money used for abortion. guest: that is a heroic and beautiful choice on both fronts. host: marjorie is the chairman and founder of the system be anthony list. sda-list.org is the website. thank you for being on the "washington journal." the executive director of emily's list appeared on c-span on "newsmakers" last week. that is it today. one last article -- this is in a booklet the wall street journal" that the u.s. plans to increase military aid for pakistan. that is the article in the paper today. it goes on to say that pakistan received about $1.90 billion in military assistance from the u.s. in the fiscal 2010, including $300 million in grants to buy defense equipment.

the new package of equipment would average out to $100 million additional per year. but the size of the grants would start lower and grow over time. at 6:30 p.m. this afternoon at the brookings institution c-span will cover live a panel on pakistan and the u.s. including the foreign minister of pakistan, and richard holbrooke, the special represent give for afghanistan and pakistan, the u.s. department at state -- 6:30 p.m. this evening on c-span. back at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> pakistan's civilian and military leaders will be in washington today for three days of high-level talks. on the table is a multi-year security agreement. if the brookings institute will be hosting a discussion with pakistan's foreign minister, richard holbrooke and we will have live coverage starting at 6:30 p.m. eastern. at 7:00 p.m., secretary of state hillary clinton will be addressing the american task force, talking about peace talks between israeli and palestinian leaders. you can see live coverage on c- span2. >> voters had to the polls in less than two weeks. follow the key races and the candidates on the c-span networks with archived debates,

and at our politics page, candidates's twitter feeds, and other sources. follow the election coverage right through election day. >> president obama is headed west today on a five-state campaign swing. he will raise money and rally voters in washington state, california, and nevada. the president will also stumped for gubernatorial candidates in oregon, california and minnesota. earlier, president obama criticized a republican campaign urging latinos not to vote. the ad has been pulled in the nevada. the republican group had planned to run the commercials in nevada, florida, california, texas, and colorado. the midterm election are less

than two weeks away. each night on c-span we are showing debates from key races. tonight, we will start with live coverage of the illinois governor's debate. then, florida, pennsylvania, and connecticut. the candidates in florida as u.s. senate debate held their fourth of six -- of six debates. the democratic candidate, kendrick meek is running last in the polls. the debate last night is just under one hour.

>> welcome to the debate. the three candidates vying for this senate seat are governor charlie crist, the independent candidate, united states representative, kendrick meek, a democrat, and the former speaker of the florida house, marco rubio. the candidates will be signaled by a clot. our panel concludes -- includes the tampa tribune, the miami herald, and cvs four political's reporter. -- political reporter. our time is limited, and the issues are endless. we will get started. marco rubio won the toss to go first. we will begin with the issue

florida voters care most about, jobs. our unemployment rate is two percentage points higher than the national average. nearly one in eight floridians that want to work can not get a job. you oppose the federal stimulus which, by all accounts, save the jobs of firefighters and teachers. without the stimulus money, when things have not been worse? >> first of all, the thank you for having the debate. let's talk about the stimulus package first. it was supposed to stimulate the economy. it failed to do that. since it passed, over 3 million americans have lost their jobs. the unemployment rate in florida and national it is substantially higher than it was before it passed. it failed to do everything it was supposed to do. and the other hand, it has contributed to the national debt. there were other alternatives.

it was not about doing the stimulus or nothing at all. it begins by acknowledging that jobs are not rated by politicians. u.s. senators, presidents, do not create jobs. they are treated by everyday people that start a business. what we need our leaders in washington to do is to create an environment. an environment where expanding a business is easier, not harder. that is not what we have gotten. everything that's happened over there has made it harder, not easier for jobs to be created. but as the important thing the next u.s. senator from florida needs to realize. >> charlie crist, the unemployment rate has soared during your tenure. why should for the voters' trust you? >> this is a tough four years,

probably the toughest four years in the history of our state. it is easy to govern when money is flowing. it is hard to govern when money is tight. it was important to take the recovery act money for one simple reason, because i care about the people of our state. if my opponent, marco rubio had been your governor, 20,000 educators tonight would not be employed. another 60,000 of our fellow floridians would not have that paycheck coming to their family every week in order to put food on their table. that is not compassionate i think it is important that we understand what else to stimulus did. it cut $300 billion in taxes. that is important for us. how did we do it? investing in things that were important to people, like new home buyers. i talk to people in the housing

industry every day. some homes are starting to sell because first-time home buyers got the tax credit. other things the stimulus did was to invest in infrastructure. we all know if infrastructure is invested in, you get more jobs. >> mr. kendrick meek, you, as opposed to many democrats in congress who believe the bush tax cuts should not expire, even for wealthier americans, including the former budget director for president obama who wrote it would amount to the largest tax increase in american history, say no one wants to make a stagnating job market worse, you want those cuts for americans to expire. you have not proposed cuts in taxes for corporations. how will that create jobs for floridians. >> thank you very much for the

questions and for moderating this debate. i am glad we are having this debate. it is about the future of this country, and the future of our state. i think it is important that we look at the stimulus. we need to look at it as a tool but said the platform from stopping us from going into a depression. in the last debate, mr. marco rubio and mr. charlie crist stand side-by-side in making sure the special interest and the super wealthy get their tax cut. i pointed out the fact that middle-class families under the income of two to $50,000 would have to pay $6,000 a year on that particular tax cut for those americans to get a tax cut. i am for middle-class tax cuts. i am for child credits. i am for tax cuts that will help people get back on their feet. they are advocating tax cuts for

the super-wealthy and those that are privileged. we had a different economic times during the time those tax cuts were given. now, we are in a super deficit. if they believe in trickle-down economics. it will not work now. i'm protecting those that were part. >> turning to the federal deficit, non-partisan economists argue that to avoid medium or long-term federal bankruptcy, either taxes must be raised on all americans, where huge entitlement reforms must begin, beginning with so/security. -- social security. beginning with you, mr. charlie crist, do you reyes taxes if it comes down to that choice, or begin to cut benefits, and if so, precisely where and high -- where and how?

>> now is the time to cut taxes. this is where the speaker and i agree. we have to cut taxes to put more of your money into your pocket. we have to do it for small businesses, too. these are not the wealthy. these are the people that create jobs in our state and our country. if it is important to have those tax cuts come about, and make sure you have more of your hard-earned dollars in your pocket instead of having government spell -- spend that money in a way that is probably wasteful. >> the choice economists argue is to raise taxes or cut benefits. given that choice, first and foremost, which is your choice? cut the social security benefits, or raise taxes to cover those benefits? >> neither one. that is a false choice. we need to be smart, bruton, and

protect our sit -- prudent, and protect our seniors. it is a promise that was made to them. i am the only one in this election that said if elected your u.s. senator, i will protect and preserve social security as we know it today because it was a promise. once we get through this difficult time, we can do what we did in florida. i am a fiscal conservative. i slashed the budget more than any governor in the history of the state without hurting education, without hurting seniors, without hurting health care. we did it by being smart, targeted, and doing it the way i would want to do it in washington. >> mr. kendrick meek, leading democrats acknowledged that we would have to put everything on the table eventually, including social security.

you, like the governor had not talked much about those tough choices. if it comes down to having to raise taxes or cut social security benefits, which is your choice, and if you cut or change benefits, precisely how do you do it? how you answer that question after running for this office for the lead before the last two years. >> it is important to pay attention to what the governor just said. he said very little. he said what we have been hearing through the years for washington, d.c. let's cut taxes, and everything will work out. when it comes to entitlement programs, we have to be able to weed out the waste. the -- it is the second largest deficit reduction that has been

passed. marco rubio and charlie crist want to repeal it. it is important to know that we have to make tough decisions. when it comes down to dealing the issue which it with the issue of how to get there, we roll up our sleeves, and make sure we work on the issues. the tax cut that the governor and marco rubio are talking about our tax cuts that will take the country into deeper holes. $700 billion for the super- wealthy will bring about the fall of many of these programs if we do not make tough decisions. the next center of florida must be a protector, not of the special interests, but of the people of the state. >> i am not hearing from either one what will happen to social security when we know full benefits will not be able to pay doc -- be paid out in 2037. neither of you is proposing a specific resolution.

>> with all due respect, report after report does indicate what you just said. that is important for you to hear. social security is solvent until at least 2037, or 2041, yet there are people like marco rubio who want to tinker with it. it does not make sense. it is one of the few programs that actually worked in washington, d.c., and typically, it is what politicians attack. >> it is important that we expand middle-class jobs. both of these gentlemen want to give tax cuts to companies that ship jobs overseas. i want to give tax cuts to companies that stay here. expanding the middle class in florida will help the social security trust fund. i think it is very very important. 40% of these floridians would go

into poverty. if someone wants to change social security, they are going to have to go through me. i take my orders from the people that i represent and those that would vote for me to protect them, and not the special interest. >> i have yet to hear hard specifics. let me put the question to you. you have been assailed for saying we will need to look at entitlement reform over the long term, and that anything less is simply someone wanting to be elected to office. what specifically do you propose? higher taxes, or beginning to make reforms, and precisely what are the reforms you are willing to consider? >> i have to set the record straight and answer your question. let me set the record straight. the governor has repeated something that is an old political trick -- schering

seniors about social security. if you are over the age of 55, a current beneficiary or about to retire, i do not believe there should be any changes for social security. there are a lot of reasons sitting in -- for that, and one is sitting in the audience, my mother. she depends on social secured. i would never support any changes that would adversely impact her or anyone in her demographic. what you have not heard is a plan to solve social security. what you effort from the governor is that there are no problems with social security. that is not true. for years, congress has been raiding the social security trust fund. they use it to pay for all sorts of things. republicans and democrats have done it. by the year 2037, the year my daughter turns my age, it is not that far away.

the closer we get, the harder it is to solve these problems. younger people like myself, 20, 30 years from retirement, need to understand that we have to discuss different options, whether it is expanding their retirement age, or indexing for younger workers. >> indexing? >> the way the initial benefit the set. these are options. the congressional budget office has issued 30 recommendations. the fee for all illegal aliens, in which governor charlie crist said robert bryce supported it. he said he is never heard of it. >> let's do a quick question of what you would say to this boater. -- this voter.

stimulus we have talked about. there are different scenarios, and each has a different reaction from taxpayers. we'll start with kendrick meek. what do you tell a small businesswoman, an importer who imports from colombia, who is trying to hire more workers, but unfortunately, she looks up the federal stimulus, and she sees all of the money having gone to helping labor unions hire more workers, or keeping teachers, police, and firefighters hired, but nothing for her. what did it out a small business woman like that. we look at the projects that are ongoing. some businesses have been able to take advantage. some have received a tax cut

from the stimulus plan. the stimulus is the past. the future is right now, someone appointed by the governor, and someone a member of marco rubio's party, did not lift a finger to move the small business bill forward in the u.s. senate. the bottom line is this, if marco rubio was the united states senator, he would have voted against the stimulus. the real issue is this, someone willing to take on this issue. i am there for the small businessman. i m standing up for tax cuts for small businesses. if you look to the stimulus, it was to help start infrastructure projects, and agreed a initiatives. , also, it was to make sure that we provide a baseline to provide

for the government to carry out the services that that business person and other people will be able to take advantage of. >> marco rubio, what would you tell a hotel worker who is cleaning rooms and her husband has been in construction for the last 10 years, and he has lost his job for the last 18 months, and they are counting for -- on the unemployment extension, part of the stimulus money, and all she thinks about is marco rubio wanting to extend tax cuts? >> two things i would say is that i have said unemployment benefits should be extended, but we just need to pay for them. >> where would that be? >> held on spent stimulus money?

