joe sestak, the democrat. thank you. do not forget to vote on election day, only 11 days away. thanks to those who wrote in on facebook and contributed on videotape. election day is drawing near. do not forget to vote. good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> midterm elections are november 2nd. here on c-span, we're showing

dates from key races around the country. here is a roundup for today -- next, candidates in the colorado senate race. after that, the wisconsin senate race. later, a debate on the u.s. senate race in florida. later, the candidates running for florida governor. >> voters head to the polls in less than two weeks. follow the key races and candidates on c-span with to date every night up until election day. archive debates are online at the c-span video library. you can see upcoming event coverage, campaign ads and other helpful resources. follow election coverage on c- span right through election day. >> now, the final the senate debate between colorado senator, michael bennett and republican ken buck. this took place in denver and is moderated by the news anchor. this is about one hour.

>> thank you for joining us. in the next hour, we will be quizzing of the candidates for senate in colorado. for both men, this is the first time they have faced general election. michael bennett was elected after can sell as are joined the obama capital last year. he has worked as a superintendent of denver public schools and in the private sector -- private-sector as well. he is 45, married and has three children. his opponent is republican ken buck, elected as returning in 2004 and has worked as a prosecutor in the u.s. department of justice and the colorado attorney's office. his 51 years old, married and has two children.

he beat jim norton, a republican insider who was considered a shoe and for the nomination. mr. bennett was challenged by the former state senator for his nomination. this is one of the most hotly contested senate races in the country and could tip the balance of power in washington d.c. has anything about this race and anything what -- has been anything like you expected? >> i think it is a hard-fought race. there is a lot of outside money in the race and i did not expect as much as we got. this is a key race and i think the issues are pretty much what i expected the issues to be. we are talking a lot about jobs, the economy and spending. those are the issues i think that are important, so i think the race has been a lot as i expected. >> i have traveled almost 30,000 miles around the state and had the privilege of having town

hall meetings in red parts of the state and parts of the state. we have had a serious conversation about what's happening to our working families and middle class families going to the most savage economy since the great depression. i am surprised there has been so much outside money spent in this race, especially on the other side, and i hope to go back to washington to make sure we can get these ads with disclosures on them so everybody knows who is trying to buy these races. >> thank you. now that we have set the scene, let's get to the particular of the issues. joining me this weekend is a news analyst -- let's start with how the economy is effecting this race. each of you will get one minute to answer with a 32nd rebuttal. -- with a 30-second rebuttals. >> it seems every candidate is promising to create new jobs whenever because politicians cannot do that, at least directly.

other than shape policy, what can you do specifically to put people back to work with these new unemployment figures in colorado a around 8%? >> it is higher than 8%. it is 8.2%. the unemployment rate is far too high. but you put your finger on it. since we were driven into the worst recession since the great depression, if you look at the last time of economic growth, it is the first time the economy has grown in the middle income as fell. we have created no net new jobs in the u.s. since 1998. we need to give small business access to credit samara money and hire people. in colorado and across the country. we need to break the reliance on foreign oil, stop sending billions of dollars a week to the persian gulf to regimes that turnaround and send money to arm and equip terrorists overseas and use those funds instead to invest in energy in the united

states. colorado has seen 20% growth in clean energy jobs and natural gas jobs as well. that is what we need to fight for. >> 94% of business in colorado are small businesses. if we're going to get out of the economic slump in colorado, we need to encourage small businesses to expand. they will not right now because they do not have the certainty to risk capital in the marketplace. they don't know what their health care is going to be in three years, with their tax bill is going to be, what their energy bill is going to be, they don't know how hard regulators are going to come down on them. we had a dramatic lurch to the left in government and it has caused uncertainty in the marketplace and we need to make sure those folks have certainty by making sure we develop an intelligent island -- intelligent energy policy, not cap and trade that imposes such huge burdens. that we do not overtaxed by putting it in taxes in health

care bills and other places and we make sure folks have the ability to, when they put the money in the marketplace, they know they can grow and create jobs. >> there is some certainty out there. the economy is what is really uncertain. the health care bill, every small company will seek a tax credit for employees of between 25% and 35%. i voted for a bill that cuts taxes on small businesses by $12 billion in this country. my opponent opposed that legislation. i am for entrepreneurs, innovators, small business in colorado, but not special interests in washington. >> let's talk about tax policies specifically. given the state of the economy and the state of the budget, what changes to tax policy would you support to promote certainty, investment, job

growth and deficit reduction? >> i would absolutely do away with the 1099 provisions hidden in the health care bill. i think they are incredibly onerous on small businesses and just at the wrong time, they place a burden when those small businesses need to expand. what we need to do is have a tax code that is simple, fair and efficient. our tax code is complicated and we need to find ways to simplify the tax code, reduce the burdens on businesses again to make sure what their tax debt is going to be. >> i believe we need a tax code and regulatory code that supports innovation and job creation in the united states and does not inspire companies to ship jobs overseas. i agree with what ken buck said about simplifying the tax code. for 80 months, he ran a campaign as it we should get rid of our corporate taxes altogether.

-- for 18 months, he ran a campaign that said we should get rid of our corporate tax altogether and have a sales tax. i think that's exactly the wrong thing for us to do. as we think about how to innovate in the 21st century, we have a tax code full of special- interest giveaways full of all kinds of giveaways of one kind or another. i'm interested in policies that will support colorado businesses. >> you have not simplify the tax code in 20 months. you have made more complicated with your health care legislation. i'm not opposed to corporate tax or income tax. i'm opposed to having the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. it undermines our ability to compete in a global manufacturing world. we need to reduce our corporate tax rate. japan is reducing errors, which will make at the highest tax corporate -- highest corporate tax rate in the country. >> the country, i think you

would agree, is divided over president obama's health care reform. the only thing we know is it's going to be more expensive than we were led to believe eventually. senator bennett, you cast one of the deciding votes. what do you say to those promising to try to repeal it? >> ken buck is one of the people he says he wants to try to appeal it. there was a woman who came to me the other day who has type 1 diabetes and is 24 and is now on her insurance and knows she will have insurance going forward. the woman in colorado springs to said -- she was on off the insurance rolls because she mr. payment by one penny. she no longer has to worry about that -- she missed her payment by one penny. that ken buck is running against me are despicable. i wish he would get the ads off the air because that is the heart of the health care reform bill.

that's banned the mythic and -- that and a significant reforms. i want to make sure congresses and the administration cost promises actually materialize. repealing this is the wrong idea. making a better with common- sense approaches is the right idea. >> senator bennett cast the deciding vote for health care. without his vote, health care would not have passed. it is a terrible bill and we need to repeal it. first, the health care bill was passed in a fundamentally corrupt way. at least two senators, a senator from louisiana [inaudible] bride into voting for the bill based on goodies they were bringing back to their states. that is fundamentally wrong. americans don't believe this health care bill was voted on based on merits, it was voted on -- this fundamentally misses

the mark in introducing free- market reforms into health care. we have the same fee-for-service program we had before. we made a bad health care bill a bigger, that health-care bill. >> i it fundamentally disagree that repealing this is the right idea. we should not be screaming and pointing fingers, we should be making it better because of our small businesses, our state and local governments and our federal government cannot afford to consume the money we are consuming and health care. our economy spends 80% of its gdp on health care. -- 18% of its gdp on health care. other countries spend half that. if we take a business approach to refining was there, the people across the country will be better off. >> let's drill down a little more on health care. does of the country have a moral obligation to provide coverage to the 51 million americans who currently lack insurance?

for mr. bennett, how do you assess the witnesses or shortcomings of the health reform bill that passed and you supported? why was there some much more emphasis on coverage and cost? what would to do to adjust it? >> i think we have a compassionate country and we need to do everything we can to get health care to every person. that doesn't mean we have a top down model of health-care presented by the federal government. it means we lower-cost of health care and created a system where everyone can afford health care. those who can't come we have medicaid and other programs, but we have to encourage people to get on health care based on increasing quality and reducing costs. we do this like grand junction did it, by coming together as a community and developing a model from the bottom up. >> i appreciate the observation

at the end. my amendments were based on the work grand junction has done. these are colorado ideas that are on the health care bill that ken buck and others at demonize. these are ground-up ideas. is -- we are on an unsustainable path. i have always maintained from the beginning of the health-care debate that we ought to be focused first on cost because whether people are -- whether people are cover not, cost is the critical thing destroying the economy and killing small businesses. he thought everyone got health care because everyone could get to the emergency room. that's an incredibly expensive way to deal with this and it is a tax we are all paying as taxpayers and policyholders. it is an unfunded mandate that i have to pay and you have to pay and we can do better as a country if we set partisan politics aside and work together in a business-like fashion. >> the reality is the cost curve

was not bent down by this health care bill. costs will rise at a faster rate. i read recently that if the government did nothing, costs would go up less than they're going up under this health care bill. that's a disgrace. senator bennett was the deciding vote on it and it's not the kind of health care we need in this country. >> i don't know where you read that, but it is certainly not true. >> thank you for your questions. we have taken a look at some campaign ads that have attracted a lot of feedback from our viewers. she joins us to give the race a reality check. has been quite a nasty battle. >> isn't a shame? we have to decent, smart, and hard working men and you would not know it from the ads. out of state groups have spent more money on a colorado state races than any of the race in the country. the stakes are high and the

truth is attack ads work and the candidates know it. thank you to both of you for being here. i have spent the last several months researching these ads and breaking down the claims. now want to give you a chance to respond to some of the more provocative charges. you will each have 45 seconds for a response and rebuttals. we'll start with an ad that just hit the air this past week that tax mr. buck for his handling of a rape case as the district attorney. >> ken buck thinks he is more qualified because he is not a woman. this coming from a d.a. who refused to prosecute and admitted it races -- admitted rapist saying he had a buyer's remorse. >> that at would have us believe you are a sexist. >> there is a line, even in politics, but you don't cross. that line has been crossed in this case. the paper called this and add an active idiotic political malice.

my office is tough on the prosecution of crimes against women, rapes, and domestic violence. we had a huge success rate, we had a 192-year sentence against brendan bradshaw in a rape case, five life sentences in rape cases. this case is abnormal on -- this case is abnormal. but to use this story for political gain is a sad commentary. >> senator bennett, your bottle? >> @ think what is crossing the line is being prosecutor and describing a victim in a rape case as having buyer's remorse, whether you ultimately prosecuted or not. to describe it as buyers remorse is horrible. to do it on national television, when given the opportunity to apologize and say something different, he did not. i think he is out of touch on these issues. but -- as the father of three little girls, the idea he has

advocated a constitutional amendment that would ban abortions, not just bad, criminalize it, including in cases of rape and incest is just wrong. i believe buyer's remorse -- that discussion is an appropriate one to have. >> do you think you are out of touch? >> i am not out of touch. senator bennett's ads have been called deceitful, false and misleading. for senator bennett to question my office or my integrity in prosecution when he has never walked a quorum and prosecuted the case in his life for stood up for women the way i have in my office, is just empty. >> i have been a prosecutor, i have prosecuted cases. once again, you are wrong on the facts and i have a lot of sympathy for the fact checkers looking at your ads. >> let's turn to an ad that attacks you, senator bennett. it criticizes you break, he made

in regard to the national deficit. >> not only do we have $12 billion of debt, but the tragedy is we have nothing to show for it. >> but he voted to spend an average $2.5 billion per day on things like the failed park filled stimulus and obama care. now, he is outraged. >> absolutely nothing to show for it. >> do you really feel we have nothing to show for it? >> that statement was taken completely out of context, which is amazing since i have said exactly the same thing all across the state in the red parts of the state and the parts of the state. the recovery package was not perfect. most republicans and democrats and economists believe it saved us from having a great depression. we have a great recession and are still in it and we have a horrible and employment rate. but as the father of three little girls, it's not enough to say we just saved us from the great depression. we have 13 trillion dollars of debt on the balance sheet and we

have failed to invest our -- invest in our roads, bridges, waste water systems -- we have not even had the decency to maintain the assets are grandparents built for us, much less build the and the structure needed the 21st century. this is a consequence largely of the policy can but is now endorsing that led us to this horrible economic situation. >> it is one thing to say somebody else accumulated $13 trillion in debt, but the truth is cents senator bennett has been in d.c., we have accumulated $three trillion dollars in debt. that statement shows that he is going to washington d.c. to clean up. the reality is he has been in washington d.c. and hasn't done anything to clean it up. >> quite the contrary, what i am doing as a member of a generation that has done more

than any other generation in the history of the planet is saying that we as a generation have done this and if we do not clean up, the next generation will be paying a heavy price. my daughter has made a very clear to me she is not willing to pay back. we need to make the hard decisions to make sure we pay the debt and deficit down. having had a lot of experience in the private sector and a lot of experience restructuring very difficult budget that the local level, i bring a lifetime of experience to this job doing exactly that. >> i want to turn to a couple of claims in ads you have run against each other that i found misleading at best. first, an ad by mr. bok. >> what is under to colorado's ben's record of overspending, over regulating and a rubber stamp for his friends in washington. he is legislating unemployment. >> for the video back up of this ad, it says senator bennett favor higher taxes 24 times.

i went and looked up these votes and found most of them to be procedural motions. for example, to kill health care reform or the stimulus. is it disingenuous to say he voted to favor higher taxes 24 times? how do you legislate unemployment? >> you legislate unemployment by not doing anything about unemployment as it continues to rise in this country. what senator bennett did as a rubber-stamp for president obama was he focused on the issues of health care, which they have put on the table for him. he focused on financial reform and of three issues but not on unemployment. that is how you legislate and employment, by ignoring it and putting in 10 tax increases in the health care bill, onerous tax increases like the 1099 requirement. >> i appreciate the chance to respond to this. i have cut tax on 98% of people in colorado and most of those are for middle-class and working

families but it's actually for everybody. small businesses as well, i mentioned $12 billion in tax cuts. we passed the small business bill just a month ago that ken buck opposed. he is saying erased taxes and that is totally false. we need to have a tax policy and regulatory policy that drives innovation, not one that protects big oil companies and protect the largest insurers. the one that supports our working families, middle-class families, and entrepreneurs in a state like colorado. in the state of colorado. >> i understand you say you did not read the stimulus bill before you voted on it. you must not have read the health care bill before you voted on it either because there are 10 tax increases in that health care bill and you voted for them. they have not all kicked in yet, but when they do, people in colorado will be plenty bad and many of them don't kick in until after the election. >> the vast majority are going

to get tax cuts and in fact have gotten them. >> senator bennett, there is a pattern to your at framing your opponent as an extremist. i found some of the claims to be a bit extreme. we will take a look at a couple that were in have irritation. >> but wants to privatize social security. even question whether social security should exist at all. >> ken buck wants to end federal student loans for kids. >> you talked about having your comment taking out of context -- you used as backup for these claims some of mr. buck us -- some of mr. buck's comments. he's talking about protecting social security for seniors and it says we should be able to will our benefits should we die before collecting on them. on student loans, he was not opposed to the loans. he was opposed to a law that put them in the hands of the federal government. how do you defend these claims? >> again, i have great sympathy

for you in the job you're doing because every time i come to the debate, i feel like i'm debating ken buck 1.0 and the ken buck 2.0. he said many times he is against that and either one was fundamentally against what he believed. those are his words, not mine. with respect to student loans, he said the founding fathers did not intend for us to have to the loans. he said americans were going to have to "wean themselves off of student loans." i can give you all this in chapter and verse, but it is the consequence of him having run an entirely different race in the republican primary and he is trying to run in the general election. -- than he is trying to run in the general action. >> here is a man who said he wanted to go to washington d.c. to clean it up. he may not have control over the outside group at, but he has

control over his and they are sleazy. you had the opportunity to look it does that then the tape from the cameraman the democrats have fallen around at every opportunity. i did not say the things they said i said. what i talked about when i talked about to the lunch was needed to guarantee to the loans programs and put it in the health care bill to reduce the cost of health care bill. i don't want the federal government running the program. all of the banks running the program so as accountability and keeps an outsider the federal government and leave it as a guaranteed student loan program. >> even if what you're saying is true, which is not, which is not a true reflection of what he said during the primary, even if it were true, the idea we would take the student loan program and put it in the hands of banks to charge credit card rates to our students trying to go to college, i think it's horrible policy choice. >> it was for 20 years. >> that exactly the consequence.

what it did was created a huge subsidy for private companies at the expense of our kids in now have the benefit of $60 billion more of student loans when they are in the worst economy since the great depression and are taking refuge in our community colleges and four-year colleges. that's a good thing and not a bad thing. >> did he say do away with student loans? >> he did. he said "the american people would have to wean themselves off of stallone's." >> i did not. the reality is there going to have to run the program -- wean themselves off of student loans. >> he says one thing in washington d.c. and says another when he is back in colorado. >> on this subject, when it comes to kids and of their loans, we ought to be giving them the most efficient loan possible. >> the government is more efficient? >> in this case, it is.

there is only one of us who is ever -- who has ever were to reform government and that's me. >> how is that pension fund doing? >> better than any other teachers fund in the state of colorado. don't make up your own facts. [crosstalk] there is an actuarial report that came out and i would be happy to get it to you. >> we have diverged here. >> the system is in better shape than the educational retirement systems in colorado. >> of want to get to this final question. we have had a lot of comments disgusted by how ugly -- adding both of you have noticed this, how ugly this race has been. i cannot help but notice that the most recent ads that both of you have paid for here on cbs are both positive. they both have your families in them. i wonder if he never gotten the message?

as our viewers have said, this race has gotten too negative. why has it gone so badly? >> i don't know why. we have control at work -- we have control over our ads but not the outside ads. our kids are a heck of a lot better looking than we are and we will get more votes by putting our kids on ads than putting ourselves on the ads. so it makes a lot of sense. for people to know i care deeply about my family, i love my daughter and care very much about the rights she has in this country. >> for small, -- a first of all, i regret nothing more than the fact that all these outside groups are paying the salary of everyone at channel 4. you deserve a raise as a result of all that. i believe very strongly we have to reform our campaign finance system and the way we approach this advertising.

i voted twice so that people in colorado could know who is behind these shady ads coming from outside of the state. my opponent has opposed that and it's not the law and therefore your having to watch all of this stuff. >> many of your ads have been negative, though. >> many of my ads have been positive. many have talked about the economy, many have talked about the issues facing families in our state. i do think it is very important that whoever represents the people of colorado says the same thing wherever they are -- whether they are in red part of the state or blue part of the state, whether a primary or general election -- >> i'm going to cut you off. >> it is a tough job doing the reality check. we're going to move on to the next segment of our debate. we asked viewers to send air -- to send their questions to our web site, facebook and twitter.

