of issues witchy take up? i will stand firmly behind the constitution as it stands today. the case law that governs the united states. >> you were a student pastor at yale. you said that you thought you would end up a preacher, a professor, or a politician. you have occasionally been a guest speaker at some of the churches in our community -- baptist churches. what role does faith in your life have on your politics. >> faces a central part in how my wife and i raise our children. ours is a faith that we think is a general motivation toward public service, to try to create a committee that is more tolerant, inclusive, and just. we think that is the central message of our faith. i also think that someone who has been elected 10 years -- my

-- the aspect of my private faith does not influence the decisions i have made for the public in my 10 years in office. >> let us give you a chance to respond. in a television appearance back in 1998, you said evolution is a myth. do you believe evolution is a myth? >> i believe -- i was talking about what a local school taught. that should be decided by the local community. please let me respond to what he just said. >> answer the question -- is evolution a myth? >> local schools should make that decision. >> what do you believe? >> what i believe is irrelevant. >> why is it irrelevant? >> what i would support in washington, d.c., is the ability for the local school system to decide what is taught in their classrooms. what i was talking about on that show was a classroom that was

not allowed to teach creationism as an equal theory as abolition. that is against the constitutional rights and that is an overreaching are of the government. please allow me at least a full minute to respond to what he said. he said the statements that we made should be taken into consideration when casting your vote. i would be remiss not to bring up the fact that my opponent has recently said that it was -- that he was studying under a marxist professor that made him become a democrat. when you look at his decisions on things like raising taxes, this is one of the tenants of marxism, not supporting eliminating the death tax is a tenet of marxism. i believe people support my catholic faith more than his marxist beliefs. >> a lot of people -- because they have learned in the last few weeks, he once described

yourself when you were in college as a bearded and marxists. >> i hope people will go and read the article. it is an article i wrote as a senior, the day of our commencement speech. the title and the content clearly makes it obvious that it was a joke. there was a group of people i had shared a room with who were in the young republicans and who thought when i returned from kenya and registered as a democrat that doing so was proof that i had gone over to the far left. date -- they jokingly call me a bearded marxist. if you read the article, it was clear on the face that it was a joke. despite that, my opponent and those in the right-wing media have spun this. i had never been anything but a clean shaven capitalist. [laughter] >> i would stand to disagree because first of all, if you are saying what i said on a comedy show is relevant to this election, then you're writing an

article -- forget the bearded marxist comment, he wrote an article saying you learn your police from an articulate marxist professor and that is what made you become a democrat. that should be assigned to every delaware voter. >> if it were true, i would agree. >> you said at -- >> there's an issue you brought up about schools. this goes to you mr. coons. schools are trying to get an accountability in the classroom. it is very difficult to dismiss an underperforming teacher because of the stringent contracts that had been negotiated with the individual school system. do you feel that teachers' unions are too powerful? >> one of the things i have complemented, both -- is the

remarkable progress on the "race to the top" program. i like but the process and the outcome. the president and vice presidents at a very high bar. they had money for states were willing to make significant changes. delaware's teachers' union came to the table and was the leadership of gov. markel. been a significant changes. they embraced charters and made a more powerful. then made it possible for schools to war underperforming to be shut down or restructured. they change the system so teachers compensation could be tied to approval by children in the classroom. i think our teachers deserve our support. i think our teachers have a long tradition of contributing significantly to building a stronger and better community. my own mother and grandmother were schoolteachers. i respect the hard work that they do. earlier today i was at a school in new castle.

. the work that our teachers do, the work that is done in early education, the work that is done here and that other great public universities in the state and country is critical to lay the groundwork for our future. i have no problem with recognizing that the people who do the hard work are entitled to a good standard of living. they are entitled to be able to live a life where they have health care, they have a pension, and they have job security. i think there are issues we have to tackle. i think "rice to the top -- "race to the top" help to do that. >> he did not answer the question about whether the teachers' unions were too powerful because he got their endorsement. in delaware we spent so much money on education that it goes to the six-figure salaries, not to the teachers in the classroom. it is appalling that in a state

where we spend so much federal and state dollars on education that teachers who want to get extra materials have to do so out of their pockets. i have met many teachers. i have talked to them about their concerns with "grace to the top." whether democrat or republican, a lot of them have expressed that we are not spending our education dollars appropriately. what is going to happen when this funding dries up? we'll be broken system. in wilmington, we have an extremely high dropout rate. why spend money on a broken system? it is not one to work. we need to sit down and have conversations with the teachers, not the unions. >> over the years, a number of conservatives have proposed eliminating the department of education in washington. the support that? >> i do not think that we need to go to that aspect of a step. the report has been released that shows millions of dollars

of department of education money has been abused. that is the kind of stuff we have to stop. we also have to make sure that the money we are putting into education goes to the classroom and make them more effective. that is something we are ignoring. every time there is a problem, which is for more money at it. we are not getting to the root of the problem. that is what we need to do, start getting to the root of the problem. that means talking to the teachers and putting the powers back to the parents over where they send their children to school. >> in a recent survey of 30 industrialized countries, the united states ranked 25th in math, 21st in science. finland was first in math. south korea was first in science. specifically, what would you do to make the united states number one and once again in math and science? >> great question. as someone who has spent 20

years working with a nonprofit organization that raises money for private individuals and helps provide scholarships for students, teachers, and for a college education -- i have been hands on and engaged. some teachers are cynically under supported by their district. i think there is a significant role for the federal government in providing financial support and encouragement. scholarships for those teachers and -- -- we need a new generation of teachers who are fully prepared and fully qualified to engage their students in the classroom, to teach to the standards that "no child left behind" the established. we need to use collaborative learning techniques. >> i will give you a very quick chance to respond. what would you do, specifically, to make the united states number