there is all sorts of money that has not been spent and has added to the debt. find savings. i do not think anyone will argue that you will be able to find savings after the spending spree this a demonstration has been on. it is an atrocious number. that leads me back to a point that was discussed earlier. you asked about choosing between tax cuts and spending reductions. if that is a false choice because the reason our debt is growing is not because americans are not paying enough in taxes, but because there has been a proposed budget that has massive tax increases and spending increases. if they are so massive that will double the national debt by the middle of the decade, and triple it by the end. one trillion will be barred every year to pay the interest on the debt. half of that interest will go overseas. no generation of americans has

ever done this to their children. >> charlie crist, what would you tell a doctor that treats medicare patients, looking at the stimulus money, saying there has been no help for me while congress has gone ahead and pass health care reform. every year congress decides to postpone the inevitable vote to contain those costs. >> i would tell the doctor you need to send an independent to the united states senate, otherwise you will end up with a hard right republican, of heart of what democrat, who cannot find middle ground. this is the problem with washington, d.c., not being able to get things done. they're stuck in gridlock. if either of these guys go to washington, they will get in the corner when they get there, and

fight everything that makes sense. >> that is a good talking point, but how would you deal with the issue of medicare payments? that is a recurring issue? >> by working toward a common- sense solution to get things done. that is what is frustrating to the people that are watching tonight. all they hear is that they have to do with our way, or the highway. what happened with health care, which i opposed, was that the democrats just ram things through. that is what kendrick meek voted for. we need to do what is right for the people. the president started out saying he was onto it reached across the aisle and make sure we get everyone involved. it has not happened. it needs to happen. whether it is the medicare issue, the hotel worker, every

florida in watching tonight, they need to have someone that says enough is enough. i am running against the entire system. >> thank you. mr. marco rubio, on health care, throughout your campaign you have condemned the obama administration's health care reform plan, and as i understand it, any plan that requires all americans have health insurance, even though it one of your supporters, mitt romney, a implemented such a plant in massachusetts. what is your solution for the system we have now? for most americans it is grossly expensive and inundated with red tape. what would you do, if not what mitt romney and barack obama have done? >> we are the only candidate that has actually offered a

concrete plan. let me tell you what is wrong with the health-care bill that does test. this broken every promise that they made. they said if you're happy with your insurance company -- coverage, no one would lose your coverage. we were told it would make medicare more solvent. we know that is not true. " they told us it would lower the cost of health care. that is not true, that are going up across the board. what i propose a that the health insurance industry as upside down. the health care consumer has no tourists. you usually get your insurance from your employer. the only choice you have is a doctor's name. i would change that to allow every individual to buy health insurance from any company in america. by allowing every individual to buy health insurance for

themselves, to have the same benefit their employer has. by allowing small companies and associations to pull together to buy insurance. >> mr. charlie crist, you have also said you oppose the obama health reform plan and would vote to repeal it, replace it. he said it cost too much. you have -- you said it cost too much. your proposal as governor for solving health-care problems has provided health to only about 6200 people in florida. what contribution you have to this debate? >> a lot. i think obama care was off of the charts. it has taxed too much.

it is not the way to go. it was rammed through. what did we do in florida? we passed the plan called cover florida. you talk about how only six to two hundred people have signed up for it, but it took health insurance from an average of about $700 a month for the uninsured to -- and reduced it to about $150 a month. i met with a lady just last month in century village, here in boca raton, where we are tonight, who said thank you for testing, or florida. what she told me was she was not able to afford coverage for her son, who had recently been diagnosed with cancer. she was able to get coverage because of cover florida, and he is now in remission. that might only be one family, but that one family means a lot to me.

this is the kind of compassion you deserve in a public servant. i have been your governor. you know you can trust what i will tell you, and i think it is important we have people in public office that understand even if it is one person, it matters to the person, that family, and that young boy. >> let's turn the question around. boeing announced large health- care increases, blaming the health-care program. a lot of americans are seeing increases, and according to projections, the increases will probably get worse. at the same time, the plan did cut the medicare advantage plan, which a lot of floridians depend on, and most koreans say they are opposed to it. how do you defend it to -- most floridians say they are opposed to it.

how do you defend it? >> it is important enough that something needed to be done. the last election cycle was all about health care. republicans and democrats had a plan. the governor calls it obama care. i am pretty sure the governor and marco rubio will call it obama care. the real issue is that it is health care. people have rights now they did not have before the passage. people can act like everything is fine. the reason it was an issue that is because businesses were going out of business, and something needed to be done. when it comes down to medicare, it has done more to help medicare take away from insurance companies. insurance companies are playing chicken. they want to jack up premiums and copays. what was the excludes last year, and the year before that?

-- the excuse last year, and the year before that? the next senator needs to stand up against these companies and not cave in. i'm shocked to hear the window talking about obama care. i think it is important to know that you need a leader that will stand up regardless of what the polls say when it comes to standing up for floridians. it is mind-boggling to me how you can stand there and start throwing out accusations about obama care. >> governor, i'll give you a quick rebuttals. >> when we were on the beach, we were protecting florida. >> you are for offshore drilling? >> i am opposed to it. >> now you are.

>> you were there with sarah palin st. at drill, the drill. >> i need to interrupt you. we need to take a break. before you vote, we will be back in to the will minutes. please do not go away. >> welcome back. this debate is being seen across the state. we will get back to where we left off, with kendrick meek san the governor has a flip-flop on some issues. in one of the fables, he talked about the beasts and birds, and how the bat would not take a

side. the moral of the story was that he who is neither one thing or another has no friends. who are you now, and how will you vote? >> i am the same guy i have always been. i am charlie crist, a fiscal conservative, and a social moderate. i believe we have to spend our money wisely. we have to make sure your taxes are low, and that small businesses have the opportunity to provide more jobs for the people across the state of florida. i also believe in live and let live. i am running against marco rubio, police said a woman's right to choose ought to be taken away by literally overturning roe vs. wade. i do not think that is right for florida or for women. i believe in protecting senior citizens. marco rubio talks about raising the age of eligibility for social security, and putting all

these things including privatisation on the table. the only things on the table to me are making sure the other peoples' hands stay out of social security. we have a duty to protect and preserve it for the people of our state and the american people. i believe in common sense, not nonsense. ironman against an extreme, right wing candidate, who believes in taking away women's rights and punishing teachers. >> kendrick meek, you're voting record is almost identical to nancy pelosi. your plot from could have been written by the white house. at a time when the administration's positions are extremely unpopular among floridians, and almost two- thirds of the american population? we are on the wrong track, why should they elect someone that is closely associated with those

policies? >> i think it is important that people have health care. i think it is important that we stand up to wall street. that is what got us in this mess. i believe in housing reform. i put legislation within the housing bill that went after those that attack floridians, taking them into foreclosure fraudulently. i look forward to standing for things that work. offshore drilling, i was against the administration's proposal. when it comes down for flooding -- fighting for floridians, i am on their side. i'm standing between two individuals have been in a room together dealing with the state budget, and issues facing floridians. they have had conversations. when minimum-wage was up, i was the only one that stood for minimum-wage for working people. i'm the only person that fought for health care.

when it came to fighting for our environment with green jobs initiatives, i am the only one, and i am the all the candidates that will stand up on behalf of floridians, and not special interests. >> mr. marco rubio, you are running on what many commentators have described as an anti-latino platform. you oppose the pathway to citizenship. in support english as an official language. all of those issues appeal to the most conservative elements of the republican party, and the tea party, and may do a darling of the tea party across the country. how can florida voters feel comfortable that you're not beholden to 2 -- the tea party? >> i reject the characterization

of my platform with regards to americans of hispanic descent. my platform is we and forced a lot. there is no one that is more pro legal immigration than i am. my parents were immigrants. i've grown up around immigration. i think it is an important part of our heritage, and a key part of our future. i just do not think america can be the only country that does not enforce immigration laws. we need to have a legal immigration system that works. we resort to characterization's of political positions. you have heard talk of extremism. the things i believe and are simple to understand. i believe the economy does not grow because of politicians. it grows because of people to start businesses or expand existing businesses. i believe the government cannot continue spending more money than it takes in. i leave the world is a safer and better place when america is the

strongest country in the world paid these other things i believe in, and i will stand for if i'm elected. >> issues of character and integrity consistently come up, among floridians, many of whom say all politicians are the same. i want to ask about issues that come up about your background. kendrick meek, you once tried to plan money in a stackhouse now facing charges. all of that was while your mother was being paid a fee by stackhouse. you claimed to not be aware of the least some of those ties. why should anyone consider that any more than a typical business as usual in washington? >> my track record does not speak to anything that is unethical. it is important to note that i have been a state trooper. i have voted for every ethics

bill that does come before the state legislature or the house of representatives. the bottom line is that i represent a district. " blini the administration that will put people back to work. -- we need an administration that will put people back to work. it is important for floridians to know that i'm working, elected official that will dive into problems, and deal with them. it is important to note that this state needs strong leadership that has integrity. that is the reason why i took the time to go through of this state getting signatures, looking floridians in the eye, and asking them to sign a petition. that is why i won the primary, and why i will win this general election. i am connected to every day

floridians. i'm a public servant, not a politician. >> should you have known more about those ties, or avoided them altogether? >> it is important to know that if i had to do it all over again, i would have paid closer attention. i can tell you that there are no improprieties there. >> mr. marco rubio, you have had to pay back about $16,000 in personal expenses run up on a florida republican party-issued credit card. you had a home near foreclosure at one point. you chanting yourself as a watchdog of the federal budget. why should people believe you would be a good watchdog? >> a personal expenses have never been paid for by the republican party. >> you did put on a gop-issued credit card.

>> i paid for out of my own pocket. the most important thing to understand is i have never had personal expenses paid for by the republican party. these are important issues. they cannot be the only issue. let me tell you what is now being discussed. we are halfway through the debate, less than two weeks from election plan, -- from election day, we have not heard a serious plan on medicare, social security, and health- care plan. this election cannot be like the other one. the stakes are too high. we are literally been deciding what kind of country our children will inherit. we are on the verge of being the first generation of americans to leave the next generation worse off. we will not fix that by sending typical politicians to washington that are willing to say or do whatever they have to say or do to win the election.

we already have too many people like that in washington, d.c. >> character does go into judgments. you, mr. charlie crist, pushed over strong objectives for jim greer as chairman of the republican party. he now faces charges of alleged misuse of hundreds of thousands of dollars of party donations. you stood by him. why did you do so, and what does it say about your judgment? >> you do the best you can when you are picking people, whether it is to help out by former political party, an agency, or a judge. that applies in every instance and every appointment that i have made. when you do the best that you can, sometimes you are disappointed. it happens from time to time. it happened to governor john

bullish. -- jeb bush. it happens. all you can do is the best that you can. i want to talk about what is happened as it relates to my republican opponent. there is an expression called play to pay. what does that mean? let me relate it to you. when the speaker was the speaker of the florida house, he had a home in south florida. it was for sale, and before it took place, he was on the other side of a personal injury protection issue. it was a doctor that he -- that had an interest in that issue. once he sold the home for $380,000, cash, the speaker's position changed, and miraculously, a bad bill went through. >> let me set the record straight on that i will tell you why this is happening.