>> in addition to lots of complaints about the negative ads, we received lots of questions about the "meet the press" debate and mr. buck's comments about comparing public sexuality to alcoholism. many people wanted to know how that translated to feelings about gay-rights. do you foresee gay marriage as becoming valid? >> that's a question not for the federal government, buffer states. we are seeing some states decide it wants to move ahead with a marriage and others that do not. i don't believe these questions of marriage should be a question for the federal government. >> what about you, mr. buck? >> i am opposed to gay marriage. i believe marriages between a man and woman. i do not believe the federal government has a role in any

way in making these marriages legal or illegal. i think it is a state issue and i would vote for the defense of marriage act. i think it is a state issue deregulate marriages. >> senator bennett, you say it is a question for the federal government to answer. argue that? r.j. trying to be that? >> i actually said the opposite. i do not believe the federal government should be making decisions about marriage. >> so you do not have an opinion on that? you are basically saying -- >> the question from the viewer was do you see gay marriage as something that is going to go forward? i believe some states will move forward and others that decide not to. in any event, i don't think it's a question the federal government should be dealing

with. >> let's move on to the next question about illegal immigration. is a hot topic in colorado and much of the nation. what are you willing to do to secure the southern border and how do you feel about amnesty for the people who are already here? >> i am opposed to amnesty for the people already in the united states. i believe we ought to do everything we can to secure our borders. my opponent voted against e- verify, which would be to guarantee a guest worker program in the state. he has voted against sending more border patrol agents to the southern border while he agreed to vote for national guard troops. that was much later. he voted against border patrol agents. if we do not secure the southern border and enact a guest worker program that makes sense and make it a shorter time to get people into this country, we will continue to have this

issue and we will hand down to the next generation. >> i appreciate can's observation about my vote with john mccain to increase the number of national guardsmen on the border so we are strengthening our border security. i do not support amnesty either. i do support a spat -- i do support a path to lawful status. this was not a partisan issue until about 10 minutes ago. my opponent has said he would like to have a plan to shift 12 -- to ship 12 million people crossed the border. it would cost $300 billion, not including all the difficulties of a cause for local law enforcement across the country. what we do not need as 50 different states with 50 different immigration policies. what we need is to stop screaming at each other and approach this problem any -- in a pragmatic way. >> let's move on to abortion.

it has become an issue prompting plenty of questions with some saying government is becoming way too intrusive in their lives. will you really make eight raped woman carry a child to full term? others asked about abortion and the case of incest. give me your stance on abortion. >> i am pro-choice as the father of three little girls, i don't think the government has any business telling them how to make these incredibly painful decisions that ought to be made by a woman with her family and her clergy and doctor. i find it amazing who -- i find it amazing people who are always talking about giving -- about getting government out of our hair, wanting the most intimate decisions that could possibly be made. i would not support any legislation that restricted abortion in cases of rape or incest. >> mr. buck? >> i am pro-life. i can tell you there are two issues the united states said it

has addressed. the first issue is federal funding for abortions. these are two issues in the last 20 months where mr. bennett has been there. federal funding for abortions, he voted for it and i would have voted against it. there is a bill for funding foreign organizations that perform abortions with u.s. government money, i would have voted against it and mr. bennett voted for it. that is the context we are talking about. >> just to be clear, with respect to the viewer that road in, the question was would you really force a rape victim to carry her baby to term. >> thank you, senator bennett, i was going to follow up with that. >> i have answered the question in context of a the united states senate. we get caught on these social issues when the voters want to know about jobs and unemployment. they want to know about spending and we get caught on social issues. the story at the end of the day is questions on social issues. we to stay focused on the issues

that voters care about and that is spending and jobs. >> hold on just a second. mr. buck, social issues are important to the voters in the state. i'm one of them. i want to answer the question because in addition to jobs and all of which she spoke of, abortion is important. we talk about rape and incest, that is important. >> i am pro-life and i do not believe in the exceptions of rape and incest. but i will add to the question again, we need to stay focused on the issues are important to the voters in the state. if you look at polling data in over 800 meetings i have had with voters, i have been asked five or six times about issues involving abortion, gay marriage or issues like that. people want to know about jobs. at the end of this debate, that's what they should take away. >> you ran on those issues in the republican primary and to abandon the now is cynical. if you want to talk about

economic issues, which talk about those two because your positions on those issues are as far out of the mainstream as your positions on social issues. too short cut for the viewers out there, this is about, in his view, protecting big oil companies and others that have nothing to do of colorado that are paying for the television ads running against me. what it's not about is supporting our economy here in colorado. [crosstalk] >> let me respond to that. i am not the one who has accumulated $3 trillion in debt since i have been in the senate. that is out of touch with colorado values. when you rubber-stamp the ability to create good practices in the state, that's wrong. in talk about economic issues all you want. >> we are both out of time.

unfortunately, we could keep this going. >> it's always great to give the voters a chance to ask questions. we give our candidates chance to answer as well. we give the opportunity for the candidates to quiz each other. you have one minute to answer each question. senator bennett lost the coin toss, giving him the chance to enter the first question. >> senator, you have for months said you will not take a position on what is called the employee free choice act. "the also referred to as carjack. he said he disagreed with the language in the house bill. you did not explain what he meant by this agreement the language of the house bill. whether asking if you'd agree or disagree with certain provisions, i would like to know what you like about the house bill.

the like the ability to take away the secret ballot or are you in favor of mandatory arbitration where the federal government decides the conditions in the workplace? >> first, it's great to take questions from viewers, but we ought to give them the dignity of answering the questions they ask. one thing i like about the bill is shortening the time frame between the first vote and the second vote. that is where intimidation can happen and that's something nobody ought to want. what i would really like to see is labor and management working together to make sure we can solve the economic issues we face. i believe there is a very divisive this year that's not going to come for a vote and i think time ought to be spent on figuring out how to create jobs in this country and stop exporting them overseas. the tax policies you support will continue to lead us to export jobs overseas instead of building them here in colorado.

>> secret ballot and arbitration. >> he lacks the what i liked. -- you asked me what i like. i think the secret ballot rules should not change. the is the american way to have a secret ballot. being the only person up here has ever conducted a collective bargaining organization, and skeptical of the arbitration provisions because it's important to keep collective bargaining negotiations in the hands of the parties. that answer questions specifically? >> the next question is yours. >> as far as i can track it, you say you cannot support a renewable energy standard, he did not support tax credits for renewable and clean energy. what we know in colorado is we have seen more job growth in that part of the world than anything else. 20,000 jobs already, 30,000 were coming. i would like to know three things you do is to support this important industry in colorado,

including the natural gas industry. >> you made a great point at a previous debate that we have to import solar panels into this country because we cannot make them in this country. the reason we cannot is because our corporate tax rate is too high, our energy costs are too high, we have overregulated our energy production in this country. we need to make sure we have an energy policy based on good science. an energy policy that encourages energy growth so we can do the sorts of things you're talking about, make the windmills and solar panels here and create this sort of jobs that will manufacture those things in the private sector. i would decrease the corporate tax rates so we're competitive, i would find a sustainable and low-cost energy sources, and i would make sure we do not impose a health care bill on employers said they cannot manufacture. >> mr. buck, the next question is yours. >> senator bennett, you have

talked about the importance of social security and you have not yet put a plan on the table for how we make social security sustainable. my question is you have been on the committee on aging. they have oversight for social security and yet you have missed 92% of the meetings for that committee on aging. if you care so much on social security, why are you missing so many meetings? >> i do not accept your math on the number of meetings i have messed. i'm one of only 12 senators in the united states set up with 100% voting record since i've been there. i have not missed a single vote and i traveled the state 30,000 miles, having town hall meetings in the red parts of the state and what parts of this date or have not made up fax based on how receptive the audience was. it's tough to take that question coming from somebody who has missed 130 days of work in the

d.a.'s office while campaigning on the taxpayers' dime. nobody has ever questioned by worth at -- nobody's ever question my work ethic before. i did my record speaks for itself. i wrote to the amendment in the health care bill that says our seniors medicare will be protected. it got 100 votes in the senate, the most bipartisan piece of legislature passed in the senate. i don't think our seniors want to deprive the taxation of social security. i'm glad to be a specific plan of social security. i have been talking about for months, you have just not been hearing it. >> i have turned back to months of my salary to the taxpayers because have been campaigning. you have turned back nothing. the senate has been in session 39 days of the last 140. when we have unemployment where it is now, you have little ground to stand on to criticize me in relationship to the taxpayers. id creased crime with the help of the share of any have nothing

to show for your time in the senate. >> one more question, the final one from mr. bennett. >> i would like to go back to the viewers question a minute ago, since you have supported criminalizing abortions in rape and incest. my question is who is going to go to jail? when you criminalize abortion and abortion occurs, who is going to jail? >> i will tell you, i don't think abortion is going decriminalized any time soon. >> but you think -- >> let me answer your question. you have tried to take this debate off topic. we're talking about issues that are important to colorado voters. we're talking about jobs, your vote on health care and other things that colorado voters want to know about. >> this is my time to ask the question. >> [inaudible] >> you are not answering the question i ask you.

need to enter the question. -- the need to answer the question. >> i'm going to focus my campaign issue cotta voters care about deeply. i said i am pro-life. i do not believe in exceptions for rape and incest. i hope we can work together and reduce abortions. that is where my votes will be. the votes have been too -- one on federal funding for abortion. i disagree with senator bennett's vote. that is the scope of what the -- >> thank you to the before your questions. we believe that's a great way to find out what's on our candidates minds this evening. we want to go back to our panel for questions on foreign policy. >> with all the focus on the economy, the war in afghanistan is not getting much attention,

even a larger you agree america 's security * all other issues. i know you opposed to announce a timetable and senator bennett, i believe you have a different view. what would be the best course in that country to lead us to an exit strategy? >> i believe we need to define our mission airily. it is two things -- bacchus -- afghan border to stamp out the remnants of al qaeda. second, to give the military in pakistan time to secure the weapons, the nuclear-weapons in pakistan, that is a worldwide concern that those weapons be secured. then the government in pakistan cannot be counted on to do it and we cannot do it. then we need to start coming home and we need to start coming home in the middle of next year. this is the longest shooting war in our country's history and we simply cannot afford it anymore.

i believe the troops that have come back to colorado share that view. i don't think they want to stay there longer than that. we need to start bringing people home in july of next year. >> i think we have the wrong policy in afghanistan. i don't think we should be in the business of nation-building in afghanistan. we should set certain goals, accomplish those goals, draw on forces and bring them home. i think it's a mistake to tell your enemy when you are leaving and let them hide for a while and come back after you have left. i think we need to do three things -- first, make sure afghanistan is not a safe haven for terrorists. i'm not talking about a possibility of a terrorist in afghanistan, and say when you look at other countries that are similarly situated, afghanistan is at least as safe as those countries. we need to disrupt and dismantle the drug trade coming out of

afghanistan and promote stability in central asia. accomplishing those goals, we need to draw on our forces and get out of the nation-building business. we cannot lose more lives and spend billions of dollars more to rebuild afghanistan. >> we have lost 81 call robins in iraq and afghanistan. -- we had lost 81 coloradans in iraq and afghanistan. my opponent has changed his opinion sometimes it's hard to keep track. when he says it said import we have military and political stability there, that's another way of saying our troops will be there forever. that region cannot be stabilized by the united states of america pause military forces and it's unfair to ask them to do it. -- the united states of america 's military forces. >> i know these national security questions don't pop the polls, but they are critically important.

about a tenuous balance between security and liberty, protecting our country and protecting personal liberties. do you believe the patriot act has served our country well? where are you unclosing the base in guantanamo? if you favor closing the base, why has that not happened? mr. buck, you are up. >> my son is in his last year at west point. i will probably in his second lieutenant bars on him in may of next year's. -- may of next year. i think we have been well served by the patriots act. we need to make sure law enforcement and other security agencies are using it in a way that is responsible, given our love for liberty in this country. i would not close guantanamo. the idea of treating terrorists as committing an unlawful act as opposed to a terrorist or military act is wrong.

our country is giving terrorists to be rights when we bring them to this nation and try them in this nation. my opponent voted for funding of the trial to be held in new york city, that is a mistake. we should not give these terrorist our constitutional rights when they're flying planes into our buildings. >> thank you for your questions. >> do i get to answer? one of the things that brought my country to this -- brought my family to this country, there were survivors of the holocaust. i think it's important that next -- the threat we're facing is evolving. i agree with my opponent that we need to make sure every step along the way that we are vigilant in balancing our civil liberties. we should not give those up either. i support the closing of guantanamo bay, but to answer

the question directly, the reason it has not happened is because a number of this voted against the administration tried to close a because they did not have an adequate plan for what to do with the people who were there. until the administration comes up with an adequate plan to do it, that's how i will continue to vote. i think it is in the long-term national security interest of america to close guantanamo bay. >> thank you. we're going to take a moment to ask a few questions. you at 20 seconds to answer and we will live on to the next question. in every campaign, mistakes are made. what they been made while campaigning do you wish you could take back? senator bennett, you go first. >> i wish i had the time to explain the $13 trillion context. i'm not responsible for $13 trillion dollars of debt.

i have made many proposals on that. otherwise i feel quite comfortable the statements i made in the primary and general election. >> i recently made a statement about global warming. i have always had the position that the science is unproven in global warming. i was using language and i think it was unfortunately attributed to me in a way that is not my belief. >> by this time, you know your opponent as well as you know yourself. which do you think your opponent wishes he could take back? >> i think all of these commercials -- i'm sure senator bennett is an honorable man. i have not seen that much, but i'm sure he's an honorable and i'm sure you'd like to take back those ads. when your call despicable and when papers say you are running

a sleazy campaign, and sure senator bennett does not want to face his three daughters and explain why he is doing those things. >> i'm going to oppose every single bit of evidence riata i have run on our web site and your viewers can take a look at -- every piece of evidence i have run on our website. i'm tired of having my character in be viewed by can but -- my character is impugned by ken buck. >> we know the time you have given to your campaigns is all consuming. what is the impact on your family? mr. bock, we will start with you. >> it has had a big impact on my family. fortunately, both my children are out of state and don't have to watch the ads that have been run. i have tried to break the tv on

a number of occasions and it has not worked. we have grown closer in a lot of ways because we have had an opportunity to campaign together. campaigning with my children the summer was a great experience that i valued and i think they got a lot out of also. >> i would say first that everyone should understand there have been far more negative ads run against me than i have run in this race. it has been a delight to be with my wife, susan, and our three little girls traveling around the state. they are all in public school in denver and this has given them a chance to see what a beautiful state we have. also how much bigger a world we live in. their world is not just their context, but the struggles people are having all across the state. >> we have reached the closing segment of our debate. we will give each candidate a minute to make their case directly to the voters. mr. buck won the coin toss and elected to go second. >> thank you for putting this a

debate on for the people and the other zero -- the other hosts who are here. it is important for your viewers. we are facing enormous difficult economic times in this country and we have a runaway deficit and a runaway debt. i believe we can solve these problems together just as generations before have by coming together, rolling up our sleeves, forgetting about ideologies and focus on pragmatic problem-solving, which is what i have done my entire career. this is the first run i have made for office, but having significant private sector experience and significant experience working in a tough government situation that the local level gives me a totally different perspective than 99% of the senators back there. i promise to you the commitment i will make is i will do absolutely everything to make sure we are not part of the first generations to leave less opportunity, not more, to our kids and grandkids. that was our parents legacy and

we need to uphold it. >> we have a great opportunity to choose between repeating our mistakes and creating a state in the country that our kids and grandkids would love to live in. we all protest on april 15th when the congress ran up more and more debt and we knew it was tax day and we would have to face the price for that debt at some point. we sent e-mail to senators and representatives when we were going to pass the health care bill because we knew the burdens it would place on us. we told congress we don't want them to stymie growth and get off the backs of small business. yet, they did not listen. they ignored us. on november 2nd, we have the opportunity to make sure our senator and folks in washington d.c. don't ignore us anymore. i would appreciate your support and i hope you go to my website and click on the advertising

section and see exactly what other news organizations have said about those advertisements. >> thank you for being with us, gentlemen. we hope we have helped the voters prepare for campaign 2010. it promises to be an interesting election day. our partner will be airing this debate in its entirety friday at 7:00 on channel 12. friday, we will bring in the gubernatorial debate live at 6:00 and it will re-enter that same evening at 9:00 on channel 12. for complete election night coverage, join us for a live, commercial free coverage of the colorado race and a look at the national election awhile -- national election as well. you will find our debates on line as well as complete coverage of campaign 2010. thank you for being with us. we hope we have helped you make an informed decision this election year. have a great evening.