one? >> we have to empower the teachers to do what they need to do to be more effective. they are the ones on the first line of defense. they had the most influence over our students. but we also have to empower the parents. i support charter schools and i support student vouchers -- school vouchers so that it gives parents, regardless of and from, regardless of status, an opportunity for their students to have a shot at a great education. >> let's switch gears and talk about health care what is such an important issue to millions of americans right now. under the new health care all that was recently signed into law by the president, children can now stay on their parents' insurance policies until the age of 26. people can no longer be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions. ensures but the big insurance

companies, are prohibited from rescinding coverage if a customer become sick and they cannot impose any lifetime limits on essential benefits like expensive treatment or hospital site -- hospital stays. you ought to repeal all of that? >> nobody is saying that the health-care system did not need to be reformed. that is part of insurance reform, not health care reform. in the course of the public debate we have begun to use coverage with care. our goal should be to make health care more affordable. even with obama care, almost vulnerable in delaware are still left uninsured and without access to quality health care. when we passed obamacare we were promised it would make more people ensured. it is not. it is actually causing people to drop their policies because of compliance standards are so high.

this should not force businesses to break our laws. second of all, we were promised that more people -- that health- care costs would be lowered. it has not. it has increased health-care costs according to recent reports. what i want to do is fight to fully repealed it so we can begin to enact real reform. that real reform would include allowing policy ability when changing jobs. allowing someone to get policies across state lines. right now we only have three options. that is not right. i would also fight for some sort of court reform that would allow doctors to not have to worry and practice of medicine to prepare for the court room as compared to the examination room. this reform also have to protect those patients who are victims of true medical malpractice. >> you have one minute to rebut. >> i think the health-care bill

has many advances. it prevents state -- it recruits and trains a whole new generation of doctors and nurses by expending support for community health centers. it also improves the efficiency of our health-care system. it makes a landmark investment of $350 million over a decade to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. there were strategic investments in electronic medical systems that would allow medical records -- 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 include 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 massive 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 national 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 chamber of 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 have been 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 ill and is worse -- and its rush to the emergency room. should we, the people who pay for health insurance, provide 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 hypothetical, 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 democrats agreed with me. >> this question will be for mr. coons. do you support a pathway to citizenship or illegal 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 government 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 security. 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, being 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 campaign trail. i would ask you when you say that you support border enforcement, this administration recently stop the efforts to put a virtual stance on our border. when barack obama is standing with you on the campaign trail this friday, are you 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 worry 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 tell president 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 carefully thought 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 contribute 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 of our security policy in the pacific rim. we joined -- where this excluded from military at exercises. it the chinese had become economically 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 the vitality of our economy, but also to our safety and security. they have widespread counterfeiting of everything from pharmaceuticals to garments. >> we are out of time. are you saying that china has a

plot to take over america? >> and move on to the student questions. we do want 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 clearances, 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't 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 made 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 medical waste, i would point to a program called the "snowflake baby." they had used human embryos that were going to be discarded as medical waste. 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 abortion, 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 incest, 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 these 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, would 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 harry 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 same reasons, 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 disclosing it. 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 harassing 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. that is against the law. it is being abused. >> i don't know. [laughter] frankly, i support full disclosure of campaign contributions. i think it is the best way to ensure that we have fair, 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 events of the past decade, islam has been viewed as extremists. muslims can 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 draw the line between those who would do the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theater and those to pass up scripture, religious traditions that are deserving of broad support. those are difficult lines to police.

that is the 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 always 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, right 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 overturned, 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 castle 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 think the best way to address it that is most relevant to this race is to talk about the issue of cap and trade. the winner of 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 need 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 concerned 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 fascinating 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 that things that greenhouse gases or a concern for the long term. i think we need to take steps to rein them and 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 stand 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 businesses 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 cells are not currently used broadly in the united states. it's sunday as the promise of being a significant contributor to making 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 got 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 resources. 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 think 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 technology. 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 term. >> 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 earlier. all give you a chance to clarify and explain. harry reid has told you his 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 opponent 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 on 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 went with 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 the republican 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 to 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 raising 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 is why harry reid has told him his pet. i am not against pets, 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 for me. god bless you and god bless delaware. >> i appreciate your attention to tonight's debate. i thank you for the tough questions you have asked them for the top of it -- 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 on 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]

>> delaware voters go to the polls on november 2. here are two campaign ads that are airing in delaware now. >> in america, where jobs are being lost and wages cut in delaware, where the economy is suffering and families are losing their homes, there is one man who stood against the tide and raised taxes. one man who thought that a 911 calls should be taxed. one man who thought property taxes should be tied to 50% for

a one-man who wants to put the lever on the brink of bankruptcy. chris coons is the tax man. >> i spent eight years working with one of the most innovative companies in the world. i know it takes to help businesses create jobs. we have to invest in education and make the tax code more fair and more predictable for small businesses. we have to prevent companies from shipping jobs overseas. we should do more to invest in labor structure that makes america competitive. if we don't fight for this economy and good jobs, we are giving up on the future. i am chris coons and i approve

this message. >> you can watch many more campaign ads that our politics website. you will find video of debates and other campaign events along with analysis from political reporters. visit us online at c-span.org/ politics. on cspan today, "washington journal" is next live with your phone calls per later, a live news conference with defense secretary robert gates and secretary of state hillary clinton from the nato conference in brussels. tonight, our campaign debate coverage continues with the debate between senate majority leader harry reid and the republican challenger is sharon engel of nevada. in about 45 minutes, the lifting of the ban on deep water oil drilling. we will talk with the natural