>> it is happening because it was in the paper just about a week ago. >> let me set the record straight and tall you why this is happening. -- tell you why this is happening. >> it is happening because you deserve to know. >> what the governor said was categorically false. if you want the details, you can go to our web site. it was an arm-length transition. the gentleman that's mom still lives in the home. we reduced the price. the legislation failed to pass in the fourth house, and did not test for months later until a deal was cut to fix it. let's talk about why this is happening. the governor is running on the idea that he is a centrist. yet, in front of the live audience, he's just launched a

vicious personal attack against me. this is a personal attack. why is this happening? the governor is not a common sense conservative. on the day he switched partner, -- parties, the reporter -- a reporter was with him, and his last call before you switched was to the poster -- pollster. >> let's move on to more substance. >> a little practiced on the filibuster over there. [laughter] >> let's get into serious business on the war on terror. we talk about the generational stakes as far as the costs. let's look at the war on terror. the public support is starting to wane. when do we know that we have

done what we need to do in the afghan war? >> let's understand what the goal has to be. the goal is to have a stable afghan government, and a strong civil society that can support it. that is the goal. that is important not just because of afghanistan. they are a neighbor with pakistan, which possesses a nuclear weapons. afghanistan were to fall into chaos, it would be a base of operation to destabilize and ultimately overthrow the government in pakistan. a regime were to take control in pakistan, you would have a radical regime in possession of a nuclear weapon. i think general petraeus and the president have it right, provide security and safety so when afghan government can take root, and the people can begin to govern themselves. that is the goal. the stakes are extraordinarily

high. it is important for our leaders to explain that. i do not support an arbitrary withdrawal from the region. i think it is important that we be successful. when you announce that you will be leaving on a date certain, you open yourself up to failure. >> same question. >> we actually agree pretty much on this point. the most important thing government can do is make sure we are safe and secure. the founding fathers understood it it. the war on terrorism must continue until we are saved and secure. we have heard reports about the possibility of terrorist attacks in europe. we suffer severely as a nation when this occurred in new york city, pa., and at the pentagon.

i think what the president is trying to do is right. one of the things that encourages me the most about the policy is that general petraeus is the man leading our troops on the ground it would be laudable and good if we would be able to withdraw those troops next summer, a gold the administration has expressed. however, i would be a cautionary there to say that the only way that would occur is if general petraeus, and others on the ground, have the facts and circumstances that support that withdrawal. if we have to stay, and make sure america continues to be safe, it is the first and foremost thing we need to do. >> let's try to keep our answers brief. >> kendrick meek, same question. both of my opponents agree with the approach. i'm the only candidate that

essentially been to afghanistan, pakistan, and iraq. i've spoken to our men and women in harm's way. god bless them. it is not how long we will stay in, it is how long our coalition partners will stay with us. it is important that we work with the secretary of state, the president, and general petraeus in keeping that coalition together. we cannot do it alone. if this is not just about america. it is about the world. it is important to note that we could stay there, as my opponent says, as long as we can. i understand what we are going through. a lot of folks do not like to talk about the fact that we have mothers and fathers tetanus several birthdays, weddings, funerals, because there are serving this country. that is why i was endorsed by the veterans of foreign wars because they know i understand those issues. i think it is important that we

have policy that is sound. it is very important. >> i'm going to ask that you keep your answers to 30 seconds. >> charlie crist, on immigration, you have advocated a path to citizenship. marco rubio says that is no more than code for amnesty. let me ask you to imagine that you have are speaking to a group of people who of waited years to enter this country legally. how do defend would you advocate to that group? >> what i am more concerned about is what is best for florida and for america. we have a leaven million people to reach 11 million people, to 15 million people that are not citizens here. it is fundamental that we secure our borders. i also agree we need a path of citizenship that is provided for

the people that are here. it is what president bush, senator mccain, and center martina's wanted to do. it is the right approach. >> kendrick meek, you have been in congress for eight years. in that time no one thinks our problem with illegal immigration has been solved. it is widely seen as a national security problem. how long will it take, and why has it not happened? >> when i get to the senate, it will happen the problem has been the united states senate looking at polls -- happen. the problem has been indicted states senate looking at polls -- united states senate looking at polls. marco rubio would like to see stalling this comprehensive

immigration reform, say we want to protect our borders. we have wanted that for the last 15 years. we have to move forward. >> you have already spoken on the emigration. you were opposed to the dream act. let me pretend you have an imaginary audience of illegal immigrants that are part of the united states service that have just deployed from -- return from deployment in afghanistan. tell them why they should not be citizens. >> children that were brought here as young children by their parents, and want to continue their education, and contribute to our country, i am in favor of helping to accommodate them as a part of our modernization of our system. the dream that goes well beyond that. it extends to people up to 35 years of age. it could apply to all boards of

two million people in our country. >> we need to proceed to closing statements. >> thank you to leadership of florida, and all of you who have turned in. i got into this race because -- despite significant items. this election is about the future of our country. the choice before us is clear. we will either be the first americans ever to lead our children worse off than ourselves, or allow our children to be the most prosperous, and freest americans ever lived. that choice is up to us. it is up to the decisions we're making right now. the road that washington has us on, a road that my opponents both support, is the wrong direction. if we're willing to send people to washington, d.c., to stand up to that, and offer an alternative that stands up -- to

confront the challenges. we will lead our children. >> mr. charlie crist. >> thank you. i'm running for the united states said as an independent for you because washington is broken. they cannot get anything done for you, the people that are watching. it is very frustrating. as your governor, we have been able to get things done for the people of florida. we need to realize there is an extreme right candidate in this case, mr. marco rubio, who was proud of it. he says he is a tea party guy, and he wears it as a badge of honor. i believe women should have the opportunity to make the decision about their lives as it relates to roe vs. wade.

i think senior citizens deserve to have a united states senator that will defend them and preserve a social security. we have to preserve our teachers. i'm public asking for your vote. >> thank you very much. i am glad we had this debate. the earlier today, i was with bill clinton in st. petersburg, and i will be with him here in orlando tomorrow, talking about a clear vision for the country. it is important to note that there is a clear choice in this debate. i'm the only pro-choice candidate. i'm the only can write that stands up for working men and women. i went up against tallahassee for smaller sizes. i'm the only candidate that will stand up to while companies that want to drill off of the coast of florida.

there might the issues we disagree with, but one thing i will not be mistaken on that is not being able to have a clear vision for ford, and not standing up for you. i want to be your next yet states senator. let the world and now -- united states senator. when you vote, we all win. thank you. >> thank you, kendrick meek, and to everyone that i participated in the debate tonight. we ask you all to please vote on november 2. thank you for watching tonight. have a good night. [applause] >> the midterm election are less than two weeks away, and each night we are showing the dates from key races around the nation. tonight, we will start at 8:00 p.m. eastern with live coverage of the illinois governor debate.

then, it is florida condo governor debate, pa.'s u.s. senator debate, and connecticut's u.s. senate debate. it is being reported today that in the pennsylvania debate -- senate race, the democratic candidate has pulled ahead. both candidates will debate tonight. you can see it at 10:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. "the washington post" is reporting that a liberal- leaning pact is putting money into democratic house seats considered to be in danger. they're spending nearly two million dollars for campaign ads in a half-dozen races. >> and the final weeks of campaign 2010, the c-span video library is a great resource. hear from candidates, analysts,

and reporters. it is all free, on-line, any time. civilian and military leaders will be here in washington for three days of high-level talks, on the table is a multi-year security agreement. the brookings -- the brookings institute will hold a discussion. we will have live coverage starting at 6:30 p.m. eastern. at 7:00 p.m., secretary of state hillary clinton will address the american task force on the peace talks between israeli and palestinian leaders, and and and test now, two weeks after the talks started. it can see live coverage of that on c-span2. can rates in the illinois senate race held their debate last night. alexi giannoulias is running

against mark kirk. the races been rated a toss up. polls are showing 15% of illinois voters are still undecided. >> tonight's moderator is george stephanopoulos. >> good evening, and welcome. it is great to be here tonight. the race could not be tighter between mark kirk and alexi giannoulias. their report -- the debate is being presented by the league of women voters in illinois. joining me is and the shaw,

executive director of the better government association. . . over the last decade the congressman has been an architect of these decisions. why would we send the same people that created this mess back to washington, d.c.? you deserve a senator that will

fight for the truth and stand up to the special interests of rural washington, d.c.. you will always know where i stand. i cannot promise that this will no one will fight for work harder to make sure that you and your family have a shot at the american dream. >> i would like to thank channel 7 for having us here today. help grow our economy. america was once a creditor nation, now it is a top debtor to foreign interests. every american born today already owes the government $42,000. i will vote to spend, borrow, and tax less to help save our economy. i am a fiscal conservative, a

social moderate, and national security of. a centers that will bring thoughtful leadership to the united states. >> we will start with the questions. >> there has been a lot of mudslinging and a notable lack of high-level this course on the important issues facing the next the illinois senate. to what extent should he be held accountable by the voters of illinois, the negative tone of the campaign has been disappointing to everyone. >> when we vote on november 2, it will be about economic philosophy. if you are happy with the direction of the government right now, trillions in debt, increasing the accelerating the growing of the government into our national life, my opponent is your candidate. there is a growing voice in

illinois that once a check and balance that does not think we should raise taxes in springfield for washington, d.c.. we need a new small business bill of rights. policies to help out the real number one employers. small businesses. 80% of the job losses. we do not know much about how the current congress has helped them at all. >> this has been a brutal campaign. but it has been brutal for a lot of families. our campaign has tried to talk about ideas, investing in early childhood education, changing the way that things are done in washington, d.c.. that is politics. to hear congressman kirk say that he taxes, boroughs, and spends less is a tremendous irony. no one in this race has actually tax, spend, or borrowed more.

you can call yourself a fiscal conservative all that you want, but we went from record surpluses to record deficit. part of the over-spending, over- taxing, borrowing egos in washington, d.c.. to claim you are a fiscal conservative when the record does not prove that, if your thrilled with the way that washington, d.c. works, politics as usual, congressman curt and karl rove, he is your man. if you want fresh leadership and new ideas, i would be honored to have your vote. >> let me follow up by addressing the elephant in the room. character. what you tell voters about a man that embellishes a resume. what do you say this someone whose bank makes fun savory loans and whose student loan program collapsed. >> the military record is a

painful process. i learned a lot of lessons from that. i apologize to the people of illinois. i released all of the years of my office to fit this report, service in afghanistan and northern washington. it has made me a better advocate and veteran for the men and women that use the uniform. >> i am proud of the community bank that my father started 30 years ago. let's be clear, no one has ever suggested that the bank has ever done anything illegal, or improper, ever. the difference between myself and congressman kirk is that i always tell the truth. values matter. we may not always agree, but you will always know where i stand. that is what we need now more than ever. people are sick and tired of washington, d.c. politics more than ever.

i hope that we can have that discussion here tonight. >> each of your campaigns have been dogged by personal stories from the past. mr. kirk, allegations of embellish resonate. mr. alexi giannoulias, your family's bank. looking back at how you responded to those in the media, do you think he should have done anything differently? that your statements may have discouraged voters? >> i think that what i ran for state treasurer, i probably should have done a better job, frankly, explaining the way that community banks decide to approve or deny a loan. again, we need to understand the facts. no one has ever accused my father's business of ever doing anything illicit or improper. congressman kirk, karl rove,

they have said a lot of things that are not true and deeply offensive. i am very proud of my father and the fact that he came to this country to help thousands of people achieve the american dream. having cherry pick a few individuals of thousands, making a nasty political advertisement, a business owner will tell you that running a business is not a straight line. of course mistakes made. there are people that you wish you never would have done business with. talking about was right for moving this country forward and who will fight for middle-class families, there is a stark choice in this race. i want to fight for middle-class families that have been destroyed by this recession. >> there is a big difference here, i took ownership as naval officers were trained to take command, be responsible and accountable. i am and that is why i corrected the record.