>> midterm elections are november 2nd. here on c-span, we're showing debates from key races run the country. here is the lineup for today. next, the candidates in the wisconsin senate race face-off. later, the u.s. senate race in florida. then, the candidates running for florida governor. >> this week on "q&a" -- two former parliamentarians compare and contrast the house of representatives and house of commons. on the rules that run parliament and congress, tonight on "q&a."

>> one of the great features of the c-span video library is the ability to clit venture programs with your friends. during the campaign season, that includes more than 100 debates. if you are new to it all, watch the tutorial on our web site. search, find, and share with the c-span video library. >> now the third and final debate between ron johnson and russ feingold. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> the following is a special 12.entation of wisn

>> wisconsin's voice will help shape the nation's agenda. your vote on november 2 will the -- what does decide who will represent wisconsin on the national stage. ron johnson and russ feingold join mike gousha for discussion. they will take questions from citizens of wisconsin. it is part of the upfront town hall challenge. from marquette university law school in milwaukee. , mike gousha. [applause]

>> hello, everyone i am a journalist to exports public policy. i am also the host of the political affairs program, "upfront," in august, we hosted a the gubernatorial candidate in the republican primary. then it was the democratic candidates. tonight, we are joined by democratic senator russ feingold and his challenger ron johnson. i will be asking them questions for the first months and then we -- th4e first 15 minutes and then we will take questions from citizen groups. they were recruited based on their participation in local communities. we found them by reading letters to the editor, minutes from school board meetings, council meetings. they are republicans, independents, democrats, tea party members. they want answers to the

questions. we want to thank them for their participation. some of them are in our audience tonight. my colleague is here with me with a group of citizens from southeastern wisconsin. also dan jones from milwaukee public television is fielding questions from our internet of yours through wispolitics.com and wisn.com. this is a conversation. people tell us that they want to hear more than talking points. the time will go by quickly. we are asking the candidates to answer the questions as directly and as concise as possible. the candidates can speak to each other directly. again, i will play the role of a traffic cop. our goal is to have the candidates address the issues that the citizens groups braced

-- raised and answer how they would address the toughest challenges. there are no opening statements but each candidate will have a closing statement. we tossed a coin and mr. johnson will go first. i thought that we would be getting a better sense of your world view, what you think about the current state of affairs. mr. johnson, what do you think poses the greatest threat to our nation at this point in history? >> there is no doubt about it, this is the out of control spending and debt going in this country. when i drive around the state, that is the issue. the economy and jobs. we have to get this economy moving. we have to create jobs. people understand that racking up deficits of $1.4 trillion, over $3 trillion has been added

to the debt in the past three years. senator feingold has voted for that. that is unsustainable. they look at that and they see greece and france. they understand that we are on the same path and we need to do something about it. >> senator feingold, what do you think? >> i think that this is more complicated. i have worked hard to reduce the debt and deficit and i successfully did so with clinton and the republicans despite mr. johnson's advertising which is totally false. we have more challenges. this challenge of jobs is real. we have to create ways to have job creation. there is an international situation out there. one of the greatest threats we have is that al qaeda attacked us and has not been brought under control.

our challenges are multiple, they're not just one. >> when i hear you on the campaign trail, it is basically that washington doesn't get it. what evidence do you have? >> we are over $800 billion in additional debt. senator feingold cast the deciding vote for the stimulus package. the government can create long terms of sending jobs and that was the premise that was wrong. it is the private sector that creates long-term, sustainable jobs. that is the point i'm making. this election is a pretty stark choice. a pretty clear choice in terms of the two candidates. senator feingold spent the better part of 30 years in politics as a politician verses myself, 31 years as a manufacturer. i created real jobs. this is a pretty stark difference.

>> is there any reason why a career politician is a bad thing? there are others out there. >> the distinction of a to make is what kind of government philosophy does that boston -- politician have? believes that the government is the solution to our problems -- senator feingold believes that the government is the solution to our problems. my philosophy is less government control, spending, taxes. that is a big difference between a career politician. someone who relies on the government versus someone who has traded jobs. >> the truth is that i voted to cut taxes. he said that the recovery bill did nothing. this provided a tax break to 95% of all families in america. the health care bill, this is helping 85,000 small businesses

in wisconsin. they will get a tax reduction to help them pay for the health care for their employees. we also passed a tax cut to any business that hires anyone that has been laid off more than 60 days. this will be a $6 billion tax cuts. on all of these issues, i have supported and passed tax cuts. he would like to wipe out that entire agenda. his statement is that the recovery built it and nothing is absolutely false. that is absolutely false and he keeps saying it despite the fact that it is not true. the evidence is that that bill probably prevented a depression and is estimated to have created or preserved 1.5 million jobs. the notion that it did nothing flies in the face of all reality.

>> what are the arguments that you hear is that firefighters' jobs are safe, teachers' jobs are safe, what is your response? >> three days before senator feingold cast the vote, he issued a press release that said that in the first year it would create 2.4 million dogs. -- jobs. the fact of the matter is that we are down in jobs. there was far more jobs lost so the net effect was 2.6 million jobs lost. 85,000 just in the state of wisconsin. >> because of the recovery bill? >> if you do the math, they come in at a high cost. those are just temporary jobs.

they were not private-sector, self sustaining jobs. those are the jobs that actually fund the government we need. >> you had better tell the people in plymouth, wisconsin. that community work for 11 years to have a new senior center. when the economy tanks, their plans and hopes were dashed. i was with them the other night and they had a celebration. the reason that they're going to have this senior center is because of a $1 million grant from the stimulus package. that is a very conservative community. it was doing the work? this is a private company from sheboygan, wisconsin. they were doing the private work and this is a permanent firm. >> you know what else is permanent? the $800 billion in debt that is

passed on to the children and grandchildren. >> this is a philosophy question. i heard you at an event a few weeks ago where you were speaking to a group of commercial realtors and you were telling a story about senator judd gregg who is retiring from new hampshire. you quoted him as saying that you have to understand that the people up here in washington don't get it off, that they don't believe in the free market system and profits. my question is, do you believe that that is true? i would assume that if you are telling the story that that is true. does senator feingold fit into that category? >> certainly when you hear him demonize businesses, that is certainly the implication. it is unfortunate that many

people in washington to not understand how the free market works, how private enterprise works. the exhibit of this is the failed stimulus package. what they should have done, they should have come in and said that these tax increases that are scheduled, we will not increase taxes. we will make those tax breaks permanent. that would provide to the certainty that would have cost consumers to start thinking about spending and that business people would have thought that maybe this economy will start recovering. by the way, that is what creates real jobs. that is what gives people incentives. they think the economy will grow and the demands will increase. $2,000, $3,000 tax credit, that is not what prompted business person to create a job. >> how can someone say and $800 billion bill that includes a $250 billion tax cut is somehow

a waste of money or a ballooning of the deficit? the fact is that that was a tax cut. you have never confessed that the bill had a tax cut because you're so committed to pretend that it did nothing. you cannot even it meant that 95% of all families got a tax cut. -- you cannot even admit. i talked to a guy in lake geneva. he said that he added jobs because of the tax cuts. this is literally saying, if you do this, we will give you a tax cut, to a business. they will have a tax credit to stimulate a more of this. on every item here that has to do with tax cuts on the last three years, he is against them and i am for them. >> there's more to what he is saying.

he can make his argument for himself. your critics would say that when he talks about an anti business attitude, he says, look at the things that russ feingold has done. they will say several. they will say that he has not voted for wall street regulations. -- look at the things that russ feingold has done. he would like to regulate political advertising, trade. this is a person who would like more government control in our lives. >> that is false. >> that is a true statement. >> it is true that i don't favor the larger institutions. i favor main street. try to let wall street make their own rules because this would hurt local banks and institutions. this bill does not do the job of regulating wall street adequately and yet you have

over regulation of the banks and credit providers here in wisconsin. we just passed a bill that is providing credit with some help from the government to these banks. this is making an enormous difference. my issue is that i favor the small citizens and the main street businesses and of course some of the big companies. you can ask the people at harley-davidson, the organic farmers, any kind business in the state whether i have worked to try to help them and i have. when certain businesses start having a stranglehold over parts of our economy like wall street or the insurance companies, whom mr. johnson will defend any time, they will destroy small businesses. what led me to the health care bill, the constant complaints from citizens who said that the insurance company was destroying their ability to cover their own employees. that is why i fight for them.

>> first of all, i am a small business person. i am main street. i pay about half a million dollars to insurance companies. i want to make sure that we can lower costs. the reason that the tax cuts did not work in the stimulus package is that there's nothing else that this administration did. everything else that has been done has created uncertainty in our economy. when you spend $800 billion, you will eventually have to take money. inflation will explode. again, they took the $800 billion and they threw it at the wall hoping it would create jobs and then they spent the next year trying to take over 1/6 of the economy. part of the provisions is the addition of more irs agents. a new regulation that requires small business owners to fill

out a form that they give more than $500 a year to. they did not say that the taxes were going to increase. that is a high level of uncertainty. they have not taken captain trade off the table. -- cap and trade off the table. from the standpoint of a business person, will we have our jobs? there is no certainty and stability. >> he smiled when he said main street. why? >> he does not know he is talking about. he does not have the scope of experience i have around the state. he might know his own business. i talk to the people producing fences. he said, it is going well for him.

he is getting orders much later than the year. you find the same thing in other places. there are certain businesses that are down. you go to o'brien and -- you go to o'brien and oshkosh. they are able to put their financing together. there is a lot of positive energy are there. the worst in the weekend do is -- the worst thing we can do is depress it. even though it is not fast enough, the private employment in this country has gone up every single month for nine months. the wisconsin unemployment rate is about 1.5 points lower than the national average. we can sit here and say that nothing good has happened but once again this is not the truth. there are some good things happening and we need to encourage those things, concurs things like water technology so that this can be the silicon

valley of water. i have been engaged to do this. i am the candidate who is taking the time to learn about all the different kinds of businesses in the state. he has a very narrow focus on his own business and he does not have the experience. >> i have talked to all kinds of businesses. i have been doing this full- time for six months. i have visited countless businesses. every time i asked about this, i have yet to have one person who said that this has created jobs. not one person says that this will have any effect at all. >> our citizens groups have questions. we will begin with pam. why don't you go ahead with your questions? >> this is an extension we have

been talking about. this is a question that could make or break it. >> what role if any do you feel that federal housing policy played in the economic collapse? what role do you feel that federal housing policy should play? >> if you go back to what actually created a housing bauble, it was the federal government housing banks. they work moaning to people who -- loaning to people who cannot afford the homes. they said, don't worry about this. we will have fannie mae and freddie mac guarantee those loans. they had every incentive to

offload the is. the beginning of our economic problem was relieved of this was caused by washington. fortunately, this was paid for by the american taxpayer. >> he says that government is responsible. >> that is very convenient. he let everyone else involved off the hook. wall street had something to do with this itself. the use of derivatives, these to not just relate to housing. the fact that the glass-stiegel act was overturned was critical. i was one of 8 senators to vote against it. that is a -- no one was serious about this issue believes that this was just about housing. however, i do think that we need reforming. when john mccain brought up the amendment on the financial

regulation bill and said that we should include these gse's was in -- within the category of institutions, i was one of only two democrats to vote with him. i said, that's right. they might have played a role but to this strange any -- strains any credibility to say that this is only because of that. >> i did not say it was only. the big banks certainly played a role. the fact of the matter is that congress's reaction to this thing was a 2300 page bill that did not even addressed the problems of the fannie and freddie. we had an entity that was turned too big to fail. regulation already failed. >> did they get the answer they were looking for? >> that may ask the person to ask a question. >> the answer to the first part

but the second part is that does housing policy play a role in the economy? >> the housing sector will. this will have to work its way out. unfortunately, homes will have to be foreclosed on. what we need to do is to remove all the other uncertainty. this is caused by this administration's policies. this was what the senator passed for the housing and a stimulus bill. we don't want to increase taxes. we have to remove that uncertainty. >> that will be critical. mr. johnson says he is willing to put the mortgage interest on the table. that is unacceptable to me and that is a tax increase. that will have a devastating impact on housing and the ability to stimulate the housing market. i've never considered the

possibility of getting rid of the mortgage interest production. -- deduction. >> that is not true. i was talking about that we need tax -- >> i will go to green bay and tammy eliot we are continuing down the same path as the decisions made and what we have learned. >> the securities and exchange commission was created in 1934 on the heels of the great depression and it has primary responsibility for enforcing the federal securities laws and laws regulating the securities industry. i have howard brown here with a question. >> i have a question, i asked them to put themselves in the position of front-line government officials.

if you were the chairmen of the sec, how would you expect wall street to self regulate? how would you direct the agency to to a more effective job of achieving its mission? >> of course, i would not expect or think that wall and street itself regulate. that is essentially what happened after the repeal of glass-stiegel. it was like the ok corral and the federal regulators to not do their job properly. the problem is that having regulation often does not work. their knees to be absolute rules -- there needs to be absolute rules preventing certain things from happening. too, they get regulated between all the back-and-forth between lobbyists being hired. 8 i was the only democrat to vote against this bill because it did not meet basic rules.

he did not get rid of the too big to fail institutions. you cannot have this. we need to get back to the rules to make sure that investment houses and banks are not allowed to intermingle. that distinction was critical. the fact that it was lost is important. i think that the regulators can do it very important job but without those provisions, that becomes difficult. >> i think that we are close to agreement on this. obviously, banks cannot self regulate. we need regulation. what happened the regulation bill, this did not address the problem. i can, we have antitrust laws on the books. the fact that any entity became too big to fail this proves that the regulation failed. had been in this position, i would have been looking back when the banks were operating properly.

rather than write a new regulation, i would have looked at what works. glass-stiegel was put in place after the depression. that works pretty well. >> we will go to channel 27 in madison. >> we had a good discussion about social security couple of weeks ago. it started with someone mentioning that they had heard the latest target date for it to run out of money is 2037 according to the social security board of trustees. then we were talking about that many people had heard and talk about experts who said that relatively minor changes relative to running out of money means that it could not run out of money.

>> would you support making changes now to keep social security solvent. if so, what specific changes would you support? >> be specific. this is a lot of you here on the campaign. >> promises have been made to seniors. the people who have retired and about to retire. we have every responsibility to honor our responsibilities. these problems with social 30 have been known for decades. instead of addressing the problem, senator feingold used this as a political football. the system has taken into $0.2 trillion in taxes. -- $2.2 trillion in taxes. win and you talk about social security being solved until

2039, that is based on the treasury bills. this is no more than an additional claim on the american taxpayer. the american taxpayer was taxed once to the tune of $2.2 trillion. >> what do we do? >> we need to look at all the options except i would not agree to a job-killing payroll increase and i would never force preposition on anyone. -- force privatization on anyone. all the other options we have on the table would be a mixture of all of those in terms of how you would make this sustainable. in terms of talking to young people, they don't even think that there would be social security for them so that there would be a receptive audience for changes. >> where come from, saying that all options on the table is not constitute being a specific. -- wants to be your senator

what he wants to do on jobs or to fix the health care system. on this one, this is almost incredible that he cannot answer your question. i will answer your question. i think we need to raise the payroll tax of all to protect upper income people. this needs to be about 106,000 to help fund social security. the reason that this fund is solvent despite your scare tactics is that this was done well before i was involved in politics. they said, we will have to raise the level that comes out of your payroll. i came back and started working in madison. this was about 60,000. now this is 106,000. i have been in every county in the state. there is almost never a listening session. i would either take this completely off or raise it to the level of the salaries of members of congress. >> different government

philosophy. i believe that if you tax people you will harm the economy. our job is to get the economy going. we have to move towards a growth agenda. >> let me go back -- >> he loves to insulate himself from the privatization charge but the words "all options on the table," means that he is open to some kind of privatization. he said that everyone who is over 65 we will keep the promises on. what about everyone in this room? what about those who are 30, 40, who have been paying? he said he would be open to the idea of volunteering privatization for certain accounts. i oppose that. i oppose proposition and always. -- oppose privatization.

i'm specific on how i would fix this. >> let me tell you why young people would possibly consider as an option putting money into their own accounts. that is because senator find gold and his colleagues took money and they spend it and now it is gone. >> you had a follow-up. go-ahead. >> i have two questions. one, about half of the social security looks like. -- goes to disabled. if they privatized, they would not be getting any money because it would not be putting any money into this. my understanding is that the social security changes that are done under president reagan were to create a surplus which was then borrowed, put into treasury bonds which paid interest back to the social security trust fund. if the government used that money for a variety of things. if they had not borrowed that from the social security fund, they would have had to have

part this from the chinese or other creditors. when the money was repaid, this would have been paid not to the social security fund but to the chinese. >> it is understanding what that trust fund really is. if you have $20, you spend that on dinner and then you write yourself and i know you, do you really have an asset? -- and you write yourself an iou. when the federal government does this big, that is simply a claim on taxpayers. the federal government already taxed us once in order to reclaim those treasuries, you will have to tax us a second time. >> mr. johnson has completely mischaracterized my record. i have been trying to prevent this. remember when al gore was made fun out because he wanted to

create a lock box. we have not passed this because there are people here who want to play games with the money. i will not tolerate that. people with disabilities need to be included in this program. >> you are running an advertisement where you have all of these objects on the table and you run your hands across them and say that these are off the table. >> i simply said that privatization is off the table. he has stated that he is willing to be open to some kind of proposition and i have said for me, that is off the table. that is -- >> let me take our next question. we have a couple of questions from people who are watching this.

