my predecessor. >> as a county executive, you

raised property-tax is, a 25% hike in the last fiscal year. proposed new taxes on hotels, paramedic services, even 911 call from cell phones. is that true? >> no. it is not true that we proposed a tax on calls to the 911 center. research into that would reveal that. it is difficult and complicated. next did increase taxes as the county executive? >> blanda walk you through what happened. one of the tax my opponent has made repeatedly is that i have driven the county to bankruptcy. nothing could be further from the truth. today, new castle county has a surplus. when i became the executive in 2005 it had a deficit. i have work to the then as significant reserve that is made it possible for us to continue to have a aaa bond rating. roughly 30 counties in america have aaa bond rating.

>> you have been criticized for saying that you brought the county to aaa bond rating. you inherited that good rating, and how would you justify cutting the tax exemption for low income seniors and disabled seniors, cutting our police pay when you wastefully spent so much money on keeping the special interest groups? recently cannot justify that. that is a career politician. that is cronyism. we don't need any more of that in washington. >> it will be difficult to respond in 30 seconds. i am proud of my record as new castle county executive. the hard choices that had to be made to clean up the government, every time you get a bond rating, you earn the bond rating. ms. o'donnell is not familiar with how bond ratings work. moody's just two weeks ago said it was because of the

conservative fiscal policies of my administration that we have reaffirmed a aaa bond rating from all three agencies. >> on national security, foreign policy, 100,000 american men and women are serving in the military in afghanistan right now. the president's of afghanistan, hamid karzai, has acknowledged he is in direct talks with the taliban leadership and wants to create what the cause of peace council. here is a question for mr. coons. we use aboard a negotiated settlement in afghanistan that includes taliban -- would you support a negotiated settlement between hamid karzai and the taliban? >> i am concerned about the security of our troops in the field and honoring the service and sacrifice of our veterans. i think the war was justified by a direct attack on the united

states. the taliban was the are of the 9/11 attack. we have to look good weather will continue to contribute to american security by having 100,000 troops on the ground -- we have to look at whether we will continue to contribute. it allows the opportunity to read engage, should the taliban take control again, or allow al qaeda to reemerge as a real threat to the region or to the united states. we have spent $1.30 trillion in iraq and afghanistan. have lost more than 5000 american servicemen and women. we have asked a lot of our men and women in the field. they have delivered brilliantly, but frankly, the mission has exceeded the scope that we could initially have expected. i am more concerned about the threats to our security posed

by an unstable pakistan, by iran, and by an endless war in a country where we are trying to build a nation where there has not been one in modern times. >> light on the campaign trail has he said -- y on the campaign trail has he said he supports this random time to withdraw all? iran and withdraw that he says he supports will simply embolden the terrorist to come after us even more. when we withdraw from iraq, we need to make sure there are benchmarks in place. those benchmarks are making sure there is a government, a representative government over there that serves the needs of the people and that can defend themselves. when we have reached these benchmarks, that is when we withdraw. >> she said withdraw from iraq. >> that i say iraq? i am sorry. i meant afghanistan.

>> frankly, i come from a family of veterans. i come from a family that has dedicated a lot to the service of our nation, and i wear a flag in every day to remind me of a man who grew up next door to me and was killed in iraq in december 2005. i never take lightly the enormous sacrifice our servicemen and women have made and that we'd ask them to continue making. i don't know how long is too long, but to endure strikes me as awfully long. i question whether your standards and principles give us any hope of winding up this war on any reasonable time line. frankly, the government of hamid karzai has proven itself to be largely corrupt and ineffective of establishing control of the whole country. we have dedicated hundreds of billions of dollars to this conflict, and i am deeply concerned that it is a conflict without a reasonable in the inside.

we have to come up with a plan to responsibly wind down the conflict. >> it should be based on established benchmarks that mean we have had success. he said that your top priority is the concern for the safety of others on the homeland, if you seriously support this random time withdrawal. all we are going to do is embolden the terrace to think they have more power than they do. i would ask you, whether it is the tax cut, you have gone back and forth on what you said on afghanistan. do you support the president or don't you support the president? >> let's stay focused on the issue in front of us, which is afghanistan. >> you have jump around. >> the core issue is, what reasonable prospect the have for these gauzy benchmarks and time

lines to actually result in withdrawal? in iraq, there was in for structure in place. in afghanistan, there has not been a nation in decades. despite 10 years of incredible effort, we are not succeeding in building a nation. if the benchmark is self- governing, stability, security, we had a decent shot at that in iraq. >> when we were fighting the soviets in the 1980's and 1990's, we did not finish the job. now we have a responsibility to finish the job. >> we are about to wrap up this topic. yes or no answer, is this nation more secure than it was under president bush? >> yes. >> no. >> we will move on to our next topic. >> it can i say why? >> we do need to move on. >> the statements out in the

national media, the "saturday night live" skids or a distraction. to the voter in delaware, is the message they are receiving. we would be remiss if we did not address this issue. the comments you have made in your own lawyer have become fodder for the late night tv shows. a local newspaper columnist said that the comments you have been seen to be making make delawareans cringe. what you say to voters who want change but or uncomfortable by these remarks? >> this election cycle should not be about comments i made on a comedy show over a decade and a half ago. the election cycle should be about what is important to the people of delaware. hell are going to get real jobs back to delaware? -- how are we going to get real jobs back to delaware? these are the issues that

delawareans are concerned about. i have not welcomed at this media attention. you have been asking for an interview for quite a long time. my priority has been meeting as many voters, going to as many community forums as possible so we can counter these things. my opponent has said the statements we made should be off the table. after he made that statement, days later he started running ads. he is going back on his work, using those statements to misrepresent my character. again, i thank you for the opportunity for the delaware voters to get to know who i am and what i am all about. i can assure them that while i made statements, my faith has matured over the years. regardless of my personal fate, when i go down to washington d.c., is the constitution i will defend and it is by the

constitution that i will make all my decisions. that will be the standard >> i was surprised to see in a newspaper a profile about the bus. it was pretty similar to what you just heard from her, that she would not let her faith in the central driver of her decisions when elected. your suggestion that the constitution would be your guide -- i am interested in hearing if it is the constitution passed by the founders, the constitution of the 1930's and 1940's, or the constitution at the day. protecting a woman was the right to choose, protecting reproductive freedom, making sure we have miss o'donnell's views on prayer, abortion -- these are important. these are not random statements on a late-night tv show. what can a judge is witchy confirm?