the difference between myself and my opponent is that he made a number of mistakes. betting his bank's future on risky real-estate loans. loans to well known convicted felons and mobsters. even this mystery trip to florida, where he ran a prostitution ring. when we saw the broadway bank collapse, you took no responsibility whatsoever. when we saw the bright star program risk the savings of many families that trusted you, that was not your fault either. the difference is in accountability. i have made mistakes, but i have found and corrected them. my opponent, nothing is really his fault. >> typical, washington, d.c., change the subject sleight of hand. i have seen the congressman's fitness reports, and they are

impressive, but nowhere do they answer the questions that have plagued him. i looked at as fitness reports. nowhere does it say that he served in iraq. nowhere does it say that he was shot at by peacekeepers. nowhere does it say that he was shot at at all. >> the question was about how you handle your own situation and if you should have done differently. >> and mention, when talking about the realities of community banks, the congressman is holding himself accountable. but that is not true. i have looked at the business reports. i asked him if he was shot at and the congressman never answered the question. why, with this record, would you not tell the truth? why would you make this stuff up? were you shot at or not? >> the ultimate irony of the man who spends most of his campaign for the senate criticizing his military image of my military

record, you have never served a day. i have put my life on the line for the united states, as many of my fellow veterans have done. you were back in the rear, with of the gear. i understand that you made that decision. when you look at these bank loans to felons and mobsters, the people that were your business associates, that on national television admitting that she did not know the extent of the criminal activity from a federally licensed institution that collapsed, transferring its $390 million bill onto the back of the federal deposit insurance corp., you should have some apologizing to you as well. -- to do as well. >> congressman curt, you have made fiscal responsibility a centerpiece of your campaign,

citing your opposition to the obama administration's economic stimulus because of its cost. what different courses of action would you have supported in 2009 to stimulate the economy and get unemployed americans back to work? >> if we had had a much smaller bill with a larger amount of money for infrastructure, it could have gained bipartisan support. a surprising amount of the stimulus spend money on programs that were rejected by the congress for many years. the failure of the stimulus, remember, we were promised that unemployment would top out at 8% by the administration. we have seen a raft of wasteful spending stories about what the stimulus tried to spend money on. and a real failure of its record. we could have build a bipartisan record on that bill. but the lasting legacy of the stimulus will be a near $1

trillion debt level on the financial future of our children. much of that money, borrowed from creditors that gave it to sam, expecting to be repaid with interest by our children. >> again, fax and records matter. congressman curt voted for every record budget deficit. more than all of the administration's in the history of the united states combined. president obama was handed a deficit today that he took office, another congressman voted against the largest tax cut in the country's history. the question is, what would have happened if we did not have it? economists across the board will tell you that it helped them avoid the second great depression. >> comet -- congressman curt, be

more specific about what you would have supported by about getting the economy righted. >> one of the tragedies of the stimulus was that it limited projects to shovel ready projects. meaning that the big payoff funding the o'hare modernization project, or a new system for the river. if that was funded, instead what happens, spending nearly $1 trillion, taking nearly all the discarded programs of the table. remember, every dollar by this congress, 40% is borrowed. most of it from abroad. one of the things i did after the stimulus was i went to the bureau of public debt and asked -- how much do we have to borrow

every week. he said that between servicing the old debt and the new debt, we have to borrow $160 billion every week to make sure that the treasury does not run out of money. >> following up, will you go to washington to some feet a rubber-stamp for the obama administration? >> i have said repeatedly that i will vote my conscience. if i disagree with the of ministration, i will say so. i will not be a typical, washington, d.c., party hack. i believe in job creation for small businesses. i believe we should have a permanent extension of the tax credit, over $1.50 trillion on the sideline.

urging the sector, private sector, to start hiring, investing in infrastructure. people are hurting in a real way. unfortunately, congress has forgotten how tough it is on main street. with an unemployment rate of under 10% in illinois. >> of all of the candidates in the country, mr. for democrats, 202-737-0002. , you are one of the few -- all the candidates in the country, mr. giannoulias, you are probably closer than most. no matter what happens there will likely be fewer democrats in the senate and house. as a friend of the president, what course correction would you advise the president to take? >> it is important to point out that we are dealing with enormous challenges. we were dealing with them when the president took office. there was an omnibus bill that i

would have voted against. i am sure the president obama should have vetoed it. >> moving forward? >> is a priority not just from a moral perspective, but from a global competitive perspective. doing everything that we can to incentivize the private sector to start hiring. making a better business environment, increasing access to capital. i hear about how tough it is out there to get a loan. to get a line of credit. and if there was a bill that would provide $30 billion to community banks, tax breaks, by the way the congress voted against them, those were measures that were deficit neutral. $1.80 trillion sitting in wall street banks.

$18 trillion in lending. another question for you, congressman kirk. sarah palin says that the republican party needs to follow the dictates of the key party. what is the two-party getting right in getting wrong? >> we are facing a $900 billion tax increase. if you look at congressional leaders and their plan, it threatens a double-dip recession. if we look at the need to cut spending across the board, even the department of defense -- i voted to not add a second engine to the 35 fighter. i supported the secretary's plan for the joint forces. i think that spending restraints and a line-item veto proposal from the president, i

can hear it coming and we support it. any way that we can reduce spending will help out the economy and the long-term future of the united states so that we do not become a debtor nation to other countries. >> mr. giannoulias, on the president's basic approach, what kind of midcourse correction in the agenda needs to be made? >> as i mentioned, learning from a focus on health care reform, that is something that i support. long-term economic stability of this country. that being said, we need a laser light focus on jobs. >> if people are not working, the children cannot afford to go to college. losing a job is more than just losing a paycheck, it affects the community and morale.

we will do everything we can to create private-sector jobs. >> i think that the tea party focus on fiscal conservatives is good. if u.s. man of my independence from the republican party, i have backed up stem cell research, funding for low-income children and health insurance. but conyers kirk bill, making sure it is the law of the land. making sure that we of subsidies for oil in the house of representatives. when the daily herald endorsed me over my opponent, he called me mr. independent. >> gentleman, illinois is a fiscal basket case. virtually bankrupt, the budget deficit within $18 billion unfunded pension liability.

money to bail out the big banks, wall street, a giant insurance companies. to what extent is the federal government responsible for bailing out bankrupt states like illinois? governmental armageddon in states like illinois. >> the illinois economic situation is terrible. of course, these unpaid bills by the state of illinois have gone from $1 billion to $5 billion according to the chicago tribune just this year. all three credit ratings of downgraded the state's debt. recently we went hat in hand to european creditors and asked to borrow money, to pay a higher interest rate than mexico. a country whose economy collapsed in 1982.

i do not think that the federal government to further bailout such fiscal irresponsibility, rolling back many of the spending decisions made by governor blagojevich, now and i did felon, returning fiscal responsibility to the state of illinois, without someone bailing out even more irresponsible decisions. >> bailout by the fed, mr. treasurer? >> i have been screaming from the rooftops of the treasury. why do not have a vote, i have a voice. doubling our national debt, we have found ways to cut discretional spending when needed. cutting the work force by 17%. tahir congressman curt rail against these bailouts, he voted twice for the bailouts of the biggest wall street banks and

the recovery act, which provided emergency stimulus and funding to states and municipalities that have been devastated. the state of illinois, this is a 25 your problem of chronic under-funding of the pension. the truth is, going forward, the state provides to many families. my biggest problem with the recovery act was that when money was given to states and municipalities, there was no requirement for budget constraints. that you would only get this money if you made corrections to how you operated york yearly budget. >> some have suggested a virtual race to the top approached the bailouts. in other words, proved to me that you can cut and you can raise revenues, streamline, then we will talk about some kind of credit. does that make sense?

or are you ruling out bailouts of any kind? >> when money is given to states and municipalities, that was an opportune time to use leverage to make sure that there was accountability, that every year there were not front sweeps and a lack of paying their pension obligations for states and municipalities living within their means. >> congressman curt, are there conditions under which he would support federal assistance in the form of a line of credit? cutting budgets? streamlining? raising revenues? would you maintain a credit line that would allow them to keep government running? >> for example, i voted for an amendment this summer that cut it a large number and it was a surprising set of decisions by the speaker to actually identify many stimulus programs that were a complete waste, cutting funding, providing for other key

programs. my opponent just criticize me for voting for the tarp, but during the endorsement session, after selling it was painful to watch, he admitted he would vote for it as well. and he criticizes me? he could not identify one spending program that he would veto. part of the reason why they endorsed me over my opponent. >> the dream act, legislation aimed at helping children in the united states become legal citizens has become a flashpoint over the contentious debate of immigration. these detail if you support the measure and how you would vote in the senate. >> i am in favor of the dream act and comprehensive immigration reform. this goes to the broader issue.

people want leaders. they want to hear where you stand on different issues. they ask the congressman a few weeks ago where he stands on the dream act. he said he had not seen it yet. that is not leadership. we cannot afford to tear these families apart. these young men and women want a shot at the american dream. >> first we have to restore the trust of the american people and the ability to administer our own borders. right now that trust is completely broken. i am the only spanish-speaking candidate in this race, went to school in mexico. very much care about that country. president calderon has had a struggle with cartels and said he does not control four of the 32 states in mexico. it has become one of the kidnap capitals of the western hemisphere. we do not want that kind of

violence on our side, remembering that illinois has the highest number of per capita gang members in the state. i think that if we restore that trust, closed down the border, making share -- making sure that we accomplish our fundamental mission of understanding was coming in that country, awarding legal immigrants the play by the rules, we open up a space for the rest of the debate. until that trust is restored, we cannot move forward. and that trust should be restored. >> if it came for a vote, how would you vote? >> this is not the time to do this. we have a decisive majority right now for border control, for making sure that the united states can defend itself and making sure that legal entry into the united states is not possible. making sure that the problems that come with that are secure from the american people.

we have leaders in washington right now that are out of touch with the american people. i will tell you that the rank- and-file members that i work with are ready for trust establishment. once we do that, the rest of the debate can help. but until that time we have a set of speakers that are not interested in border control, who have a different agenda. soon we will have new leaders and we will be able to work on this problem by restoring the border control trust. >> you are saying he would vote no? >> we would need border control first. i will tell you that there is a decisive bipartisan majority of democrats and republicans that want to get it done first. >> this is what people are sick and tired of i am washington, d.c.. we ask him a simple question and he refused to tell us the position on the dream that. >> i made my position clear, i

am responsible to 1/2. give them an answer, congressman. tell them so that they can make a decision on how election day. i will always tell you where i am on positions. congressman curt, voting for cap and trade saying he does it for the national security of the united states, then running back and saying that he would never vote that way again? on one afternoon he wants to protect 6000 teachers from losing their jobs, 18 hour later on a two hit -- tuesday afternoon he votes against them? that is not a dream act. this is hearing about whether or not you were shot at. >> earlier this month, during a conference call, you describe your campaigns voter integrity

program, saying it would focus on the south and west sides of chicago, rockford, and metro where your opponents where"jigger -- where your opponents mike ight "jigeer the vote somewhat." can you describe whether this program is targeted at african- americans? >> remember, metro east is 84% nine-african-americans. with poll watchers across america, across the state, making sure that we have a free and fair election, it is no surprise that with the last two chief executives of illinois, convicted felons, that we have a corruption problem in our state. according to the justice department we are one of the most corrupt state in america. we have become a punch line on my television.

my opponent, interestingly, said he would launch his own motor integrity operation. he was surprised when i said that was good. if we have poll watchers across illinois, we have a shot and free and fair elections. >> is clear what happened, congressman curt got caught on tape saying that he wanted voter integrity programs on the south side, the west side of chicago. parts of rockford. calling them the dunes and thugs responsible for what took place in 2000. there has never been an accusation of fraud on the west side or south side of chicago. he is trying to suppress the african-american vote, which is unacceptable and dangerous.