>> we have been getting some great questions from all over the state. in a capitalist society, the basic goal of a business to make a profit. would people with this goal the good running our government? why or why not? >> what makes that necessarily a transferable skill? >> we need a different perspective in washington. we have an ad that says that in the u.s. senate, there are 100 senators. there are 57 attorneys. there are zero manufacturers. we are talking about budgets in excess of $3.5 trillion. only a business person owned -- understands the discipline. i a need to balance the budget. that is the engine for economic growth, a surplus.

i understand that. i'm afraid wait too many career politicians do not understand because they never operated as a business. their only perspective is writing rules, regulations, imposing taxes. we just need a different perspective. >> i have worked with a lot of business people like mark warner, frank lautenberg, various successful business people. herb kohl took a look at the health care bill and he said, you bet. he said that is the right thing to do. you look at the recovery act, with his business experience and background he said that this is the right thing to do. what is wrong with his business judgment? >> they have failed.

the stimulus package failed. the health care bill has taken $500 billion away from medicare. we are putting 16,000 additional irs agents. this is designed to lead to a government takeover of the health care system. >> he refuses to answer the question which how do you justify this argument that business people bring a perspective that these to the conclusion that you would not vote for those bills when herb kohl is one of the most successful business people in the history of the station. about -- he proudly voted for the healthcare bill. how do you argue that he has the market cornered on business experience? >> i think that america would like to produce products again. i'm the only manufacturer.

>> based on some polls, this is a pretty close race and it is possible that whoever wins will do so by a small margin. the challenges facing this nation are enormous and it requires people working together and finding a shared vision for the future and committing to shared parties, commitments, and sacrifices. if you win, how would you govern in light of the fact that much of the electorate did not vote for you and does not like you? >> i have experience in this one. i have always had close races. that is just the way it is. i work for everyone. i don't hold town meetings that restricted to -- that are scripted or avoid people. i go into tough places. this is the right thing to do. i made a place i would go to every one of the 72 counties and hold a town meeting every year.

i have kept that commitment. i'm very active with bipartisan initiatives. i've probably been in defaults -- in more republican-democrat, with more bipartisan initiatives. paul ryan and i meet on the plane. we have been working on having the president able to cut earmarks and other monkey business that goes on in these bills. i have probably more experience than any other senator working on a bipartisan basis and this is because i work for everyone in the state. i will respect all citizens, not just those that vote for me. >> i understand the need for excellent customer service. understand being the senator from wisconsin is a representative office and you have to represent every citizen.

i hatched a history of building consensus to solve problems. -- i have a history of building consensus. get people together, get to the input, action to start solving problems. >> we are going to the northwestern part of the state, eau claire. we are talking about an important industry in this state. >> we have not heard the word agriculture or farming mentioned yet. here is a couple of points. the number of dairy farms in the u.s. is down 33% in just 10 years yet milk production in this country is up 15%. many small farmers are being pushed out of the business

because of costs and a huge dairies as well. we have not heard anything from these candidates about the fact that dairy farmers are being paid less. there are five people understand how the products are priced. four of them are dead and the fifth one is lying. what will you to specifically to address concerns small farmers have? >> that is one important issue. >> both my parents grew up on farms. all my aunts and uncles were farmers. i would go down and work the farm. i would bale hay, i understand that. understand heritage, responsibility, hard work. as i have gone around the state of wisconsin, assuming that my history is solely in plastics, i have tried to learn.

there is one concern that i have been talking to the dairy farmers and this is to keep the export markets opened. this is critical for demand for our product to be able to maintain decent prices. i think americans in general realize that the farming economy is not a perfect system. q. can have a bumper crop, prices plunge, you lose money. -- you can have a bumper crop. i was certainly fight for this. $60 billion worth of agriculture in this state. this is an extremely important part of our economy. i will work hard to represent

the farmers as well. >> i can tell from his answer that the issues that are raised it to me by family farmers are not the ones that he is hearing about from the people he is meeting with. what i hear is that we have to reform the pricing system, one that has been traditionally based on how close a dairy farmer is to eau claire. this is hard to change because of regional rivalries. we have to do something about a problem with the farming economy, especially the area economy. people are still paying the same thing for milk and cheese in the store but our farmers are getting less. who is getting the money? apparently those in the middle, processors, retailers, co-ops, or some combination. the distribution is not going to the dairy farm. how do we solve this? the previous administration was terrible in this regard. this is administration is taking a more serious attitude. we got a good indication that

they are taking a more serious attitude about busting up this problem. this would be just as important as pricing to help us get a fair price for the milk. >> you had a follow-up question. them >> he mentioned the antitrust. does that come in the form of separate legislation or is this enacted somehow into the farm bill? >> to come to terms of the whole pricing structure, this is our -- it is archaic. key farmers don't know what price they're getting for milk. we absolutely have to reform the so farmers know what they're getting at the point of sale. >> that was not a question. the question is how you deal with these people in the middle. my answer is that the current antitrust laws are largely

adequate and they are helping to get this properly enforced. someone has an idea to make them tougher. because when it comes to derry, it is enforcing the current antitrust laws. anybody serious about representing dairy farmers would know that that is the crux of the matter. let me go over to my colleague. >> she has our folks from southeastern wisconsin with her tonight. >> we thought that education is the key to everything in life. there is a debate about how involved government should be. to answer our question is kathy davis in milwaukee. >> education is universally recognized as one of the most fundamental building blocks for human development and poverty reduction. when given the opportunity to learn, people need to contribute

to the development of their lives, their community, and their country. we thought this to be a top potopic. what role does the federal government have any education arena, and what will you do to influence or change that role and why? >> i think the federal government's role in education should be limited. i have always believed in local control of education. i -- people in all 72 counties warned me not to vote for the no child left behind at. it was a heavy handed bill. i do vote independently. there were some democrats that voted no and some yes. i voted against it. the federal government can provide funds for grants, if school districts want to do

this. that is what we have done that under the clinton administration. a new issues are important. one is small class size and after school programming. some people wanted to pass a mandate. i am against unfunded mandates. but we did provide a pot of money and give districts wanted to apply, they could. that is what happened in wisconsin. i toured schools in milwaukee, all over the state, were small cast -- class sizes were provided. the funding will be principally at the local level, and i do not like federal, heavy handed education. >> we agree on basically what senator feingold said. it should be local control. my volunteer activity in oshkosh has been largely in education. i have found of the unintended consequences of no child left behind. the federal government dictated to the states and they dictated

to the teachers. teachers can teach, and local administrators know how to administer it. i am all for local control. the role of the federal government should be limited. it can act as a clearing house for best practice teaching methods. it can help out in very distressed school districts. >> there are some in the tea partiers movement that say that we should eliminate the department of education. >> in terms of a clearing house for best practice methods. far more limited, yes. >> i am concerned that there are those who believe that they have the best ideas in washington. i believe they get carried away sometimes. i am a skeptic of some of the stuff that goes on. i prefer the ideas of the people i see in every community of this state. >> let me go over to la croix.

we will talk about health care and working in health care today. >> mike, people in western wisconsin are proud of our to local institutions and they would like the rest of the country to share and what works here. > lacros cross is home to two institutions that are efficient, reduce costs, and give patients great care. what would you do relative to health care reform to ensure this kind of model survives and is replicated across the nation? >> mr. johnson, we begin with you. >> they are a model and operating from a free market system. from my standpoint, i am for the repeal of the health care bill. >> not restructure? repeal.ce and then

this was such a costly, expensive, complex overreach. we did not have to write a 2600 page bill, another 4000 pages of regulations being written to address the issues in health care. they are basically under two headings -- cost and accessibility. it he think about what -- senator feingold provided the deciding vote for this bill -- when this bill passes, because this bill passes, every family will realize a $2,500 savings per year. in fact, the congressional budget office has issued a study that it will cost $2,100 per family. families are starting to see their premiums increase. the other guarantee is that if you like your plan, you can keep it. they're all agencies at issues studied that 51% will not be

grandfathered in. we are watching corporations right now getting waivers or else it will be dropping coverage. there will be far more people losing their plans that like, including government it -- and put on government exchanges. that will be totally controlled by the federal government. we did not need to do that. >> we went a little further on that. let me have to address the question. >> you have never seen a larger gap between questions and what is said in response in any debate i have ever been on in my entire life. they understand this issue. i am astonished to understand -- to know that mr. johnson was toured and did not understand the issue. do know what they told me? we want you to pass the health care bill. not only was i the deciding vote, i was one of the principal players in making sure that their recommendation that lacrosse has pioneered, instead

of the same procedure being ordered for everybody as a profit center for a hospital, they came up with a better idea. mr. johnson could not have possibly read the health care bill. i did. in the bill, is some of the most meaningful reforms in this area that many people believe will be the foundation of for the health care bill will save tons of money. the bill does exactly what lacrosse has shown the leadership in, and they are ecstatic that we passed the bill. >> let's hear from them because they want to follow up. >> ok, just a follow-up question. you talked about the repeal and replace sequence. with the replacement be in effect before the existing act is repealed so that the replacement could kick in as quickly as possible with the repeal? or with the one be repealed and we wait another 40 years for the replacement? >> that is a process question. >> first of all, i was not hearing anybody ecstatic about

the health care bill. but, in terms of the practicality of this, president obama is in office until 2012. i doubt that we will change his mind or that he will sign the repeal. if one of the houses of congress changes to republican hands, that house should write a replacement legislation. we would start doing things that would bend the cost curve down. includedt tort reform in this bill? the health care providers i talked to around the states, doctors that think that is not under estimate in terms of the cost. why don't people have the freedom to purchase insurance across state lines? >> are there good parts of health care reform? >> say, read it. you cannot read it. it is not being done written yet. you understand the story about my daughter -- for heart was backwards we will make sure that

there are protections for people who have pre-existing conditions. we could have done some common sense, individual bills to address these problems. it would have bent the cost curve down, start containing costs. ms. daniels and indiana, saving $20 million per year because the public sector employees are choosing health savings accounts. there are many different ways of doing this. we did not have to write 2600 page bill. that is just the beginning. >> how is he doing this? >> how would i repeal it? i would not. i know exactly how it works, and i was proud to vote for the bill. he says the priority is jobs and cutting spending. the last thing we should do is start all over. does anybody really believe after we fought for decades to make sure that we now have people being hurt because they

have pre-existing conditions that it is a piece of cake to pass that. we will be in a ball again like we were in the last couple of years. we will not get to the main issue -- which is the jobs for people in wisconsin and cutting spending. this is a formula for quite mark yhuri he said this would be his first party. -- he has said this would be his first party bureaucrats if you want to cut spending, this health care bill would add trillions of dollars over the next decade. congressional budget office say specifically $143 in the first 10 years and over one trillion dollars in the second decade? >> they are forced to use the assumption the administration gives them. that's what occurred >> we will

agree to disagree. let's go back to madison. a question about taxes. this is something that people do talk about from time to time. >> matter of fact, it was one of the few things are group agreed on and that was the statement that the irs tax code is impossible for the average taxpayer to understand. with that in unanimous agreement, we have a question. >> in an effort to simplify any more taxes, would you support a flat tax or other tax mechanisms? why or why not? >> senator feingold? >> i am open to a variety of ideas on this. this is such a complicated area. my preference would be to simplify the progress of simple -- income tax that we have. as a lot of problems. there are so many different loopholes that have to be cleaned up. if not, i am willing to look at a flat tax proposal that would

be not regressive towards working and poor people. there are other ideas out there. what i think we ought to do is have a special session of congress devoted to getting this issue simple but -- this tax simplification. it is something that almost every american agrees on. it is the kind of thing you have to agree accupon. >> right now our tax code is 70,000 pages. total revenue is $2 trillion. it is an incredibly costly beast. we can not be increasing taxes. right now, taxes on everybody are going to increase in 2011 because congress did not pass the extension. segue.'s called a i think we will address that issue that remains in

washington. >> we are well aware that at the end of the year, the tax cuts that were the centerpiece of george w. bush's presidency will expire. were task is to extend, the crash -- original budget office said that the extension of those cuts, if not paid for, would be the main cause of budget deficits over the next decade. >> yes, the question is -- do you support extending the bush tax cuts? if so, should they be paid for and if so how? >> i absolutely do agree that we should extend all the bush tax cuts which is, in effect, we should not increase taxes on any segment of the economy. what i do also disagree is the way that the congressional budget office scores this lack of tax increases. they do not take into account the economic behavior, taxpayer behavior at all.

we do not have a tax problem in this country. we have a spending problem. the evidence of that is in the fact that in 2000, our total spending was $1.80 trillion. this year it will be $3.50 trillion. we doubled in 10 years. tax cuts work. in reagan, a 2/3 increase in tax revenue. even the 2003 tax cuts, federal revenue was 1.8 trillion dollars. in 2008, revenue had grown to $2.80 billion. -- $2.8 trillion. if we increase taxes, that would harm our economy. >> if you are in a position of having to vote on a piece of legislation that says we would extend them for everyone or we will not extend them at all, how would you come down on deck? >> i would fight really hard to

extend them for all. extending into not extending top tier everybody -- the -- 750,000 small businesses, 25% of all and workers would be devastated. >> whatever there is a choice to be responsible and do something about the deficit, he is not willing to do it. tacks, hee get to brass will not pay for. over the next 10 years, we keep these tax cuts for the upper income people, that is a $700 billion hole in addition to the problems that we have and the dead. how can he say he is passionate about federal debt and is

willing to continue a practice that was completely irresponsible during the bush years? i voted against the bush tax cuts. the word to get sic -- a gigantic hole in our country's finances. . .

we want to force the politicians to prioritize spending. he voted for the budget four times. if we had the discipline back then, we would not be in this mess right now. >> this is the opposite of discipline. this is a very conservative group and named in one of the top five fiscal disciplinarians and they hated it because everyone else was a republican. this gentleman here wants to have it both ways. he cares about the deficit and the debt. he will simply not touch that as

a way to help solve our fiscal problem. this is that this -- a recipe for disaster. he will put this on a credit card for our children and grandchildren. that credit card is largely owned by china. this is trying to have it both ways. >> we will not have a growing economy if we raise taxes. that is the different perspective i am talking about. i am understand what it takes to create real jobs and it is not the government. about the u.s. military. our next question comes from waow. pam? >> we are going to switch gears. we have a laura asking a question. >> do you support a fully integrated armed forces including a repeal of do not ask, do not tell?

>> let me begin with you, senator? >> yes. >> the military commission study on do not ask do not tell and our federal judges have put in an injunction. i think that is what the american people want and that is what wisconsin voters dislike. when judges replaced democracy. i have an open mind on that. i would like to see with that study actually says. i think we should get the input from people who actually served. we are talking about operational effectiveness and a surge in morale. we should wait until we get that study. >> this country is in very tough shape and been trend by countries around the world. i do not think we should break -- wait. we cannot wait around. we have a national security

issue here. >> next question. wxow, jerry? >> thank you. polaris will soon be taking 500 jobs and leaving. the company said they are moving to mexico to be closer to their customers and save on production costs. this is a major blow for the small community of western wisconsin. what do you know about this situation? is there another reason polari'' chose to leave the state? was there anything the government could have done in this case to prevented from happening? >> mr. johnson? >> i do not know anything about the specifics. the implication is we should

not have free trade and i do not agree. i insist on free trade. i export products. i know what their trade looks like. my company exports to 25 countries including china. i have a great deal of faith in the workers of wisconsin and america. i insist on fair trade. we can compete with anybody. we operate in a global economy. it is not that we choose to compete, but rather we have to. if the government couldn't get out of the way to create a level playing field, they should. >> do you know anything about polaris? >> i do not know all of the details, now. >> the point is that he says he is for fair trade. he supports the trade agreements that obviously were not fair. he supports nafta and the deal

with china. he has devastated wisconsin. i am sure there were some [inaudible] the net is a disaster. the most conservative estimates are 65,000 manufacturing jobs lost. the idea is we were going to send the jobs down to mexico and people would do better there and buy our products here, but most of those jobs went to china. it did not work. and this managed economy has caused a brutal situation. >> you want to renegotiate? >> eliminate or renegotiate them. one of the greatest threats on the horizon is a potential dairy deal with new zealand which would be devastating for our dairy farmers as well. apparently the balance is good.

it has been a disaster for wisconsin. anyone who says they care about jobs in wisconsin with knowledge those have not been good for wisconsin. >> i did not vote for those deals. i would happily take a look at the bag for those deals -- the bad. since the mid 1990's, our economy has gone -- grown from $7 trillion to $14 trillion. six to 400 businesses export in wisconsin. -- 6400 businesses export. our farmers rely on exporting our products. i do not know what senator fine gold's proposal is with a trade war, but it would be devastating for america. >> you said it is not a good thing. you said it was unfortunate.