it flies in the spirit -- spirit of our democracy. >> there is no secret that there is corruption in the state of illinois. you, of all people, should know that there is corruption in the state of illinois. >> i am asking you, where is the voter fraud? >> recent conviction. >> one of you is going to white senate. are you going to do anything extraordinary to represent african-americans once you get there? given the fact that there will not be any others there? >> i have spoken to president obama about this. as you know, i worked hard to make sure he became president of the united states. i talked to congressman rush

about the kinds of people we wanted in the senate. >> will you take any extraordinary steps to make sure that the voice is heard? >> absolutely. i want to focus on more integrated approaches to the inner city, working hard to get guns off the streets, providing young men and women in the inner city with options. that is my struggle. >> we need a renaissance in the african-american community so that people are not simply dependent on government programs, but have a business, jobs, dignity and power. one of the ideas that would bring and hope it passes, taking any vacant commercial property, certified by the mayor, with no federal tax for 10 years, making the inner

cities of america excited to build a business again. drying up the supply of the group's four gangs, at the church of smart programs, they helped to do this. finally, we need an expert to take out the big gain leadership itself. >> i have to get to the next question. it comes from facebook.com, a 23-year-old college graduate. "i am part of a generation of people known as the lost generation. we are suffering from unemployment or at the very least under employment. this campaign like so many across the country has really been more about making the other person look bad rather than

telling us what to do to improve our situation. we need to hear more about creating -- we need to hear more than create jobs and cut spending." >> when it comes to the percentage of young men and women the graduate with college degrees, i think that programs like a race to the top are smart ways to incentivize local school districts and states to work together. i like to focus on after-school program, meant for ship. and i think we can invest in health grants. all models have shown that for every $1 reinvest in early childhood education, there is a $1 return. until we have the next generation of private-sector jobs, green energy, investing in

infrastructure, those changes will not take place. that is the fundamental difference in this race. >> the next generation is often called in in a generation. net income, jobs, or assets. i think that we should focus on education ... and a national dialogue of not allowing children to drop out after two years of high school. one of the key ideas that i would like to bring to the senate is reigniting public- private partnerships for infrastructure development. in many ways we have forgotten our own economic history. the lincoln administration in the emancipation proclamation, the third biggest that it did, some would say it is the inter- continental public-private partnership i am getting information going.

in indiana, we have seen this kind of thing as nice to the economy with economic growth in states where growth has fallen behind. it is that kind of new thinking we would bring to the senate. >> you have challenged other members, what do they have to do that you are not doing now? >> staying in school. i voted to lower the cost of student loans, increasing the amount for pell grants. eliminating options that were very much needed for students. we have also got to look east as well as west. the big export markets of the united states are in asia. understanding these studies and making sure that we can expand on key exports like caterpillar,

john deere, adm, so that we especially pass free trade agreements like the ones president obama have put forward with south korea and panama, opening new market opportunities for americans. >> telling young men to stay in school is not enough. we have to provide them with options. we need to invest in job training programs and infrastructure, as well as the next generation of jobs. this recession has changed the job market in the united states. manufacturing and financial- services have changed forever. other countries get it. china is one of the largest producers of solar panels in the world, investing in the industry of the future.

we incur is the best and brightest from around the world to get a ph.d. in science, engineering, and technology. fully funding community colleges, so that they are more affordable for everyone. >> thomas, tell us what you thought about those answers. >> in the desert of polarized politics, there is one oasis of bipartisanship. both parties have overspent in the federal budget for years. if you go to washington, d.c., facing these shortfalls, where do you look to cut? what places do you look at first? what is sacrosanct? what would not touch? >> first of all, across the board you have spending reductions and no department is exempt. i have talked about the cuts that would be made in the dod

budget. i turned against your marks, became the first member of the appropriations committee to not earmark. bridges to know where, they will not be billed. we need a line-item veto. president clinton needed it 92 times. the new version that is brought forward by president obama, i hope it will be approved for in the congress. the amendment to the constitution was the right idea. base closing hours to get its policy through on an up or down vote in the house and senate. i could keep going on. >> mr. treasurer, is there a similar list for you? >> when people are not working, they are not paying taxes, which is less revenue.

>> the budget cuts? >> is an important investment to make. asking for pay zero legislation, something that congress voted against, also familiar in washington, d.c., letting the tax cuts for the wealthiest americans expire. we do not have $700 billion to give to them. when the report comes out in december, we will have to take a long, hard look at difficult decisions. just because the country has not live within its means for a long time, we will have to take our maddison. >> corruption is the big story in of an ally, but it also exists at the federal level. each of you, what single ethical for transparency related law, statute, or provision would you fight for in washington, d.c., in hopes of

giving people a better government? >> first of all, i helped us get through legislation to cancel the pension for any member of congress convicted of a felony. i think we should expand from the four allowed by nancy pelosi to the entire list of fellow knight -- felonies identified by the justice department. we need to end of the earmarks system, which has become horribly, out. the bridge to nowhere, the texas museums, etc.. especially on the campaign side. i broke with my party early to back the mccain fine gold legislation. we need all contributions disclosed within 24 hours on the internet.

we should have all of the donors disclose. >> probably the starkest choice in the race. after this, before this, you will see carl rove and the in this -- independent expenditures feeling congressman curt's commercials every day are having a dangerous impact on the truth of our democracy. i am the first candidate to run in illinois ever to end the special interests in washington d.c. politics. "the washington journal" called it a pay at the trough -- gipig at the trough. i think that citizens united was a dangerous precedent. there is a very important vote that will put safeguards in place just so that we know who

is spending this money. until there is significant campaign finance reform, things will not get better in washington, d.c.. >> a federal judge last week went back and forth on the don't ask, don't tell policy. the obama administration wants congress to repeal a law. would you explain your support or opposition for this position? >> i am for the immediate repeal of ask, don't tell. i agree with our military leaders. we have kicked out 14,000 men and women over the years that were willing to die for this country. we told them they were not good enough. meanwhile we are letting felons in the military.

one of the industry -- one of the only industrialized countries to do so. we have no business telling people that want to die for this country that they cannot join the military. >> i voted to continue the current policy and i am confused as to what the administration's policy is right now. at first secretary gates said that he wanted to wait for the joint chiefs of staff to put forward their recommendations. a federal drug -- federal judge struck down a policy. i am totally confused as to where this administration is. i think we should listen to the men and women that run the u.s. military. it is one of the most complicated organizations on earth, operating in all 24 time zones. speaking from some military experience, to remove a policy, you have to be able to look into

the eyes and tell them the new policy. how will we run this ship? without a replacement, you cause confusion. >> follow-up question for both of you, where you stand on gay marriage and civil union? it is the responsibility of the federal government to take that up? >> to answer your first question, i am in favor of complete marriage of quality. this country is founded on fairness and treating people equally. that is how my parents raised me. i am not saying that we should stuff is down the throats of churches, but my faincee and i, if we can have certain rights, they should be for everyone. >> i am opposed to gay marriage

and i support civil unions. i do not think it we should have a federal takeover of marriage laws in the united states. i think that the federal government is already taking over too much. >> going back to the citizens united decision, i do not think that congressman curt was able to fully address the issue. do you believe that these entities, like american crossroads, should disclose their donors and who is behind them? would you urge those that have assisted york and to reveal to illinois voters who is behind these negative ads? >> i think that all of the groups entering illinois to support my opponent, the big unions and their operations, the ones that support me, they should reveal their donors.

he says that he does not take money from corporate, but he is so lined up with the unions, he does take money from union cuts. the rest of the story with my opponent to constantly need to look into. bank loans, federal lobbyists not taking the state lobbyists. you take a ton of money from union pacs. >> the congressman is a great politician. he did not come close to answering your question. karl rove in the american crossroads are coming here with enormous amounts of money, trying to determine for the people of illinois who the next

senator will be. i am vehemently against the supreme court decision, is that words. do not let foreign corporations decide to your next senator is. one of the most prolific special interest fundraisers in congress is taking them on. street firms, which is why he voted for the bailout of the biggest banks in the world, voting against suspending executive pays its times, then a voted against washington reform. health insurance companies getting their way every single time, a typical washington, d.c. politics. people are sick and tired of it. >> the constitutional amendment that basically nullifies the effects of the citizens united

decision, if it came out, how would you vote? would you vote for a constitutional amendment? basically nullifying citizens united? >> you are asking me? >> yes. >> first of all, i would not. i think that the key issue is disclosure. we need reforms for every candidate to influence the election and disclose their donors. secondly, we should do it within 24 hours on the internet. in this debate, there you go again. you just criticized will be a second time for voting for the tarp legislation when on-camera you said that he would have voted for it as well. >> i would like for you to answer the question about the confidence vote >> i will actually answer your question --

that would like to -- i would like for you to answer the question. >> i will actually answer your question. having worked hard on campaign finance reform, if it comes to an amendment, i would be in favor. >> whoever wins the race will have a chance to vote for constitutional nominees. one of the most controversial, jenny thomas, called anita hill this weekend and asked her to consider apologizing to justice thomas. should it be the other way around? >> that as long ago and far away. my philosophy and judges is that they should make decisions based on the interpretation of the

mall, not making new laws. the genius of the system is that laws should be made by elected representatives of the people. in the consideration of the judges that we just had, i felt that justice sotomayor was to forward leaning on making new laws, i would have opposed her. justice katelynn, it is not up to individual senators to make the appointments, it is up to them to see of the president's appointment is appropriate. it is not subject to favor or corruption. i announced that i would favor just as kate ganz appointment.

as much as possible for the elected representatives of the american people, allowing interpretation. >> would you have voted for justice thomas? >> i think that justice thomas has confirmed he is a good supreme court justice. i will tell you, i am looking forward, especially to the nominations that president obama would make. with what i felt he made a mistake. with the other i felt that justice taken was careful and considered. not because she thought she would get the of -- the appointment, but because she was careful and considered. >> i will give you a follow-up now, is there any member of the supreme court supported -- i

think that has passed. >> we must understand that the constitution is a living document and we need. citizens united is having a devastating impact on the economy. >> i think that every member for of the majority on the court today that you would support? >> i cannot think of any. i think that there are activist leaning courts right now that are doing damage to our democracy. >> time for closing statements.

>> we have seen a stark difference between myself and congressman curt, who i will fight. but it is about real people doing real problems, ultimately. last summer kelly foster job, pregnant and just got her home. she has not been able to find a job for over one year. she is scared and concerned about the future. not sure what will happen to her family, five years, 10 years, to her and her daughter. you see, she does not want or expect the federal government to fix every problem in her life, she just wants to know that someone is fighting for her.

that someone is taking her struggle and angered washington, d.c.. let me tell you, your struggle was my struggle. your fight is my fight. your anger is my anger. i will make you very proud as your next united states senator. i will always fight for the people that want a shot at the american dream, the way my parents did when they came to this country. >> this could be the most important election for the senate in america today. because of a federal court ruling, you have the opportunity to vote twice for senate. you may have heard the congressional leaders are planning on a lame-duck session of congress. a new round of huge spending and tax bills that will hurt the economy and threaten a double- dip recession. their agenda could include a $1

trillion spending bill. a bill to take away your rights to a secret ballot in union elections. beginning a debate on a new national sales tax called a value-added tax to drain the u.s. economy of money and making sure that the government is as large as the ones in europe. i plan to be the fiscally conservative, socially moderate voice that would impose a national sales tax and rein in spending in washington. >> thank you both. i would like to thank the voters of illinois further questions and facebook. many think use tonight. thank you for watching. please get out and vote on november 2. have a good night.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> we are just under two weeks away from the midterm elections. each night on c-span we are showing you debates from key races around the country. tonight we will start at 8:00 with live coverage of the illinois governor's debate. pat quinn and bill brady. followed by the florida governor debate, the pennsylvania senate debate, and the connecticut government -- governor debate. pakistani military leaders will be in washington today for three days of high-level talks. this afternoon, the brookings institution will be holding a

discussion with the pakistani prime minister. we will have live coverage of that starting at 6:30 eastern on c-span. 7:00, hillary clinton will be addressing the american task force on the annual gala in palestine. leaders are now at an impasse two weeks after the talks started. >> time to get your camera rolling for this year's studentcam competition. make a five-eight minute video on this year's theme, washington, d.c., through my lens. tell us about a topic that helps you understand the role of the federal government in your community, but be sure to include your point of view along with c-span programming. you have a chance to win a grand

prize. the video documentary competition is open to middle school students and high school students, grades 6 through 12. for complete details, go to studentscam.org. >> the daily beast hosts a forum in new orleans tomorrow on economic and environmental issues. along with speakers, spike lee and bob schieffer. .

it is exactly this kind of event and this kind of conversation that we like to host here at the gspm, which is the nation's premier school of practical politics, the first school founded 23 years ago to teach people how the business of politics operates and create leaders for that field. we are proud to be able to host this kind of event. we are able to host this even

because of the generosity of friends of the graduate school of political management. this evening, sponsored -- this evening is sponsored by two wonderful ambassadors to the school. both of them headed their respective political parties in the 1980's, have been tremendous supporters of good political education for the last three decades, and i am very pleased to introduce an ambassador who will get this conversation started with some comments. [applause] >> thank you, director, and thank our special panel for being here tonight. i think it will be a lot of fun and perhaps you might see a grown man cry, and that will be me. my joy with the students is what i would like to focus on. i'm sure we have many good

students with us, and i really only have one campaign while a student at george washington university where i was in my second year of law school, and it was the kennedy campaign, kennedy and nixon. we debated with a wonderful man who is in heaven now. he had vice-president nixon, and i had jack kennedy, and we debated at small catholic girl'' schools. it was one of the best experiences i have had in my life. it was the first time i ever met a bloody mary, so i have many fond memories of the good campaigning of 1960, which was hard fought and very close. our graduates will, the director has highlighted, there is frankly nothing like it. the focus on ethics, on decency,

and on trying to do a good job in supporting one's family. as frank and i have both tried to do and recognize them as supporting this lecture series also. just about the right kind of thing where if you are interested in the field, i suggest every consideration you give to the graduate school of political management. i have identified my friend frank fahrenkopf. many years later we had a good, positive, strong, personal friendship. i only wish other politicians could do that. [applause] >> thank you, chuck. one of the reasons that chuck and i, through our original involvement here, decided to endow this lecture series is because of our concern of something that i think might be

on the front burner in this election campaign more than i have ever seen, and that is the inability of members of the republican and democratic parties to disagree agreeably. i have been through a lot of campaigns, and watching what i'm seeing on television and observing what i'm hearing is a pretty nasty campaign. it does not necessarily have to be that way. chuck and i met when he was chairman of the democratic national committee and i was chairman of the republican national committee. we fought like cats and dogs. i think i won 49 states. [laughter] i thought i would throw that in. despite that, we work together to help create the national endowment for democracy, the national democratic institute of international affairs, if the international public and institute. worked together on things we

felt were in the best interest of our nation and the young people of this country. i've been served for four years with a man named paul kirk, who became chairman of the democratic national committee. some of you may recall recently he filled in senator kennedy's si after teddy's death until the election in massachusetts -- senator kennedy's seat. wild fall and i fought tooth and nail in 1985, we created the commission on presidential debates, which has sponsored every presidential debate since 1988. we are friends. our wives get along. we go out to dinner. we played golf. in other words, we can be friends even though we disagree on the political direction that each of us would take. we think that more and more, the question of comedy in politics

ought to be addressed. you are going to see a little bit of that tonight because the people who will be introduced in a moment and who are the stars of this program are from different political parties. it is my final task to introduce our moderator for this evening's presentation, mark murray, nbc news's get the political director. he joined the network in 2003 and has reported and written about political races, trends, and issues. he is the co-author of nbc's daily political blog and is a frequent contributor to msnbc. i saw you this morning talking about the next governor of nevada, who is a hispanic and might be breaking some real posts from the standpoint of hispanics being represented in the governor's mansion. before coming to nbc, he spent more than five years as a reporter with "national journal." he has been a free-lance

reporter for "atlantic monthly" and "washington monthly." what also makes one of our guests very happy -- he is a native texan and a 1996 graduate of the university of texas at austin. it is my pleasure to introduce mark murray, nbc news deputy political director. the floor is yours. [applause] >> thank you for that very kind introduction. now, to introduce the stars of this panel. currently serves as a strategic consultant to many fortune 500 companies and ceo's end as an adviser corporate leaders like bill gates, steve ballmer, and bill for. in 2008, he was the chief strategist for hillary clinton's presidential campaign, and he also served as senior advisor to former president bill clinton and former british prime minister tony blair.

he writes a weekly micro waitrons column for the wall s j." now on to karen hughes -- the quality wallace j. -- the "wall street journal." now, onto karen hughes. she served as counselor to president george of the bush from 2001 through 2002, advising the president on communications. she returned to texas on 2002 but continued serving as an informal advisor for the president and she served as a consultant for the 2004 bush /cheney reelection campaign. she served as director of communications for the governor bush in texas and was a past executive director of the republican party in texas and a former tv news reporter for the nbc affiliate in dallas-fort worth. both mark and karen have opening remarks to make. we will begin with mark.

>> i think as we look at the likely results of the midterms, i think karen was going to go through in a little bit more detailed the current republican projections, and every day, the republicans come out another 10, 50, 60, 70. i do not know where it will come out, but we think expectations have run away a little bit from the polling, which shows most of the race is very close, within the margin of error and where turnout and the final five days are going to make a tremendous difference in the outcome of this race. i want to hit upon a couple of important overriding chin's about this election because i think it is important that even if the republicans win a significant victory, it should not be interpreted as a victory for the republican philosophy any more then i think 2008 should be interpreted as a victory for the progressive

left. the truth of the matter is it is the increasingly independent voters who are going to be making the decisions, and increasingly, they are looking for a centrist brand of politics, and when they are dissatisfied that they do not have centrist leadership, they tend to be in hong back and forth. when i look at a couple of key trends, first, independents are at a record historical highs since we have been measuring them. in the 1930's, it really was a red or blue country. about 85% belong to one of the two parties feared offending upon the full today, it is close to 1/3 or 40% who are independent. the biggest party in america it is no party, particularly among younger voters. those numbers are off the chart in terms of younger voters being more independent than before.

i think you are seeing somewhat of a balkanization of the parties. first, you are seeing the impact that even though so many more voters are independent, if the republican party is 26%, as a practical matter, it only takes 20% of the country to have a majority of the republican party, and since typically there is only democrat and republican on the ballot, the 14% can run the entire country, and that is precisely with the electorate is getting more frustrated, and that is where you are seeing that politics is probably one of the few things left in your life where there are only two flavors. that and i think wine are probably the only two. there are 155 different varieties of coffee, and if there's one thing voters are demanding, it is more and more choice. there is a huge wave of discontent. it is the longest sustained period of discontent that i have

seen pulling in my lifetime. we have seen two or three years, but now, we have seen about six years of discontent. this could well be a decade of discontent, and that will have, i think, long term effects on both the american psyche and on politics today. there is continued demand for change. they continue to be dissatisfied with what government is doing. finally, i think there is more partisanship than ever. i find that people are digging more and more into personal backgrounds. the politics of personal destruction is out there stronger than ever. what the ads are saying now, they have gone back to college. they will probably get to high school long before, but nothing seems to be out of bounds for wholesale distribution over the internet, and i think that is

certainly deteriorated some of the discussion of issues. let me just say that people often ask what it is that people want, and i took a poll for the aspen institute earlier this year, and we went in with the theory that people wanted more decisive government, that in fact, they were probably in patient with checks and balances and wanted the president to have more power. that was completely wrong. people in this whole we affirm checks and balances, said they did not want the president to have more power, and said fundamentally that they wanted, if anything, to have a greater role themselves. they backed election of supreme court justices. they backed direct election of the president without electoral college, and they backed national referendum. what they said was do not give more power to the politicians. give more power to the people.

with the growth of new movements you are seeing here, whether or not the two-party is the ultimate movement or the second generation of what could become a series of movements, what you are really seeing is people saying that people want more power. when the constitution was written, typically, it relied on a few inmates who went to college. today, voters are smarter, have more access to information, are more issue-oriented, and i absorb far more about what is going on than ever before. i read a book in college that was a lot of my underlying thesis of voting behavior, and it said the simple thesis of the book is the voters are not fooled. the voters are not fooled today. they are increasingly testy, and they think they should have a bigger share of the power because they are not concerned so much about the system as they are about the politicians and their role in the system. i think that underscores what they are looking for. they are looking for both

parties to sit down, solve the economy, solve immigration, solve health care, and do it in a strong, bipartisan fashion. the voters, as we often find, eventually get their way, and that is the message i think we are sending in this midterm. >> thank you very much. i want to thank shocked and frank for encouraging greater civility in our discussion, and for this series -- i want to thank shop and find -- thank chuck and frank. mark and i work together agreeably, and he is my boss. and if that we are able to come at a problem from different perspectives. this panel is about understanding the implications of the midterm elections, and they are really great. the one you hear the most about is the potential to change the balance of power here in washington, which will affect

what legislation is and is not able to be passed over the next couple of years, but it will also set the tone for the final two years of the obama administration. it will be the starting gun for the 2012 presidential race and my party's efforts to fund the best republican -- to find the best republican to run against president obama and it has the potential to shape the political landscape for the next decade, as we will be electing governors in 37 states, including 15 of the 18 that will be redistricting next year, so that will determine legislative boundaries for the next 10 years, and most estimates are that of redistricting is done in a fair way, republicans have the opportunity to pick up 20 or 25 seats in congress. this is a time of great disillusionment, of deep anxiety. voters are frustrated, angry. for the first time that i can remember -- i am a baby boomer.