>> is an economic term to describe how the economy progresses. we have gone from eight tracks to cassettes, to see the's -- to that is hows, but the economy moves forward. you create new things and moved forward. new jobs are created in that process. unfortunately old jobs falloff. we are creating about two million jobs per year. there are 15 million jobs lost and that is just a fact. >> would you rather go back to the days of protectionism? >> those are fair trade deals that are balanced. the idea that things are coming up roses in wisconsin, and there is the absolute desperation of people who have lost their jobs

in kenosha, kimberly. mr. johnson's vision says it will work after the trade agreements? what do we do? we negotiate things fairly. that means you need to have environmental standards and standards for workers rights. you have to have some control over wages. these have not been balanced. that is why i voted against them. he specifically endorsed these trade agreements that have cost us thousands of jobs. >> these individual companies are tragic and we should do everything we can to help these workers. let us not forget that six to 400 businesses -- 6400 businesses do export. it is done quietly. it is not quite as noticeable as these big job losses.

>> another question from our se wisconsin citizen's group. >> a question from racine. >> federal spending and federal that have increased over the last two administrations due to unexpected increases in entitlement as well as costs of the war. the projected fiscal situation of the government is dire. what actions with you at, as senator, take your support to significantly reduce our country's unsustainable debt? >> i begin with senator fine gold. >> mr. johnson was asked repeatedly what his specific ideas were about cutting spending. he said he would not get into that because he would get attacked. i have proposed the control spending now act that has

specific provisions that would cut over $500 billion out of the federal deficit and debt. some of these are military items like the c-17 planes that the military says they are good but we do not need them. for some reason, will companies do not have to pay for their permits but the coal industry does. there is a few hundred million dollars. i have already gone some of these enacted. i work on this every day. i was part of the efforts in the 1990's where we got rid of the federal deficit. i have a great deal of experience in identifying these programs. my opponent, not only does he not have experience, but he will not even tell you when he is going to do. it is a secret plan that will be revealed after the election. >> it starts with the hard spending cap. senator feingold voted against

it four times to but the hard spending cap. $165 billion has been on spent. let's not spend it. the health care bill? $675 billion the first decade along which will be a huge budget buster. the tarp money is already law, but anything payback out of tarp goes to deficit reduction. his plan has 41 points and it is really a to launder $50 billion plan over 10 years. our deficit this year is $1,400 billion. he has a plan. we have seen this plan. the deciding vote for the stimulus, the health care bill, all of these will explode the deficit. all he is looking at is $25 billion in savings per year. that is just scratching the

surface. >> for the specific proposals that cut hundreds of billions of dollars vs nothing? bursa's absolutely no attempt to be serious and identify -- verses absolutely no attempt to be serious. medicare will be solvent for an additional 12 years because of the health-care bill, because we will cut back on waste, fraud, and abuse. if we cut this back, the official estimates are that it will add to the deficit and will make it much harder to protect medicare in the future. there is no serious effort here to identify what you would do and i have made a very serious effort. >> i made very serious proposals. when he was in office he had a 82-point plan. the deficit is now $14 trillion. >> that is absolutely false. that plan was one of the things

used so that when we came to the end of the clinton administration, there was 0 deficit and it was completely dishonest for you to say that the plan did not do that. that is completely and totally dishonest. >> you should have voted for the balanced budget back in the 1990's. we started off with a $4 trillion that and now we are at $14 trillion. >> we will talk about immigration for a few moments. let's go to scott in lacrosse. >> is not as important an issue in wisconsin as it is in the other parts of the country, but we have a question. >> it seems that the federal government has not been willing to enforce our immigration laws to protect our border. relating toyear's

wisconsin workers. >> we need to secure the borders. we need to enforce the laws on employers who are attracting an enticing the people who come in this country illegally. we should be passing laws to trap illegals. senator feingold voted to grant social security to illegals and amnesty. we do not secure the border which is job number one. it is a two-step project. >> they do not want us to just secure the border, but we need comprehensive immigration. we have a lot of people in this state who are undocumented. it is a very messy situation. i support comprehensive national immigration reform so that our economy can have a system where so many of these hard-working

people can pay a penalty, get a temporary work permit, and then ultimately have to pay and other penalty to get in line for citizenship. he would simply close the border and leave the mass as it is. >> what will you do with the 12 million people who are here illegally? >> again, i have no problem. if you came in illegally, we cannot grant amnesty, but i'm willing to treat them humanely. >> let me raise another important issue which is what is happening in afghanistan. how long should american troops remain in afghanistan? mr. johnson? >> as long as the threat that afghanistan can act as a haven for terrorists. there is a clear and present danger and it is not just in

afghanistan. it is in somalia. we need a strong intelligence capability and we need to be seeking out where the threats may come from. we have to respond to them. >> senator? >> then we should invade every country in the world then. you have to go into somalia and, yemen, pakistan. if you want to do ground troops to deal with al qaeda, you will be in the high bar that osama bin lot loves to see has fallen in. -- osama bin laden loves to see us fall in. i am not in favor of invading somalia or yemen. i want to take the steps that have been taken by both administrations to try and identify these people and knocked them out. that is how you do it. we need a timetable to get out of afghanistan like we are doing with iraq.

>> beside the terrorist threat represented by al qaeda and other similar groups, what concerns you most in foreign policy today? what keeps you up and i think about what could happen because of the actions of another nation or another group of individuals? >> i am concerned about iran. they have the capacity to take steps that i think would be very extreme, and human, and in danger not only israel but could endanger our country. we cannot allow them to become a nuclear power. i feel very strongly about that. it worries me because we are in a very delicate situation of trying to identify where they are at, what steps we can take, and when to take them to make sure either through peaceful means or other means to make sure this does not happen again. >> both iran and north korea and

represent very nature -- very dangerous regimes. it is why we should not have taken down the missile shield from the czech republic and poland. >> of the ambassador of the czech republic said -- was that a disadvantage? -- there are arguments that it was the right approach. i do not know how a missile shield relating to russia is the answer. >> to have repeatedly voted to decrease funding for. >> now what i will do is put an end to the questioning and we will wrap up questions with our

citizenry. now we have time for political statements from each of you. based on the coin toss, i believe mr. johnson goes first, followed by mr. feingold. please hold your applause. >> thank you to market university for hosting this. -- marquette university. he voted for the health-care bill and the last three budgets. he has added more than $3 trillion to our debt. we cannot afford this any longer. i offer a different direction. as an assistant legislator has been involved in creating real jobs for the past 30 years, i have a life experience to help get our economy growing again and get our spending and debt under control. america is precious. it is our job to make sure it

survives future generations and that it thrives. that is why i am asking for your vote. thank you and good night. >> think you, mr. johnson. >> thank you for having this wonderful program. i would love to have this decided on who is more fiscally responsible. i proposed a fiscally responsible programs to get rid of things that are not needed. i was involved in actually balancing the budget successfully under president clinton. the candid to my left refused to give any specifics that all about how he would cut spending except for making sure there is a huge tax cut for the very wealthy people which will balloon the deficit. almost every group has identified mean as one of the toughest people fiscally in congress. i know that is what wisconsin expects and that is what i will continue to do if you would like me to keep working for you. >> senator, thank you very much.

before we go, we want to think the candidates for being with us tonight and taking time away from the campaign trail. i know these are busy days for both of you. we do appreciate you making time here at marquette university law school. i would like to thank everyone who has been involved with the last three broadcasts. thank you to all of you at home for joining us. a special thanks to our hosts at marquette, milwaukee public television, and all of our state wide affiliates. we appreciate your work on this project. again, thank you to the candidates. the audience has not been able to applaud for a while. thank you very much for not -- for being with us tonight. [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

♪

>> imad term elections are november 2nd. here on c-span we are showing debates from key races around the country. here is our lineup for today. next, the u.s. senate race in florida. then the candidates running for florida governor. tomorrow on "washington journal," david keene discusses what conservatives are looking for in income than sand those running for office. mary kay henry talks about the union's role with elections and efforts to get voters to the polls. then richard barrett, coordinator of the u.n.-taliban coordination. "washington journal" live at

7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> it is time to get your camera rolling for this year's student camera, the video documentary competition. make it 5-8 minute video on this year's fame, washington, d.c., through my legs. tell us about an issue or topic that helps to understand the role of the federal government in your life for community. include more than one point of view alone with c-span programming. the deadline is january 20th and you could win the grand prize of $5,000. there are $50,000 in total prize is. the c-span stood in video documentary competition is open to kids in grades 6-12. for more information log onto studentcam.org. >> now i debate for the u.s. senate race in florida. marco rubio, kendrick meek, and

charlie crist. this was in fort lauderdale. the florida press association and the leadership florida organized the debate along with the wfor-tv in miami. this is about 55 minutes. >> from the beautiful campus of nova southeastern university, a decision 2010 presents the candidates for u.s. senate in florida. your host from wfor-tv cbs, antonio morra. >> welcome. this is being broadcast by a number of stations across the state in order to connect with as many candidates as possible. the three candidates are -- governor charlie crist, independent, u.s. representative kantor to -- kendrick meek,

democrat, and marco rubio, a republican. our panel tonight in includes a representative of from "the miami herald, "and a reporter from cbs television. we asked the audience to hold the applause and the candidates to follow the guidelines presented to them before the broadcast. our time is limited and the issues are endless. mr. rubio won the toss to go first. then we will go to mr. crist and then mr. meek. we will begin with the issue florida voters care most about -- jobs. nearly one in eight floridians cannot get a job. you opposed the federal stimulus which, by all accounts, saved the jobs of the firefighters, police officers, and teachers. if we had not had the stimulus money, what would you have done differently to make sure floridians get jobs?

>> thank you for having the debate tonight. let's talk about the stimulus. it was called a stimulus for a reason. it was supposed to stimulate the economy. over 3 million americans have lost their jobs. over 200,000 floridians have lost their jobs. the unemployment rate is substantially higher than before it passed. it failed to do everything it was supposed to do. and has stimulated the national debt. this is money our children and grandchildren will work their whole life to pay back. there were other alternatives to the stimulus. it begins by acknowledging that jobs are not rated by politicians. senators do not create jobs. presidents do not create jobs. they are greeted by everyday people who start a business or expand a business. we need government leaders in washington that will create an environment where starting or expanding a business is easier, not harder. that is not what we have gotten.

over the last 18 months from the stimulus package to the threats of tax increases to obamacare, everything has made it harder and a lot easier for jobs to be created. that is the next important thing the next u.s. senator from florida needs to realize. >> mr. crist, the unemployment rate has soared during your tenure as governor. why should voters trusted to get them going? >> it is important florida voters understand this has been a tough four years, probably the toughest four in the history of our state except for the great depression. it is easy to govern when money is flowing. it is hard when money is tight. it is important to take the recovery act money for one reason -- because i care about the people of our state. i care about you. if my opponent marco rubio had been your governor, 20,000

educators tonight would not be employed. another 60,000 fellow floridians would not have an income, would not have that paycheck coming to them in order to be able to put food on their table. that is unconscionable to me. that is not compassionate. i think it is important that we understand what else the stimulus did. it provided $300 billion in tax cuts. how did it do that? by investing in new home buyers. i talk to those in the housing industry every day in the sunshine state. some homes are starting to sell now because first-time home buyers thought that a thousand dollar tax credit. other things the stimulus did was invest in infrastructure. we all know that if infrastructure is invested in you will get more jobs. >> mr. meek? you, as opposed to many democrats in congress, who believe the bush tax cuts not --

should not expire including for the top 2%. peter orszag said, "no one wants to make an already staggering job market worse which is what would happen if the cuts expire as planned." you also have not proposed any cuts in taxes for other corporations even the corporate taxes in this country are the highest in the developed world. how will that create jobs for floridians? >> thank you for the question and thank you for monitoring of this debate. i am glad we are having this debate because it is about the future of this country and our state. i think it is important when you look at the stimulus that we need to let get a tool that sets the platform to stop us from going into a depression. when we look at tax cuts, the last debate, and for those of the he did not see it, mr. rubio and mr. crist stand side-by-side

to make sure the special interests and the super wealthy get their tax cuts, even those who ship their jobs overseas. middle-class families under the income of $250,000 would have to pay $6,000 per year on that tax cut for those floridians or americans to get a tax cut. i am for middle-class tax cuts, the child credit, tax cuts that will help people get back on their feet, but what they are advocating is a tax cut for those who are privileged who did not ask for the tax cut in the beginning. and was a different economic time when those were given. now we are in a super deficit. they believe in trickle-down economics. it will not work now. i am protecting those who work hard for their money every day. >> the next question. >> turning to the federal deficit, non-partisan economists argue that to avoid a medium or

long-term federal bankruptcy either taxes must be raised on all americans or reforms must begin beginning with social security. my question to you, when you hear more and more that everything is a political ally. facing that stark choice, do you raise taxes or begin to cut benefits? if so, precisely where and how? >> i think what we do is what we have done in florida. now is the time to cut taxes. this is where the speaker and i agree. we need to but more of your hard-earned money back into your pocket. we need to do this for small businesses. these are the entrepreneurs to make a difference to hire people and create jobs throughout our state and country. it is important to have those tax cuts coming about going forward to make sure you have more of your hard-earned dollars in your pocket instead of having

government spend the money in the way that is probably not in your best interest and probably wasteful. >> answer the question. either the choice economists argue is to raise taxes eventually or cut benefits. given that choice, first and foremost, which is your choice -- cut social security or raise taxes to cover those benefits? >> and neither one and i mean to be blunt. that is a false choice. what we need to do is be smart and prudent and protect our seniors. my republican opponent, marco rubio, talks about raising the age of eligibility or privatizing social security. that is not what our seniors deserve, watch, or have. i am the only one in this election who has said if elected, and i am talking to the senior citizens, i will protect and preserve social security because it was a promise made it to you. once we get through this

difficult time, we can do what we did in florida. i'm a fiscal conservative and i have a/the budget of florida by more than $7 billion and we did it without hurting education, seniors, health care. we did it by being smart, targeting, and by doing it the way i would do in washington if i had the honor. >> mr. week? -- mr. meek? steny hoyer the knowledge we would need to put everything on the table. do, like the governor, have not talked about those tough store -- those tough choices. if it comes down to having to raise taxes, as economists say we will have to do, or cut social security benefits, which is your choice? if you choose to cut, precisely how? >> eu no i have been around the longest.

-- you know i have been around the longest. the governor just said very little. he has said what we have been hearing in washington d.c., "let's cut taxes and everything will work out." that me tell you something. when it comes down to these entitlement programs, we need to weed out the waste. when you look at the health-care legislation that was passed, we are not healthier because of the money spent. it is the second largest deficit reduction legislation passed in several years. charlie crist wants to repeal it. marco rubio wants to repeal it. it is important to note that we need to make tough decisions. when it comes down to dealing with how we get there, we get there are rolling up our sleeves, making sure we work on the issues facing this country. the tax cut that the governor and marco are talking about our tax cuts that will take this country into a deeper hole.

$700 billion for the super wealthy in this country will bring about the fall of many of these programs if we do not make that tough decision. the next senator of a florida must be a protector not of the special interests but of the people of this state. >> i have not heard from either one of view what will happen with social security when we know that the full benefits will not be able to be paid out in 2037. neither of you are proposing a change in the formula for benefits or raising the age. >> report after report does indicate what you just said which is important for people to hear. reports indicate that social security is solvent until at least 2037 or 2041, yet there are people like margaret reveal who want to take away. it is one of the few programs in washington d.c. that actually works.

typical of washington, it is what they attack. >> it will not work in barely more than a generation. >> it is important to expand middle-class jobs. both to the gentleman want to give the tax cuts to companies who have jobs overseas. i want to give tax cuts to companies here. expanding the middle class in florida will help the social security fund. it is very important. when we look at this issue, 40% of floridians would go into poverty without social security. if someone wants to change social security, they will have to go through me. i take my orders from the people i represent and the people who signed petitions to place me on the ballot and those who vote for me to protect them. >> let me put the question to you.

you say we need to look at entitlement reform over the long term. you have said before that anything less is simply bad someone wanting to be elected to office. what specifically do you propose -- higher taxes or reforms? what are the tough reforms you are willing to begin considering making? >> first of all, i ask for your indulgence to set the record straight and ask that -- and answer your question. the governor has repeated something that is now an old political trick. let's scare seniors about social security. here are the facts on where i stand. if you are over the age of 55 and current beneficiary, i do not believe there should be any changes for you. there are reasons i feel that way, one of them is sitting in the audience today. my mother will turn 80 years old two weeks for today. social security is your income that she depends on. i would never support any changes that would adversely

impact her or people in her demographic. what you have not heard today for many of these candidates is a real plan to solve social security. when you heard from gov. chris is that there are no problems. that is not true. the fact of the matter is that congress has been raiding the social secure the trust fund. any money left over, they take it and use it to pay for all sorts of things. republicans and democrats have done it. by 200037 -- that me tell you about that. that will be the time my daughter turned my age. it is not that far away. here is what i said we need to do. younger workers like myself and leave -- who are 20, 30, 40 years from retirement need to realize we need to discuss other options on the table whether it is extending the retirement age for younger workers, not people on the system today.

the progressive price index or something like it. these are options. the congressional budget office has issued 30 some odd recommendations. the former labor secretary under bill clinton, someone needs to tell robert rice who thinks your plan will make it worse and not better. >> we move on to "the miami herald." >> let's do a quick question of what we the same to this voter. we talked about the stimulus. there are different scenarios. each one has a different reaction from the taxpayers. we will start with mr. meek. what do you telling small- business woman, an importer from columbia, and she is trying hard to hire more workers. unfortunately, she looks of the federal stimulus and what she sees is the money having gone to

help labor unions hire more workers or keep teachers and police, all very important people, but nothing for her. what do you tell the small business woman like that in florida? >> tax cuts, infrastructure, and money that went to really to the states to be able to balance their budgets. we look at these projects on going in some small businesses have been able to take advantage of this. some small businesses have received a tax cut from the stimulus plan. the future is now. someone appointed by the governor and someone that is a member of mr. rubio's party did not lift a finger to move the jobs bill for word for the small-business bill forward in the senate. the bottom line is this. if marco rubio was a senator, he would have voted against the

stimulus because he would not have been able to get a -- a proposal. the real issue is this. someone who is going to take on those issues for that small business woman or businessmen, i will stand up for them for tax cuts for small businesses and i look forward to doing that when i become the next senator. the stimulus was to help start infrastructure projects, green initiatives, tax cuts to floridians, and to make sure we provide a base line for the government to be able to carry out the services that are in -- that the beat -- that the people in the community could take advantage of. >> mr. 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 has lost his

job in the last 18 months. they are counting on that on climate extension which was part of the stimulus money. all she thinks about is, "well, mr. rubio wants to extend tax cuts but not agree about those who are already unemployed. >> that is not an accurate reflection of my position. i think unemployment benefits should be extended. we should identify some areas in the budget. >> where would that be? >> i spent tarp money. there is money all over the budget that has not yet been spent. i do not think anyone would argue that you would be not -- would not be able to find spending after the spending spree -- would not be able to find savings after the spending spree this administration has gone on. michael, you asked about choosing between tax cuts and spending reductions and that is

a false choice. the reason the debt is growing as that because americans are not paying enough in taxes. the current congressional leadership and the obama administration has proposed a budget has amassed -- massive tax increases. it will double the national debt and triple id by the end of the decade were even $1 trillion per year will be barred per year just to pay the interest on the debt. half of the interest overseas to try and elsewhere. no generation of americans has ever done this. >> what would you tell a doctor who is looking at the stimulus money. his medicare payments have not grown in the the last so many years and every year congress decides to postpone the

inevitable vote to try and contain those costs. >> i would tell the doctor that they need to send an independent to the senate because otherwise they will end up with either a hard right republican or a hard left democrat who could not find a middle ground face their debt -- them in the face. that is the problem with washington, d.c., not being able to get things done. they're stuck in a gridlock. if either of these two go to washington, they will go to their corner and fight everything that makes common sense. they need to help the doctor, the hotel worker, all of these people. >> that is a good talking point on independents, but how would you deal with the issue of medicare payments? that is a recurring issue. >> by working with the other people in the congress for a common-sense solution to get things done. that is what is frustrating to the people watching tonight.

all day here is we need to do it our way or take the highway. it happened with obamacare, which i opposed. what happened as the democrats, unfortunately, just ran the thing through. that is what mr. make the voted for. -- mr. meek, the president started out saying, "i will reach across the aisle to make sure everyone is involved in the solutions that matter to americans." that has not happened yet and needs to whether it is about medicare, everything already in this audience needs to have someone who will say, "enough is enough." i am running across -- running against the system. >> "the tampa tribune." >> thank you. mr. rubio, on health care to run your campaign had condemned obama administration's health care reform plan. as i understand it, and the clan

that requires all americans having health insurance even though one of your prominent supporters, mitt romney, implemented such a plan in massachusetts. what is your solution for the system we have now? for most americans is inundated with red tape and expensive and we are at the mercy of insurance company bureaucrats. what would you do? >> we are the only candidate running for the senate that has offered a concrete plan for what i would do. i will take your question in two parts. first i will tell you what is wrong. the bill has broken every promise. they said if you are happy with your insurance coverage that no one but a visit. up to 69% of americans who are currently insured could lose their coverage. we were told it would make medicare more solvent. we know that is not true. they will not lose their medicare advantage plan. we were told it would lower the

cost of health care. that is also not true. health-care costs are going up across the board. what i propose is that the health insurance industry is upside down. the people who buy health insurance have no choice. if you're lucky, you get it from your employer and the only choice to have is a dr.'s name out of a book. i went to allow every individual in america to buy insurance from any company that will sell it to you even if they are in another state. by allowing every individual to purchase for themselves, to have the same benefits their employer has when they buy it for them. by allowing small companies and associations to pull together and buy insurance with the same tax benefit from any company in america. >> mr. crist, you have also said he opposed the obama health care reform plan and then you would repeal it, repair, replace it, any of the above.

you said it costs too much and you abhor the cuts to the medicare advantage plan. your proposal as governor for solving health care problems has provided help to only about 6200 people in florida. what contribution to you have -- do you have to the debate? >> ala. i think obamacare was off of the charts wrong. it has mandates that are probably unconstitutional. it is not the way to go. it was our ran it through. what did we do in florida to try to make things better? we passed a plan that you referred to call the cover florida. you said only 6200 people signed up for it. from an average of $700 a month for the uninsured, those who have recently lost their jobs and reduced that to about $150 per month.

i met with a lady just last month in century village here in boca raton who came up to me and said, "governor, thank you for passing cover florida. she told me 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. he got treatment and he is now in remission. that may be only one family, but that one family and that one percy -- and that one person and that won the sun meant a lot to me. that is the compassion you deserve in a public servant. i have been your governor. you know you can trust what i will sell the. i think it is important we have people in public office to understand even if it is only one person that matters to that person, that family, that boy. >> mr. make, let's turn the question around a little bit. boeing just announced a very large health-care premium

increases and blame the obama health care plan. a lot of americans are seeing increases in their employer- provided health care plans. according to projections, those will probably get worse. at the same time, the plan did cut the medicare advantage plan with a lot of floridians depended on. to top it off, most floridians defended. how you sell this to them? >> the real issue here is that floridians, of 23500 people per week lose their insurance. something needs to be done about health care. the last election cycle was all about health care. republicans and democrats both had a plan. the governor calls it obamacare. i am pretty sure a marble column obamacare. the real issue is that it is health care.

we have people who have rights and who did not have them before the passage of that health care plan. the act like everything it was fine. the reason it was an issue is because businesses were going out of business, small and large, because something needed to be done. it is taking away from insurance companies. right now, insurance companies are playing chicken with the radiance and america. they want to jack up premiums. what was the excuse last year and the year before that and the year before that? your next united states senator, which are believe will be me, has to stand up against these special-interest companies and not cave in. i am shocked to hear the the from the governor talking about "obamacare. i wonder if he said that to the president when they were walking together on the beach? you need a leader who will stand up regardless of what the polls say when it comes down to

standing up for floridians. it is mindboggling to me how you can stand there and start throwing accusations saying "obamacare." >> a quick rebuttal. >> when we were on the beach we were protecting florida. that is what i spoke to him about. >> you are for offshore drilling? >> i am opposed to it. [laughter] >> i do not know. you were with sarah palin's years ago saying, "brill baby, drill -- "drill baby, drill." >> we will take a very quick break before we start another round of questions. campaign 2010 before you vote will be back in two minutes. do not go away. welcome back to the debate for

the united states senate from the campus of nova southeastern univ.. this is being seen by voters across the state. we will get back to the questions and where we ended that half hour with congress menmeek -- congressman meek. he is accusing you of flip- floping your position to help as a republican in the past. he talked about being the bats, the moraland in the end of the story is that heat who is that neither one nor the other has no friends. what are you now? >> i am the same guy i have always been a. i am charlie crist and i am a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. i believe we need to spend our money wisely. we need to make sure your taxes are low. we need to make sure that small businesses have the opportunity

to provide more jobs for more people across the state of florida. i believe in live and let live. i am running against marco rubio when it comes to issues related to women who believes that a woman's right teachers ought to be taking away by literally overturning roe v wade i do not think that is right for florida or right for women. i am also the guy that believes in protecting our senior citizens. the only things that are on the table as it relates to social security are making sure that others people's hands stay out of it. we have a duty to preserve it for the american people. i am not that believes in common sense. i am running against an extreme right wing candidate who believes that taking away women's rights, punishing seniors, punishing teachers.

>> your voting record is almost identical to nancy pelosi. your positions could have been written -- or platform could have been written by the white house. almost two-thirds of the american population thinks we're on the wrong track. why should they elect someone who is so closely associated with the administration's policies? >> i think it is very important that people have health care. i think it is important that we stand up to wall street. the regulators on both sides of me. that is what got us in this mess and the first place. i believe in housing reform. colin harrison people rule tequil

i look forward to standing with things that work. when it comes down to fighting for floridians, i am on their side. when minimal wage was up here in florida, i am the only one who stood for minimum-wage rate when it came to health care, i am the only person who fought for health care. when it came down to fighting for our environment, the green jobs initiative, i am the only one. i am the only candidates who will stand up on behalf of floridians and not the special interest. >> you are running on what many commentators have described as one of the more anti latino platforms around. use of -- you support the arizona immigration law. you oppose a dream act. you oppose the pathway to

citizenship. q support english as an official language. it has made you a darling of the tea party and got you enormous support. how can florida voters feel comfortable that you are not beholden to interest in the tea party? >> i am the only candidate that has a platform on his website that outline specific ideas. i reject the characterization that might platform is against americans of hispanic descent. there is running in america that is more pro legal immigration than i am. my parents were immigrants. i've grown up around immigration my entire life. it is an important part of our heritage. i do not think that america can be the only country in the world that does not enforce the immigration laws. the laws need to be followed.

we need to have a system that works. we resort to characterization's of people political positions. the things i believe and are pretty simple to understand brent i believe the economy does not grow because the politicians. it grows because of people who start businesses and expand existing businesses. i believe that the world will be a better and safer place when america is the country -- strongest country in the world. these a the things that i believe then. these are the things that i will stand for. >> thank you. michael williams? >> jenna men, issues of character and integrity consistently come up among floridians. many say that all politicians are the same. i want to ask you about issues that have come up in your background. beginning with its view, you tried to land federal money from a developer dennis stackhouse

now facing charges on unrelated charges. your mother was being paid a sizable fee by mr. stackhouse. he provided a luxury car for her use. you said did you were not aware of those ties. why is that? why should anybody consider that any more than typical business as usual in washington? >> the bottom line is that my track record does not speak to anything that is unethical. it is important to know that i've been a state trooper in this state. i voted for every ethics bill. i live in the congress as it relates to corruption. i represent a poverty district. that is one of the reasons i am running for the senate. to make sure that we have leadership that will put people back to work. when it comes down to the situation dealing with mr. stackhouse, the state attorney is doing what she has to do. i support her in that effort.

i am working elected official. someone that is going to dive into problems and deal with them. it is very important to also know that this state needs strong leadership that has integrity. that is the reason why i took the time to go throughout this great state of bars, getting signatures, looking floridians in the eye and asking them to sign a petition to place my name on the ballots. that is the reason i won the primary. i am connected to the everyday florida yen. i'm a public servant and not a politician. >> should you have known more note -- should have -- should you have known more about those ties? >> it is very important to know that if i had to do it all over again, i would have paid closer attention. there is no improprieties there. >> you have had to pay back some $16,000 in personal expenses run up on a florida

republican party issued credit card. you had a home in tallahassee near foreclosure. huge champion's yourself of as a watchdog. -- eugene been yourself as a watchdog. -- you at champion yourself as a watchdog. why will people in -- why should people believe that you will be a good watchdog? >> anything that is personal, i paid out of my own pocket. >> you did put them on a gop- issued credit card. >> if i had to do those things again, i would handle them differently. i have never had personal expenses paid for by the republican party. these are important issues that we should discuss. did they cannot be the only issue in this campaign. we are literally have fight to the debate and we're less than two weeks away from the election and that question after question, we've not heard a plan. at least congress and meat has a voting record. -- congressman meek as a voting

record. we of not of heard of plan on medicare. this election cannot be like the other ones. the stakes are too high. we are deciding what kind of country our children are going to be -- are going to inherit. we are not born to fix that by sending typical politicians to washington. we already have too many people like that in washington. >> you pushed over the strong objections of republican party leaders for the chairman of the party. he now faces charges of the misuse of donations. you stood by him to the very end. why did you do so?

what does it say about your judgment and your ability to make decisions? >> you did the very best you can when you are picking people. that applies in every instance and in every appointment i've made. when you do the best that you can, sometimes you are disappointed. it happened to governor jenna -- jeb bush. he appointed to be -- a guide to be the head of the department of corrections and ended at been arrested after he was indicted and is now in prison. it happens. all you can do is the very best that you can. i do want to talk about what has happened as it relates to my republican opponent. let me related to you. when the speaker was speaker of the courthouse, he had a home here in miami.

it was for sale. before that sale took place, he was on the other side of the personal injury protection issue. once he sold the home, for it $380,000 cash, the speaker is fish -- opinion on the issue change. miraculously, that bill went through. >> let me set the record straight. let me set the record straight. >> it is happening to -- because you deserve to know where we stand on the issues. >> with the governors that is categorically false. -- what the governor said he is categorically false.

the house was an arm's length transaction. we reduced the price of the home. it did have been for sale for months. my position did not change. the legislation failed to pass in the florida house and it did not pass for a month later. let's talk about why this is happening. the governor is running on this idea that he is a centrist. he wants to change the tone of washington. he just launched a vicious personal attack against me. why is this happening? this is a personal attack. >> is not a personal attack. >> you talk about newspapers, governor. the last call he made before he switched parties, it was to a pollster.

>> let's move on. i will have to take control here. >> a practice on the filibuster over there. [laughter] business into serious on the war on terror. we talk about the generational stakes. let's look at the war on terror. when do we know? the public support is starting to wane. we have been in this for nine years. how do we know what we need be -- what we have done what we need to do in afghanistan? >> the goal in afghanistan is to have a stable afghan government and a strong civil society. the reason why that is important is not just because of afghanistan. afghanistan is a neighbor with pakistan. if afghanistan were to fall or evolve into chaos, it would be

a base of operations to destabilize and overthrow the government in pakistan. a radical islamic regime were to take control, you would have been in possession of a nuclear weapon. general petraeus and the president have it right. the role is to provide security and safety. the afghan people can begin to govern themselves. that is the: afghanistan. the stakes are high. it is important for our leaders to explain that to people. i do not support a -- an arbitrary withdrawal from the region. it is important that we be successful in that region. when you announce to the enemy that you'll be leaving on a date, you open yourself up to failure. >> all right. same question. >> we agreed pretty much on this point.

the most important thing that the government can do is to make sure we are safe and secure. the founding fathers understood it. they put it in the first line of the constitution. the war on terrorism must continue until we are safe and secure. recently, we are reports of a possibility of terrorist attacks in europe. we suffered severely as a nation when this occurred in new york city and in pennsylvania and the pentagon. what the president is trying to do in afghanistan is right. one of the things that encourages the the most about that policy presently is that general petraeus is the man that is leading our troops on the ground in afghanistan. it would be laudable and it would be good if we would be able to withdraw those troops next summer, which is the goal that the administration has expressed. however, i would be cautionary there. the only way that can occur if -- is it general petraeus has

the facts and circumstances at that time that support that withdrawal. otherwise, if we have to stay and make sure that america continues to be secure, it is the first and foremost thing we need to do as a nation. >> let's try to see if we can get your answers short. >> thank you so very much. as you can see, both of my opponents agree with afghanistan and pakistan. i am the only candidate that has been to afghanistan and pakistan and iraq. i talked to men and women in harm's way. they been deployed over the last 10 years. it is not how long we will stay in, it is how long our coalition partners will stay with us. it is very important that we continue to work with secretary of state clinton. we cannot do it alone, like we tried to do in iraq. this is not just about a maraca. it is about the world.