for the first time i can remember in my lifetime, i truly believe that my generation of americans are worried that the country we leave to our children will not be as stable for peaceful or prosperous as the one we have enjoyed the opportunity to live in. people are worried that washington is on a path that is simply not sustainable, and they feel an urgency to change things before we walked off a cliff and it is too late. there's also a feeling among republicans and independents and even some democrats that rather than making things better, president obama's policies have made things worse. he was elected on an idea of hope and change that our politics could be higher and better. he was not elected to that trillions of dollars in spending and massively file of the national debt. we have learned there is a big difference between delivering good speeches and delivering good government. after two years, i think a lot

of people's hopes are dashed, and that is true not only for republicans and independents, but the woman who stood at the town hall and said, "an exhaustive of trying to defend your any change that i hope for that has not happened." instead of seeing that our politics could be higher and better, which is what people wanted, they have seen the worst in washington with the health care debate and the legislation passed in the middle of the night that people have not read. the back room deals, trying to buy votes for the legislation, the stimulus that was a big pork barrel exercise that did not stimulate jobs but only stimulated the debt. people feel like they have seen the worst of washington. it all adds up to a climate that is going to produce gains for republicans. i believe we will win back the house. the senate is tougher. we need a 10-seat pickup to take the senate. right now, the polls would lead you to believe maybe eight. i will say, however, that every

time since world war ii -- the six times since world war ii that the house has changed hands, the senate also changed hands even though it had not been predicted before the election. there are a lot of races that are still close. we will see. we will be two weeks away, and we will be back a couple of days after the election to talk about who was right and who was wrong. >> now, we get to the part where we will have a new -- a little q&a, but we have a new " "wall street journal" poll out tonight. a lot of polls also showed that the republican party is viewed still sometimes more on favorably than the democratic party with people so down on washington. if you were to advise perhaps the next speaker, the republicans taking over the house may be in the senate, what would you advise them to try to change the mood, as mark was

talking about right now, people are so discontent. how should republicans approached power if they are able to get it? >> we need to show that we're listening to the voters. i would recommend that we start enacting some things. if republicans are in house, we need to be positive. i would do a bill a day to cut spending. let's try to work with democrats and find some ways where they agreed we can cut spending. we need to extend the tax cuts. i have been traveling around the country, and every businessman that i talked to cannot believe that congress went home without knowing what their taxes are going to be next year. all economists agree you do not want to raise taxes when we still have the prospect of sending our economy into a nosedive, so right now, we are scheduled to have a $6 trillion tax increase on january 1 if

nothing is done, so i would suggest that the lame-duck congress, republicans need to work with democrats to extend those tax cuts and make sure we do not face a massive tax increase on january 1. i also think i would start as republicans beginning to look at some of the worst aspects of the health care bill trying to work with democrats to fix it and to begin to replace the onerous parts of it with much more market for in legislation. >> do you think that will happen? cooperation with republicans be able to work on deficit reduction? maybe sometimes be able to have a compromise where not both sides get their way? >> it takes two, obviously. if i were advising republican leaders, and kevin mccarthy was quoted today saying that he wanted to be constructed today -- we have a lot of potentially new members of congress who have

experience working in state legislature. my experience in taxes is that in state legislatures, republicans and democrats are pretty accustomed to working together. they work pretty effectively. i would certainly recommend that republicans approached this in the spirit of finding some areas of compromise, finding places we can work together, but president obama is going to have to make a calculation -- is he willing to work with republicans and compromise and recognize and listen to the people? he has done a lot of talking, but he needs to show that he is listening to the message of the voters. >> you have seen this movie before. 1994, bill clinton lost control of the house and senate. it could happen again. you helped advise president clinton. what would you advise president obama and his advisers to do if republicans take back control? >> i think if republicans take back control, there is going to

be a moment of truth for both parties. maybe republicans are going to want to cooperate and make a political calculation. maybe they are going to want to sit there and say no. either way, the president cozy job in those circumstances -- the president's job would be to neutralize some of the growing - said he has experienced. not recommend that he extend the tax cuts a year, but use that new to come up with a good tax reform bill. people think that the system is unfair, unworkable, still have so many new polls. still benefits people it should not be benefiting. maybe extend them for the economy but then come back a year later with a tax reform bill and put it to the republicans. isn't it time we had a simpler, fairer system? on health care, if he has to continue to monitor health care. i think that health care

expanded coverage but did not do enough to control costs. he is going to come back and face the cost issue on health care before it gets out of control and blows back on us. he could do a lot more in terms of some of the value issues. president clinton had a lot of issues, whether it was tracking down deadbeat dads or taking a tougher approach to violence and drugs in our schools. so far, the administration has not been strong enough so that it understands the concerns of people out there. on the deficit, i do not think the administration has to stop the basic policy of trying to prime the pump and create jobs, but they have to draw some lines in the sand on the deficits to say, "here is the limit. we are not going to go past the ." and really hold the limits of people know there is one. finally, the administration has to adopt a more comprehensive

economic strategy. in 1994, president clinton had a lot of things and expanding trade, closing the deficit. some of them really were favored by democrats. others were favored by republicans, but they hung together as a consistent and coherent economic strategy for growth. with places like china and india really leapfrogging economic growth, it is important that the united states remain competitive and that the president get out there ahead of the wave of global innovation and not leave america behind it. if he neutralizes those weaknesses, the truth of the matter is this election, no matter how it comes out, will not be an endorsement for the republican office. it will be an expression of discontent that the problems are not solved yet. is the president neutralizes those negatives, moves his administration into the center, he can repeat pretty much what president clinton did, which is to come back from this within

two years and win a landslide reelection. i think it is certainly possible. >> oftentimes conventional wisdom in washington and cable tv -- cable-tv can be wrong. we saw that in delaware. christine o'donnell one. bill miller 1. is there a path for democrats to be able to beat a lot of the conventional wisdom? >> i think the scenario in the last 14 days this pretty much most of these races are really within two or three points. they are mostly in the low 40's. there is still a good 10% or 15% undecided in every district. the question you have really got is discontent against those who are in. you have to balance against growing fear that you're going

to bring back the policies of the bush administration but remain -- that remain as on popular as ever and also put in power a basically unstable party that has lost control of itself, that is headlined by candidates that are a turnoff. i saw sarah palin headlining the "today show" out there something -- stumping. even though she is a powerful turn out machine for the base, she is a turnoff for the filly for younger people, young professionals, better educated, exactly those voters that obama won in 2008 and that have been feeling of fear read the more they see of sarah palin and the tea party, the more the last couple of days could break the democratic way. >> i think that is some wishful thinking. listening to his litany of what president obama ought to do differently, it shows howff -- how far out of the mainstream president obama's policies are.

health care reform was sold as a way of resolving cost, and it does nothing to control costs. i think the tea party has energized our party, reminded the republican party of what it stands for. we are the party of limited government and lower taxes, and i think we need to examine ourselves and look at the last time we controlled the house and senate. we probably spent too much money. we certainly spend too much money. i think the tea party has brought enthusiasm and new people into our party. i remember being the director of the executive party of texas when another tea party movement, that of ross perot, ended up costing us the election. i am grateful that the party activists chose to follow their principles and remain in in public and party and become an energizing force, reminding our party of what we stand for, which is limited government and a strong national defense and less spending and more power to the state and local governments and less power to washington.

i think it has been an energizing force for our party. we cannot be complacent these final two weeks of the election. we have a great opportunity, and we have to work hard to turn out independent and conservative democrats who agree with this because i think it is really important for our country. >> are there some potential drawbacks that some of the candidates might be too conservative to win in a state like delaware, for example? certainly following george w. bush foes a gubernatorial bid as well as president, that there was an effort to win over st. voters and independents, and the tea party seems to be a play on the republican base. >> anytime you have candidates on one side from the far right to the far left, that happens, but my answer to those who want to complain about who won our primary is to find a better candidate and win next time.

as former executive director of the republican party, as former chairman, when candidates run in our primaries and they are elected by our primary voters, we have an obligation to support them and try to elect them, and if we want someone different, we have the opportunity to choose someone in the next primary. >> i m encouraged by karen's hugging of the tea party. based on the primaries, you clearly cannot defeat them. >> i do not agree with that. i know people in the tea party. they have been republicans all their lives. they are activists who are deeply concerned about the future of our country. i welcome their involvement. we need to change the direction of our country. >> are there some certain ways in which elected leaders, people in the media can actually reduce the partisanship, change the tone in washington?

in california, they are trying to tinker with redistricting, and oftentimes congressional districts are set up for the most conservative person wins conservative districts. the most liberal person wins liberal districts and when you get those people in a room, if they cannot agree on anything, but if you somehow change redistricting, we get to more practical candidates, but there are some ways in which politicians and the news media can reduce partisanship in washington? >> as i said before, the people are ultimately going to reduce partisanship. by nature, washington is made up of two camps, and we are going to see whether or not a political decision is made for those camps to cooperate. people were really satisfied in 1994 to 1998 time when they saw welfare reform. i think structurally, california is raining and interesting way. you have to redo redistricting.

california is going to have non-partisan primaries from now on. that will bring the power of moderate voters. that will enhance the power of those voters in primaries, and that could make a real difference. i go back to that whole -- nobody is really behind any of the things people ask for like national referendum. the california system actually seems to be ahead of things in terms of both electing people who did not come from the traditional party structure and in actually beginning to change the system to make it more 21st century. >> some critics might end up saying that the referendum process in california has made that state almost so on governable -- un-double because the burdens the elected leaders in the state to be able to produce a budget -- so ungovernable. is it possible to make it is slow the process?

>> i think that is a fair comment. national referendum would have to be worked out. i just think that in the 21st century, voters are asking for more direct power. first of all, they want to at least directly elect the president, and then they want to have more input into the rest of the system. whether it is some kind of tailor national referendum, we cannot be tabled by democracy. we have been founded on the basis of democracy, and democracy sometimes make bad choices, but not having democracy makes consistently worse choices. >> i do think we need competitive districts. this election, they are talking 95 for 100 house districts still in place, which is the huge number at this point, but that is less than 1/4 of the seats in congress. that means more than 75% of the seats are so one-sided that even in this very contentious year, they are a lot for either party,

and i do not think that is good for democracy. they used to joke in texas that if you drove your car with both doors open through one of your congressional districts, you would wipe out half the constituents because it was so gerrymandered. we really do need more fairly drawn districts, and i do not know what the ultimate solution is, but having come from a state where it is hard for people to remember now, but when my boss, president bush, was elected in 2000, one of the things that i feel about him to people across the country was that he had worked with democrats in texas to get things done. people talk about how he worked with the democrat lieutenant governor. i think people do like that. the problem is from both the media perspective and the special interest perspective, you come to washington and you get pushed to the far extreme. special interest groups expect

complete adherence to their views, so we get pushed to the extremes from both ends of the spectrum. >> also talk about the nature of how media has changed from your time at the white house. probably people in the audience are leading this. -- tweeting this. if you had to go back and work on a campaign or work at a what -- at the white house, how would you deal with the fast-changing world of the media? >> my best analogy is in the 2000 presidential campaign, none of us on the bush campaign had a blackberry and we all thought that al gore was a little weird when he was using this advice. by the 2004 campaign, i could not imagine running a campaign, much less my life, without my appropriately nicknamed crackberry. you are right. there is no longer a 24-hour news cycle.

it is a 1440-minute news cycle. that is how many minutes in the day. it is just a very -- when i first got involved in the political process, the news magazines really dominated the political coverage. once a week newsmagazines were what you were most worried about during the first bush's presidency. what was on the cover of "time" and open " newsweek -- " newsweek." we were more worried about the immediate by the time i got to the white house. now, it is what is being tweetetd. the explosion of information is good. mark made the point that voters today are very informed and have a lot of information, and that is all very healthy.

i remember when i was in the white house, i found them on the electric grid, some time after september 11. the power went out in the northeast, and there was some concern about whether it might have been a terrorist attack, president bush did not say anything while he was waiting to find out more, and it took a 41 hours before the white house issued a statement. the deal was just appalled. four hours. the white house went four hours. it was unbelievable how many stories mentioned that. four hours is not very long to assess a said jubilation and think about what you want to say about it, so we do have to think about the ramifications on decisionmaking when things are so frenetic in today's news cycle. >> four hours is the length of two disaster movies. [laughter] >> you mentioned some specific ways that the obama

administration could perhaps be able to see 2011, 2012 to their advantage. talk about some times how the political moves, for example, dealing with 10% unemployment, how hard it might be for the white house to change the overall dynamics of a race if the unemployment does not start to go down. there are other things that might be outside of their control. and of women goes down, they may get reelected, and if it stays where it is now, then he is in trouble -- if unemployment goes down, they get reelected. >> one eyefold for six years for clinton in the white house, pretty much, i took the quality "washington post" headlines, and it was hard to get people to understand that "usa today" had

the headlines people were thinking about and the "washington post" had the human beltway. has changed somewhat because the information system is so much more distributed. the stories ripple through from the beltway. i have one ceo who said he prepared all year for speeches, and the only speech anyone heard was one that he gave to scandinavian students. why? because someone can say anything anywhere, and that can become a national news story of great import of the moment. never before have we had this kind of political connections across people easy and convenient. there is no question that the primary source of news and information over the next few years will become the smart phone. usually, the old pattern was you worked all day, you got home, maybe had a little dinner, turn on the nightly news, and that was really the most important event of the date.