-- this is not just about america. it is about the world. i want to say to all the military families right now. i do understand what you are going through. a lot of folks do not like to talk about the fact that we have mothers and families -- mothers and fathers that have missed the weddings and funerals because they are serving our country. i understand those issues. i think it is important that we have a policy that is sound, but looking -- that is very important that we look at this debate. >> i will ask you to keep your questions to 30 seconds. >> on immigration, you have advocated a path to citizenship for an immigrant who are here illegally.

marco rubio has said that that is coade for amnesty. what me ask you to the imagine that instead of this audience, you were speaking to a group of people you have waited years to enter this country legally. how do you defend that? >> would i am more concerned about is what is best for florida and america. 11-14 million people who are here are not legal citizens as of yet. we need to secure our borders. it must be done. we need to have a path to citizenship that is provided to these people who are here. it is what president bush wanted to do. it is what senator mccain and kennedy wanted to do. it was the right approach. >> we have to move on. >> key u.s. been in congress for a years. -- un been in congress for 8 years. nobody thinks our border is secure.

how long will it take? why has it not happen? >> when i get to the senate, it will happen. every time they approach protected our borders, making sure that there is a pathway to status in this country and going after those employers that keep the u.s. worker home and making sure that it is comprehensive and fair to our law enforcement officers. marco rubio would like to see -- we have wanted to protect our borders for the last 15 years. >> you have already spoken a bit on immigration. you are opposed to the dream act. have an imaginary audience. tell them why they should not be citizens.

>> children that were brought here by their parents, brought here when they were young children, they have done well in school and want to continue their education, i am in favor of accommodating them. as part of a modernization of what we are dealing with our immigration system. the dream act goes well beyond that. it could apply to all boards of 2 million people. >> we need to proceed immediately to the closing statements. >> thank you very much to leadership florida. i got into this race a few months ago against some pretty significant odds. a lot has happened over the last 18 months. this election is about the future of our country. it is about what kind of nation we believe our children. the choice before us is very clear. we will either be our first

americans ever to leave our children worse off than ourselves. or we will our children to be the most prosperous americans ever lead. that choice is up to us. it is what this election is all about. the road that washington has caused bond is the wrong direction. it is a road that will rob us of our exceptional was them. if we are willing to send people to washington d.c. to stand up for that and offer an alternative, to confront and solve the challenges of our time, we will be able to leave our children with add better country. >> i want to think leadership florida for this evening as well as nova southeastern univ.. i am running for the senate as an independent for you. i am running as an independent because washington is broken. it is enamored with the gridlock. they cannot get anything done.

it is very frustrating to me. i sure governor, we've been able to get things done. that is very important. what we need to do is realize that there is an extreme right candidate in this race. he is proud of it. he says he is a tea party guy and he wears a as a badge of honor. i think that women should have the opportunity to make their own decisions about their lives as it relates to roe versus wade. senior citizens deserve to have the united states senator that will defend them and protect social security. i will do that for you. we have to defend our teachers. i am humbled asking for your vote. >> we need to move on. >> thank you so very much. i am glad we had this debate tonight. earlier today, i was with president bill clinton in st. petersburg. i will be with him in orlando tomorrow. i am glad the 42nd president

stands with me. in this debate, there is a clear choice. i am the only pro-choice candidate in this race. i am the only candidate that stands up for working men and working women. i am the only candidate that would have against tallahassee for smaller class sizes. i am the only candidate that will stand up to oil companies that want to drill off the coast of florida. there may be issues that we may disagree with, there is one thing that will not be mistaken nine. not being able to have a clear vision for florida and not standing up for you. i want to be your next united states senator. let the world know that we stand with those who stand with us. when you vote, we all win. >> thank you. my thanks to everyone that has participated in this debate tonight. [applause]

please vote on november 2. thank you for watching tonight. have a good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> one of the great abilities of our c-span video library is the ability to clip. search, slide, and share with the c-span video library. >> now florida's candidates for governor. they face each other in their second debate. it took place wednesday at nova ersity.stern univ this is about 55 minutes.

>> welcome to our gubernatorial debate. tonight's event is being broadcast by a number of stations across the state so we can reach as many voters as possible. the two candidates are democrats alex sink and republican rick scott. the candidates will each have one minute and 15 seconds to respond to questions, and they will be signaled by a clock that is located on the stage. we will allow candidates on some occasions a 30-second rebuttal. our panel includes kelly dunne and adam smith with the st. petersburg times. we have asked the audience to hold its applause and the candidates to follow the

guidelines present -- presented to them before this broadcast. the coin toss went to alex sink, and we begin with the question to you. we begin with jobs, the question most important to florida voters. you have proposed during hiring by a series of tax cuts and tax credits. your opponent is talking about cutting $6 billion and bring government back to the size it was in 2004. where exactly are you going to cut spending, and how many jobs are you expecting to create? >> i want to think the viewers in the table in the audience and the sponsors of this very important debate so that it all over the state of florida can hear directly from their gubernatorial candidates. this is a very important election for our state. the whole reason i am running for governor is because i am bringing 26 years of business experience right here in the state of florida to address the critical economic challenges we

have in our state today. very high unemployment, at two percentage points higher than the national average. we have to get our state headed in a different direction. i have put together a very specific plan almost 10 months ago. it is built around a small businesses. florida is not a state of large corporations. our state was built on entrepreneurs and people who started up small businesses. that is what i have spent my career doing. i am providing tax cut for businesses who agreed to hire more floridians. of i am also providing a plan for reviving our economy and diversifying its it by bringing industries into the state. i will be a very aggressive economic ambassador for our state. >> mr. scott, let's get to work is your model and the basis of your campaign. you are proposing what it called a 7-7-7 plan, but some state economists have said that if there is an economic

recovery, no matter who is governor, the economy will actually generate more than 700,000 jobs in just four years. how do you respond to that? >> first i would like to thank the sponsors and the audience for watching. it is my mom's 82nd birthday. maybe you have seen a few ads. our plan is seven steps to 70,000 jobs. that plan is on top of what normal growth would be. it says that basically we will get the state back to work by running a state like a business, watch how you spend every penny. i will put a freeze on regulations. i will be the job as governor. i will do what i have done in business. go out and figure out how to get people to build their businesses. i will cut the property tax rate by 19%.

we will be the no. 1 state. i am sure alex and i will trade a lot of are, but i want to complement and commend her on one thing. our state budget is in a mess, and she, like i, and not going to take any state funding for our campaigns, which i think is a great thing. >> if you are going to add 700,000 jobs on what the economic recovery would bring, we are talking about 1,700,000 jobs. there are currently 1 million floridians unemployed. >> my whole goal is to grow of the state. this should be the number-one state for job creation. no income tax. we are a right to work state. we have the beaches and the weather. look at the expansion of the panama canal. this should be the number-one state for job creation. it will take a governor that knows how to build private sector jobs.

>> omayyad -- i might add that in looking at red -- rick scott glenn, jeb bush's own economic advisers have said it is flawed and cannot work. to go back to -- it would mean cutting $18 billion out of the current budget. it is important to recognize that rick scott, my opponent, talks about creating 285,000 jobs, but the way he did it was, he was a corporate raider. he went and bought hospitals all around the country and shut many of them down, some of them right here in florida. that is how he built his business. >> our first question from the panel, adam smith. >> part of your plan is to cut the state work force by 5%. that would be at least 6000 jobs. is this the right time to put 6000 floridians on the unemployment line?

>> my plan is seven steps to 700,000 jobs. part of it is to reduce the work force. if we reduced the workforce by% every year, that is $300 million. we easily have 16% of attrition, so we will be able to do just through normal change. we will do what we can to keep everybody employed, but we have to get this money back into the hands of the taxpayers, the people who are worried about making sure they can make ends meet. the more we can do that, we will build their business. this country and state is built on people that want to build their businesses. war of the money we get back into their pockets -- more of the money, the more this economy will grow. my opponent is going to start attacking. we build a wonderful company.

we took care of 100,000 patients a day. we had unbelievable patience satisfaction. i am very proud of what we accomplished. >> what significant, concrete steps which you have taken to ensure that our economy is in better shape than it is right now? >> i would have taken several different and more specific steps. first, we have in this recession for three years now pri is started with the subprime crisis hitting southwest florida very hard. there was rampant mortgage fraud. this is what i would have done in the last three or four years as governor. i would have expedited transportation projects. these projects we have that a party been funded, it takes too long, 18, 24, 36 months to put those jobs on the ground. i would have streamlined regulation so we could have expedited work transportation

projects. i also would have been more aggressive as an economic ambassador. when i am governor, i will let the everyday and ask for a list of names of companies for me to call to recruit to come to florida, or also for companies who are here right now who want to grow and expand, and offer them a helping hand to assist them so that the barriers are removed and we have the right policies in place. another thing that has happened is that we are in a critical situation on the space coast 3 we knew three or four years ago it was possible the federal government would be reducing funding of nasa. i would have gotten on top of that right away. >> the next governor will be in crisis mode almost immediately upon taking office, facing a budget shortfall, with no stimulus money in sight. where is that money going to come from? >> the estimates of the economists are that the deficit

could be between $800 million and $2 billion. through other efficiencies liked the way the state uses its real estate, and they are all outlined in my plan. additionally, we have between $2 billion and $3 billion in medicaid fraud embedded in our system, as our own accounts have told us. we have to go after that fraud and reduce it. that is the way i will work with our legislature to close that $2 billion gap so that we don't hurt services to floridians. >> mr. scott, how would you come up with this shortfall? >> step one of my plan is

called accountability budget. you go back and do exactly what you do in a business. you look at every agency and say, can i do that less expensively? there are significant savings if you do that. in business, you benchmark. you do other states and and say, can they do it less expensively and get better outcomes? as you do that, you can save significant amounts of money. we have been smart to other states and we can show there is significant savings. -- -- we have benchmarked other states. how are you going to pay for the $12.5 billion spending? promises are going to cost us. she has already backed taxes and payroll and sales and cable and water. is she going to have to propose an income tax?

>> the first thing i have to respond to is that those charges of those billions of dollars are absolutely a outlandish. rick, we cannot trust anything you say. you have been now they are throwing mud began out there throwing mud and negative advertisements ever since the republican primary, and your charges have been outlandish. there is not a single provision for any kind of tax increase in any of my plans. by transportation plan, my energy plan, my economic development plan. it is just not there. this is just very tell fabrication. >> you received a letter from the senate president, and you did not respond. what is the number you are proposing? we are walking into a $2 billion deficit. we know we have to save money.

obama math does not work here. what is the number, and what tax will increase? >> i have to respond to that. i don't know what obama math is. what i know is that i was of 4.0 math major, and i know how to -- >> [laughter] >> let's talk about education. starting with mr. scott, earlier this year, governor chris vetoed legislation that would have directly tied teacher salaries to student performance. if you are elected governor, would you sign that measure if it came back next year, or would you change it? >> i put out a specific education plan. it starts like this. our education has to be -- this is exciting.

it will benefit our kids. every child in this state has the same opportunity i had. i started in public housing. i have lived the american dream. every job in the state has the same opportunity. we have to look at every child as an individual. each teacher has to be measured on their effectiveness of living that job from this level to this level. we have to make sure retrain our teachers the best we can. next, we need to make sure that our parents have all the choice is possible. just because you live on this block does not mean you need to go to this public school. he should have the choice of a charter school, home schooling, virtual schools. we have to make sure there is more choice. my opponent in her education plan does not use the word choice one time. we have to make sure we do this for the benefit of kids. we measure our teachers, and we have to pay the ones who are most effective and give as much choice to or parents as possible. >> let me just clarify.

rick did not really answer the question, because you ask a question about whether or not he would sign the same legislation that went through the legislature last year. i have been very clear that i would not sign a bill like senate bill 6. this is the reason why. it is because while parts of the bill provided for performance pay and merit pay for teachers, something i strongly agree with, all the school boards, superintendents, parents, the teachers around the state recognize that legislation for what it was, which was nothing more than at tallahassee bureaucrats and politicians taking control of our local school. i would never sign a bill like that. my plan is comprehensive. i put together a 27-page education plan.

>> how would you call for accountability? >> i do call for accountability. the way to put together a performance pay plan is to get all the stakeholders around a table, and you build out what you think are the most important factors. it cannot be just one thing like a test given on one day. i would build out a number of factors, and i would test it out. in my company, i never would have rolled out an incentive compensation plan statewide without knowing whether it really work and results in the right behaviors. i would have tested it out to be sure it was working correctly with the result which we want which is better performance from our students. >> one of the things mr. scott has brought up is whether you are willing to take responsibility. let's go over a few controversies in your past. recently, licensing excellence to sell insurance, nationsbank

employees selling questionable securities from the lobby of nationsbank all you were florida president, audit problems at sites enterprise is what you were on the audit committee. do you take responsibility for any of those? >> i take responsibility for all of them. let me just go through what i do take responsibility for. in the licensing issues, we have a division of insurance agent licensing. i went back to check the charges that were made, and in every case, our lawyers and our agency licensing people have assured me they are doing what i expect, which is to follow the laws that have been on the books for four years and follow the guidelines and rules that were passed in 2002 and signed by jeb bush. we play by the rules, and we follow the law. when it comes to the state pension fund, rick scott is trying to blame me for the global collapse of the stock-

market. that is not going to carry water. the fact is that our state pension fund is one of the fourth strongest bonds in the country, and all he did was play all these ads to scare seniors. they are afraid they are not going to get their pensions. that is irresponsible. >> there was a drop in a third of the value of pensions at a time when the economy was tanking, but you had warnings that some of the investments were in risky securities. why was nothing done about that? >> well, the problem there was that the executive director of the pension fund it did not do his job and did not inform his board members that he had a problem with some investments. i held them accountable and ask for his resignation. we have hired a new director who has the qualified experience to run a pension fund. so yes, i hold people accountable to do the job they

are expected to do. this whole pension fund issue, isn't it something that rick scott would accuse me of being responsible for the global financial collapse, when our own state, our state of florida sued it wrecks got personally for insider-trading -- said rick scott for defrauding the shareholders. >> the company paid a $1.7 billion fine -- fine for medicaid fraud. either you knew about the major problems in the country -- in the company or you were ignorant. how do either of those alternatives make a qualified to be governor of this day? >> first, on the guidelines of the convicted felon. she did not follow guidelines. she could change the

guidelines, and she did not. on the pension fund, she was told multiple times, she was warned that the were intoo risky investments, and she did not do anything about it. she waited until after the fact. third, she talks about insider- trading. that lawsuit was dismissed completely. in contrast, when she was at nationsbank, when her tellers were paid kickbacks for referring elderly citizens from safe bank deposits to risky ones, they were fined and sued by the state. she was one of to audit members of sikes, and they were sued by the state pension fund, and they did pay fines. in the insider-trading case, was completely dismissed.

>> rick scott sold millions of dollars worth of stock in his company just days before the company was raided by the fbi and eventually charged with 14 felony charges. these charges that he is telling the people of florida about meat, a lawyer that brought the suit against nations security has said publicly that i had absolutely nothing to do with this. that was not a company that i was associated with. the people of florida have been hearing your charges and near-, outlandish attack ads over and over again, when you have a lot of explaining to do yourself. >> the columbia question, $1.7 billion of fines. either you knew, or you were too distant as a manager.