by the time you get to the nightly news, it is done. you have had a continuous flash of news and interest all through the day. i have colleagues who have probably been through the "judge report" 26 times by the end of the day. people are to and i into the news cycle in the way that people inside the bubble were tuned in. it is totally different. it is interesting that we did one focus group, and it was a discussion of newspapers, and people said, "what is a newspaper?" what do you name our news source now? it is not exactly website, not a tv network, not a website. what is it? that is going to be the fundamental new environment that we are still really learning how to handle and deal with. that news environment can create

a greater capacity for what you would call mass action at a moment's notice, and that is when you can have more swings, whether in the stock market for the voter market because information will spread within hours to huge segments of the population, and then you come back to the question -- what is the president to do in a highly polished tile news environment? first, the president is going to have to improve the economy. the fundamental on the president formed with people to become unbreakable is based on keeping promises when you got elected. that is why clinton survive the events of 1998 -- because he created 24 million jobs and he had promised 24 million jobs. that is also why i think bush in 2006 had such problems -- because he did not end the iraq war and he did not do the things

made he did not and the partisanship in washington, so people said at that point, you have not done it after six years. president obama has two years to keep some basic commitments. he has cut some on health care, on financial reform, on beginning to change the system. he is not getting the full credit -- if you were sitting in the white house, you would say we did health care reform, financial reform, a stimulus package that may not have achieved full results but everyone agreed stock fall collapse. they are saying if we continue policies, they will bear fruit and show that we are filling in the right direction, and i think it is going to be a basic choice between forward or back. they have tried to make the choice but not as strongly as they have been able to make it or will be able to make it in 2012, and the question you raise is what happens they do not have the kind of economic improvement that they really need? it is going to be a different

environment. it will come down to difference in philosophy and difference in candidates. the republican party might have a structural problem that started with the tea party. sarah palin is the republican nominee for president. i do not care whether unemployment is 15%. i do not believe she will be elected. >> how did you look at the emerging republican field? we can talk about sarah palin and everyone else, but as mark mentioned a little bit, there are people who see republicans, for example, as the bush campaign did in 2004. you need to win about 40% if not more of the latino vote. you have to make inroads in places, and that is what the bush compassionate conservatism benefited you guys so well. who are some stars and what does the republican party need to be able to do to win? >> we have to show that we can make government work. that is what people want, and

that is why they are so frustrated. government just does not work. we are seeing gridlock -- no jobs, no improvement. we have gone nowhere, basically. people describe this as an anti-income of election, but that really does not sum up, especially when you look at the governors' races taking place across the country. i was at a meeting of the governors' association a couple of weeks ago, and he the barber is doing a fantastic job, but we are forced to have 30 republican governors after the selection. six of the six incumbent republican governors who are up for reelection this year are expected to win reelection. of the seventh democrat governors who are of, six of the seven are viewed as vulnerable. the difference -- republicans are making government work at the state level. they are the governing based on limited government, focusing on priorities in government like

education and health. the governor of indiana inherited a budget deficit and got rid of the deficit, worked to create jobs in that state. . pawlenty in minnesota. bobby jindal. rick perry in texas. we're looking at governors across the country who have made the government effective for the people. they have a record and results to run on, and i think that is what they will have an president obama will not have in the 2012 election cycle. >> you think the future of the republican party is with the governors? >> i might be prejudiced because i came from the governor's office, and a governor is a chief executive of the state. the governor has experience setting a direction and achieving results, and that is why i think you are seeing president obama's weakness. he does not have that executive experience. he is a legislative.

he sublets is programmed to nancy pelosi in the house. that is the problem right now. that is why i think we are not seeing the kind of policies, the kind of leadership that you would have expected. i personally think that the governors are really eight ceo of the state, and people are going to be very suspicious about rhetoric in 2012. we tried that. the change they did not work out so well. people believe in it, and maybe their expectations were too high, but they have definitely been dashed, and i think people are going to be very skeptical about rhetoric. >> in 2011, we had to the presidential primary season, and a bunch of people will parachute into iowa, new hampshire, south carolina, looking at what is happening across the country where in most cases, the most conservative republican has won, certainly george ~ bush did not win his primary in 2000 by being most conservative.

he tried to position himself to be the most general election candidate with his message he had in texas. does it concern you that perhaps the republican race in 2011 might be the race for who is most conservative? >> i really do believe will work for governor bush was compassionate conservatism. in a conservative who is optimistic and hopeful. i believe that conservative philosophy can be compassionate and hopeful, so i would hope that would be the kind of tone we would set, but in 2012, people will be looking for someone who can make our government work, and i believe there are a lot of republican governors across the country who have got great records off to run on. they will be running on not who is most conservative, but "look what i have done. i have balanced the budget. you want to have economic

balance and jobs? look what we have done in our state." those of the things people will resonate with. >> what are your thoughts on the republican party? >> 2/3 or more of those people who consider themselves republicans, particularly republican primary voters are conservative. almost zero liberal, and the rest moderate. that means they have got well over -- and if the republican party or primary voters are about 25% or 26% of the country, it means with 13% or 14%, you can dominate republican primaries, and we are seeing the most conservative movements gathered the most enthusiasm within the party. you are seeing the tea party dominate not this litany of millie established governors, of the world.nels

there is an inherent instability that might not come out in this election but i surely think it will come out in the presidential election. that is whatever moderate rains that there was and the ability for bush who ran as more of a moderate and i think took a lot of moderates in order to bring the 2000 election to at least a draw, i think that right now, there is a war within the party, and i think because people want so many choices, the party is dissembling, and the primary process could bring that because what is the party going to do if sarah palin has the growing name recognition, highest enthusiasm -- i would bet that she will have incredible organization in iowa -- wins the party? what is the party going to do? if they are going to back the candidate until the end, i do not think she has got a chance of winning, and she is becoming emblematic of the republican

party whose ratings, have fallen even lower than the democratic party. i think the party itself really has some structural problems that are playing themselves out. it is not unusual for the party that is out of power to have these problems. democrats had these problems until they resolve it, and it is now the turn for republicans. >> i think all the governors i mentioned would be offended if you did not say they were strong conservatives because they are. what i think is important for our party, and the tea party has reminded our party that we need to go back to our roots, our core beliefs and cutting spending and some of the frustration you have seen with the republican party was that when we controlled congress, we spend too much money, and the tea party has reminded us of that. sarah palin has been particular of that, and our governors had taken heed of that, and they

have cut budgets and cut spending. the 2012 presidential election is going to be a great and true philosophical debate. we did not see that in 2008 because of a lot of people thought that president obama was a lot more moderate than his policies have turned out to be. clearly, he likes spending money. he believes in government solution to problems. republicans believe in releasing the private sector. we know that we need to properly limit government, so there will be a great philosophical debate in 2012, and i believe that puts republicans at a natural advantage because this is a center-right country. >> there are democrats and progressives of their ruse president obama did not go left enough on health care. he did not have the public option theory people say one of the front runners for president on the republican side, mitt romney, was similar to what

president obama initiated on the federal level. >> i think the democratic party has some real fishes when you look at an incumbent president most of the country now things policies are too liberal, but the liberals are not saying they are not liberal enough, and they are disappointed in him. that shows the pressures he will be under as he tries to negotiate his reelection campaign in 2012. >> i will say that even the democrats are an outspoken party, and there are even some criticisms, the truth is when you look at them in the polls, democrats are 100% cohesive, behind the president, behind giving him an opportunity to keep moving his policies forward. when you look at the numbers, it is actually democrats voting more solidly democratic and republicans are voting republican these days. >> a final question before we start turning to some of the

questions from the audience. you find yourself in the news when bob woodward on cable tv was started to talk about potential switcheroo and moving hillary clinton to vice president and half vice president biden become secretary of state. can you shed some light on that? do you think that could happen? do you think hillary clinton might decide to do that or perhaps try to run for president in 2016? >> i think he is trying to have a little fun with the media. i do not think it is happening. i think the president has a strong team. i think hillary is doing a great job of secretary of state. biden is out there as a strong vice-president. part of what president obama is showing is that he has a strong team. >> we want to start with questions from the audience, so please far away. the microphone is right there.

>> do not be shy. >> i guess this question is directed to ms. hughes. if a lot of these tea party candidates or tea-party-backed candidates when they are running for senate and congressional races, do you think they will demand an over proportional amount of power in congress? if so, do you envision a shot down in government like there was in 1995? >> that is a good question. i do not envision that. what i hope is that they will demand some changes. i think they will shake things up a little bit. that is what voters are saying. they do not want business as usual. that is what they said in 2008, and no one was listening. i think they will try to come to washington and try to shake things up a little bit, and that is probably healthy. we have all seen that sometimes people can be in office for a long time and get used to the way things have been done, and it might be a breath of fresh air to have some changes.

i do not think you will see the kind of government shut down efforts that you saw in the past. it is what happens. if republicans take the house and not the senate or if they take both the house and senate, i still think it is in either party's interests to try to shut the government down. i think there was -- it was not to the benefit of the republicans the last time that happened, but i do think they will be a voice of conscience and remind their colleagues of what the voters said in this election. >> a quick follow-up on that -- are there not some inherent contradictions? on the one hand, we want to reduce the level of partisanship, change the tone, but some candidates might end up winning who said their entire rationale for running was to oppose president obama on all these policies -- >> let me disagree with that a

little bit. let's get realistic about a tea party race. in florida, we have an hispanic republicans strongly supported by the tea party, great guy who has achieved great things as speaker of the florida house. work closely with the popular incumbent governor. he has not only talk about how we need to change the way we have done things in washington, but he has also given ideas. he went around florida and ask florida voters and published a book with 100 ideas that floridians had to improve their state. happening at what is in a lot of these races with a lot of these candidates. we have an articulate hispanic republican with a great family story, very charismatic, and when he wins the florida senate race, which i expect him to, will become a be a leader in the republican party, and that is good for our party.

>> in fairness, he is not really the tea party poster child. implied in the question is this fear and concern about if the republicans got howard, who exactly are you collecting? i think that has put the brakes on the momentum that the republicans had. going into the summer, the republicans had unbelievable momentum, and i think exactly that question -- i was there in 1994 when king woodstock it was a good idea to shut down the government -- when gengrich thought it was a good idea to shut down the government. i think -- i doubt they will try to do that again, but try to come up with something else. they will try to stop the national debt in some way, some of the trip wire that could be seen as destructive rather than constructive, but i do not know what they are going to do and how it is going to work out,

but and why in the question is the fear and concern that maybe there is a rubio in florida, but there is an o'donnell in delaware. >> more questions. >> this is for both of you -- can you name some individual races that might be under the radar at this point that on election day we will be surprised by, as to someone winning that just has not been covered in the media may be adequately or at all? >> there is a couple of races i have been watching. i was in alabama yesterday campaigning for a woman who is running for the second congressional district. i think it is a good representative race because the democrat is a first-term one in 2008, the former mayor of montgomery. she is a very effective city councilwoman in montgomery has a councilwoman in montgomery has a very