>> we build a great company. i started with my life savings of $125,000. >> you have said that already. >> what i focused on was making sure patients were taken care of. i reduce the cost of health care. i clearly could have done a better job of hiring more internal and an external auditors to have done a better job in making sure the company completely complied with the medicare rates. the lesson i learned is you have to broaden your focus and do what ronald reagan said, trust but verify. that is what i bring to the table. in business, what happens is you get better. something goes wrong, you focus on it and you get better. that is what i have done. >> you have talked about openness in government and you created another successful company. you had a position relating to

lawsuits involving the company just days before you file to be a gubernatorial candidate. why not, as part of that openness, allow people to see that deposition? >> there are over 20 million lawsuits filed every year in this country. there are frivolous lawsuits, just fishing expeditions all the time by trial lawyers. that case has nothing to do with my run for governor. i have elected not to release it. >> mr. scott, some parents and teachers criticizes fcat, saying teachers are teaching to the test. do you believe these tests are the best way to hold public schools accountable, and are they best for the students of florida? >> we have to have a way that we can measure the effectiveness of teachers from when the child starts with them to when they

finish. we have to make sure if they are in that class for nine months, and we measure it on a per student basisf. cat should not be the only measurement. i second daughter teaches special needs kids. what i have done in business is, you start out with a measurement program and you constantly upgrade and improve it. fcat is one way to do it. you go from how well that teacher was in giving that individual student. >> overall, do you like the fcat or would you change it? >> it is one way to do it now, but i am sure we can figure out better ways of doing it. >> it talk about your plan for teacher accountability. the think the fcat does it for florida? >> as a parent, testing was

always really important to me. my son is in the audience tonight, and he will bear this out. every year i was waiting for the test results to be sure that my children were performing again is a nationally norm to reference test. i believe the fcat has gotten away from that. our children need to be held to national standards. testing is just one way to the evaluate a student. it should not be done on just one day. we should have ways to evaluate and measure student performance all during the year. if you get to november and a child is falling behind in reading or math, you don't have to wait until the end of the year to say what we need some remedial help here. we have to turn the system around. i am going to ask our teachers and superintendents and principals to and professionals what is really important and how they think we ought to evaluate our students.

most people in florida are sick and tired of the fcat. >> we are going to take a quick, two-minute break before we start another round of questions for the candidates. we will be right back. >> welcome back to the florida gubernatorial debate. this event is being seen by voters across the state. we will get right back to the questions and our panel with the next question. >> on emigration, the next governor is likely to face legislation that could require police and law enforcement in florida to check the immigration status of people they suspect are here illegally. is this a good idea, or a bad idea? >> all of us are frustrated by the lack of action of the federal government in implementing a comprehensive immigration reform plan that

will be consistent across all 50 states. as governor, this is the plan i would offer that i believe is appropriate for florida. we should increase the penalties and fines on businesses who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, because they are taking jobs away from floridians and from legal immigrants. when it comes to law enforcement, i have the support and endorsement of the two major organizations in this state in addition to democratic and republican state attorneys. i have spoken to them about the appropriate ways to enforce our immigration laws. our law enforcement officers have been subject to a tremendous budget cuts, and they are already concerned about the future. they need to be able to protect orleans from serious crimes. >> so you would not support an

arizona-style -- >> i would support the alex sink immigration plan. >> a we are country of legal immigration. my running mate is a legal immigrant. she emigrated here when she was 8 years old from trinidad. she has lived the american dream. after high school, she joined the u.s. navy and started at the bottom, and retired after 20 years as a lieutenant commander. we have to come up with a way that people can come here legally, and everyone knows what the rules are. the federal government needs to secure our borders. we need to come up with a work visa program that works for our employers. whatever industry or in, we need to do that. in contrast to my opponent, who wants to beat up on employers, we need to come up with the way that employers know how to

comply with the law. it is common sense, if you are in our country illegally and you are stopped by law enforcement, they ought to be able to ask if they are legal or not, just like we did ask for our id. my opponent wants to talk about all her endorsements for law enforcement. i have been endorsed by sure it's all across this day -- by sheriffs all across the state. >> four weeks we have been treated to enlist negative ads with you to attack each other. to switch gears, take a moment and tell us what you admire about your opponent. >> [laughter] >> the one thing i'd mayor about her is our commitment to work- family. -- i admire about her. she is clearly committed to her

children and two per husband and being a great family person, which i admire. >> you can take more time if you like. [laughter] >> i admire that rick has been married to his high-school sweetheart for 38 years, and likewise, two lovely and very successful daughters. >> that was a little too easy to talk about each other's families. you have been a tremendously successful businesswoman and he has been a tremendously successful businessmen. both of you, in many ways, in your purchase to creating jobs and tax cuts and spending cuts, there are a lot of similarities in your platforms.

with all those similarities and background and policies, do you think he would make a bad governor? >> i agree with many of the newspapers who have endorsed me in the state. i have 10 newspaper endorsements. a double leverage has gotten a single one yet. i'd agree with them that basically, rick scott is unprepared to be the governor of our state. >> despite that he has had multiple successes in business? >> i don't think that leading a large hospital corporation that was charged with the largest medicare fraud in the history of this country would rate him as being in a highly successful ceo, when his board had to ask him to leave the company. i think there is an issue of trust here and character and integrity. but the just say, more importantly, the thing that is even more worrisome to the people of florida is that he has not made himself available to a single newspaper editorial board. when you go into those boards,

you cannot talk in sound bites anymore. you have to sit there and talk in detail about your policies, and about all we have heard from riggs got up to now is a bunch of sound bites. -- what we have heard from rick scott. >> with regards to editorial boards, i am going right to the voters. i have traveled the state for 6.5 months, doing events everyday and talking to voters. that is how i am going to spend my time. i think the best way to compare my opponent and the is this. she clearly it is a tallahassee insider. she has been there for years. she has had her shot in her time there. the state has lost over 800,000 jobs. the pension fund has gone to 13% underfunded. she has had a lot of issues

with regard to every company she has been involved in. she is basically a failed fiscal watchdog. if you look at nationsbank, pensions, and sikes. on top of that, she supports everything obama support. if you believe obama's plan is the right plan for the country, then you should go for my opponent. i don't believe it is. obamacare is a disaster. his stimulus is a disaster. on top of that, she believes his economic policies or the right solutions. they clearly are not. >> rick scott just mentioned he has been supposedly talking to voters for the last six months. i have been talking to the people of florida for 26 years. i had 9000 people work for me and my banking career. no newspaper ever wrote anything negative about my character and my integrity and my career. more importantly, i have been talking to the voters of florida for five years.

i have been a public servant. i have handled my job very well, according to many newspaper endorsements to have lauded might services to this day. >> you won't answer the question about what you would have done differently on the job. but i was a senior right now, i would be scared to death of having you spend another four years in office when you took the pension fund to 13% underfunded. you look at what you did by paying kickbacks to tellers. look at the money that was loss s sikes and the fines that were paid. if you want to attack my background, that is great. i have had a very successful company. in every case, you have been a failed fiscal watchdog. >> let's move on. >> i received a call from a viewer in palm beach county to found out i was going to be a panelist for this debate. he wanted me to ask about your opponents idea to drug test

welfare recipients and equated it to keep someone when they are down. you have said that you would not oppose this. why? >> what i said is that i don't think the state of florida should be using taxpayer money to fund somebody's drug habit. there has to be away to be sure that our taxpayer dollars are not used -- enabling someone to continue to be a drug abuser. before we implement an across- the-board plan, i am a fiscally responsible person, and i would like to know what the cost to the taxpayers would before implementing a plan like that. >> mr. scott, is this the right thing to do in an economy and people are losing their job and they might be on government help for the first time in their lives? we cannot insinuate that everyone on welfare is doing drugs. >> we have to think about the children of those families. when there is drug abuse in

those households, those kids are having problems. on top of the fact that we will save money, we will make sure that these recipients don't use drugs. my experience is if you test people, they were generally do the right thing. if you define a problem, those children will be taken care of. i think it is the right thing to do. >> this coming sunday is the fed anniversary of hurricane wilma. the state has been recently lucky since then when it comes to storms. starting with mr. scott, how do you make citizens less of a liability without soaking homeowners with extra, higher premium costs?

>> first of all, you can go to my website and see the specific plan. we have to take it from what has happened in the last four years while my opponent has been in office. now we have 1.2 million policyholders and we take $500 billion worth of risk. first of all, you have to understand why insurance companies to know what to do business in our state and what they have been pushed out of our state. what they cannot quantify his other risks like sinkhole risks. we're not going on talking to these companies and finding out what their problems are. the ceo of state farm came to tallahassee and nobody would even meet with him.

we have to talk to these insurance companies. companies understand their problems are. but clearly do with the issues that cause and to not want to do business in our state. >> the ceo of state farm did come to tallahassee and i was the only cabinet member who agreed to meet with him. the reason i did was because they were threatening to pull out of our state entirely. i implored him and worked with the state farm agents and other insurance agents in the state to beg them not to leave their state. unfortunately, rick, you need to understand that, for some many people here in the state of florida, citizens' property insurance is the only choice they have. it is not the insurer of last resort. it is the only insurer they have. it is the only way to get ourselves out of a heavy reliance of citizens party

insurance co., to be sure that we have policies in place, which i will do as governor, to attract global capital to come back to our state and compete for business. i know i can do it. >> you had for years. in four years, we have gone from the insurance of last resort to the entrance of first resort. insurance companies have left the state. you have not solve the problem in the last four years. why do you think you could solve it in the next four years? you have not propose anything that will deal with the sinkhole risk. more insurance coverage is a leading all the time. state farm is not excited about being in the state. nothing that you have done so far has worked. >> i do want to bring up something about rick scott plan for insurance that he ruled out a few weeks ago. he is calling for deregulation of insurance rates in this state. that is something i would totally opposed. there has to be away for

insurance companies to stay honest, frankly, otherwise, they will discharge would ever reach the please. deregulation is not the answer for florida's. >> that is not accurate. we have to make sure that insurance companies treat policyholders fairly. we have to make sure that we treat insurance companies fairly so they can make a profit so they stay in business. where we are now is that, we as taxpayers and policyholders in the state, we're taking $500 billion worth of risk. what will you do to solve it in the next four years? >> you have the final word. >> he made a comment about we have to be sure that insurance coming street policyowners fairly. i am sorry, but they tried to get away with things all the time, in terms of slowing down claims payments.

my office use the complaint frequently. rick scott has made a proposal that we could heavily eliminate several bad faith flaws in this state. that would be an absolute disaster. -- bad faith laws in the state. that would be an absolute disaster. they have deep pockets and it would hurt premiums. it would really hurt our homeowners. >> mr. scott, do you believe homosexuality is immoral? >> what i believe this -- i believe marriage is between a man and woman. >> would you continue to fight gay couples from adopting children? >> i believe that children are raised in a more healthy environment if they are raised by a married couple. >> so as governor, you would like to see that and kept in place? >> yes. >> miss sink, do you think

homosexuality is immoral? >> no, it is not. let me mention that he did not answer the question you asked. he has a history of answering evasively in all of his depositions, many depositions that he has given. i would invite people to go to ctsforflorida.com. no, i do not think it is immoral. i believe the judge made the right decision. when it comes to issues of adoptions -- i am a mom. i care for the best interest of the child. i think it should give to a judge and the social worker and the people were closest to that child to decisions about the best loving home environment but that child should be living in. >> mr. scott, many people

watching now are facing foreclosure. they're so underwater with their mortgage because the rally was dropped by 50% or more in some cases. they may be forced eventually to walk away. does the government have a role in helping these people who are teetering on the edge or have lost their dream homes? >> our government caused the problems by making money to cheap. the way to solve this is to go to my seven-step plan. get people back to work. if we get people back to work and all my plan, we will get people moving back into the state. first of all, there would have a job. there would be moving back into the state and home founvalues would go up. >> but is there anything specific? someone in an ambush watching and is thinking, oh, that is nice. the moment people go back to work, i will be set.

that is not happening. is there any hope that could be extended to these floridians? quarks with government -- >> what government can do is create an environment that can create jobs. we need to make sure that homeowners are treated fairly if they're going through foreclosure and things like that. i belief is that we will solve the problem, long-term solve the problem, by getting this state back to work. i have lived the american dream. i know what is like. my father was a truck driver with a sixth grade education he was laid off every thanksgiving. we learned we had to go out and work hard. that is what i want to do as governor. i want to make sure people can get jobs. >> can the governor do something to help these homeowners who are either out of a home or about to be out of a home? >> let me tell you what i have actually already done as your

chief financial officer. when i became aware of this problem and it started with the subprime crisis three years ago, i approach the members of the florida bar. it takes a lawyer to try to delegate through this system. i went to the florida bar and, in conjunction with me, they put together a florida savings homes. they got a group of lawyers pro bono, that means they give free time to counsel families who are facing foreclosure. i'm very proud of the bar. right now, today, go to my official web site, myflorida cfo.com. we have been talking with community leaders and credit counselors and consumer credit people to help floridians figure out how they can stay in their homes.

those are the kinds of help that i would propose that we continue to give and i will give as i am the next governor. >> a question about taxation. floridians face a sales tax if they buy an item on main street, but not on line. there has been a proposal in the last few years to establish an internet sales tax. do you think is a good idea? >> now is not the time to be talking about any taxes measures. floridians are hurting. our economy is challenged. i do not propose any tax increase at all in any area at all. >> the florida retail association says it would level the playing field for main street retailers and those online. >> the problem with the internet or the lack of the internet sales taxes that are local mom-

and-pop stores who are paying rent to big strip malls are highly disadvantaged because, if you to buy a pair of shoes, it is cheaper if you go on the internet because you do not have to pay sales tax. but down the road, as i work with the legislature on many of these issues of fairness, we do have to address the fairness issue. our local retailers are very disadvantaged on the sales tax issues. but i do not abdicate any increase tax issues. >> our taxes are too high. i propose dropping property-tax is by 19%. my opponent has continued not to respond to the citizens letter about her spending proposals that will cost $12.5 billion. we see tonight that she is receptive to increasing the

internet sales tax. but she has backed property-tax increases, payroll tax increases, water tax increases, cable tax increases. she will have to propose some tax increases to pay for all the things that she has proposed. that is no different from what president obama has done. [applause] >> may i follow that up, please? >> there are florida retailers the believe that the online internet sales tax levels the playing field. >> i am against any tax increases at all. we are taxed enough. i will do everything i can to reduce taxes and get many back in the box -- in the pockets of businesses and as individuals so they can get the economy going again. any tax increase kills jobs. >> i will stand here and be ronald. there you go again. [laughter]

i said earlier in this debate that you are just throwing mud out -- $12 billion, i do not know where you get the number from. there is no number like that in any of my plans. this is why we cannot trust rick scott. he keeps bringing back the same old mud and same old dirt over and over again. and i do know what the folks at home to think that he can just throw the same statement out that i talked about would have it -- talk about without having to -- >> my opponent is clearly an obama liberal. [applause] she proposes all the spending ideas, has no earthly idea how much they will cost, but she's now responsible for those costs. she does not know what they are and she is now responsible for what the taxes will be. no different from president obama. we know all his proposals will cost us a lot of money. it is costing jobs across the

country. >> un fortunate, we will have to leave it there. before the debate ends, a candidate has an opportunity to share final thoughts. you have a minute and 30 seconds. >> thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to participate in this very important debate. again, thank you to all the sponsors and the folks who are in the audience tonight. i came to florida 26 years ago to follow my dreams, just like many floridians have come to our wonderful state. i wanted to make a good living and raise a family. i have been very blessed and fortunate that i have been able to realize those dreams. but we know that our state has enormous economic challenges right now. the reason i am running for governor is because i want to bring my values to the governor's office. i am still that girl who grew up on a family farm. the values i learned there was at the most important thing in life, alex, is your character

and your integrity and being honest. and it is important to be accountable and responsible for your own actions. when your neighbors need help, you have to go and offer a helping hand to your neighbors. so all i want for florida is to bring those values into the governor's office and that is how i will leave their state as your next governor. all i want is a stronger economy. i want him are accountable government. i do not want to be anybody others -- anybody else as governor but yours. i am inviting you to come with me. if you believe in local control of schools, not tallahassee politicians and bureaucrats, come with me. if you think character and integrity are really important in the person who is our next governor, then i will ask you to trust your vote for me on november 2. thank you very much. >> i would like the thanked the

florida press association and all of you for taking the time to watch. on november 2, you have a clear choice. you have a choice between a tallahassee insider, an obama liberal, someone who believes obama's policies on the right ones for state or an outsider who has a lot of life experiences and private-sector jobs. our state is clearly headed in the wrong direction. record unemployment, almost 50% of our homeowners are under water, big budget deficit, we clearly need new ideas and someone with a proven record of getting results. i am not a politician. i am an outsider and a business person. i build businesses. i put my own money up. i create jobs and balance budgets and held people accountable. i have a detailed seven-step plan. i am -- i will cut state spending and will create

private-sector jobs. if you're happy with the white house cst -- if you're happily tallahassee is operating, you should probably vote for my opponent. if you want jobs, if you want to turn the state around, if you want to change the way tallahatchie works, my commitment to you is i will take my business experience and run the state for the benefit taxpayers, for the benefit of families. thank you very much. >> thank you mr. scott. thank you miss sink. [applause] thank you to everyone for putting together this event. election day is november 2. thank you all for watching. have a great night.

>> c-span local content vehicles are troubling the countries as we look at some of the most contested house races leading to november's midterm election. >> it has been an interesting race for the sixth district congressional seat. through the primaries, both parties were hotly contested. both of the nominees won by just the slimmest of margins. this has been an area that has been predominantly democrat. now, it looks like it may go republican. it has been good at all times southern politics, from the get go. kissing babies, shaking hands, all the things they you can imagine, the sixth congressional race has had it. >> i am running for the -- i get

out and there was not even any barbecue. >> she is the state senator. obviously, she knows politics. she has been around. she is a former nurse. she has been able to use for medical background to appeal to the anti-obamacare, coming across as somebody with an alternative to that, somebody whose mom are grand miserly down to earth, a person that voters can really relate to -- whose mom or granma, somebody down-to- earth, a person that voters can really relate to. >> people are just saying,

government, stop, slowdown. do not spend so much. get out of our lives. >> rick is kind of an unknown. he came out of nowhere. during the democratic primary, it was pretty much a given that then lemmings, who was a military man who just had gone out of the marines, who had been in the navy, was pretty much the issue in to win and then, all of a sudden, rick carter comes and got the nomination. people are attracted to his down-home appeal, riding a tractor, connecting with the rural folks and really -- has been plain spoken and does not seem to be a politician per se, kind of your average joke talking out to a -- talking to everybody and getting up the -- kind of just your average joe talking to everybody in getting out the. >> i have an accounting degree

to make sure that the money is spent an hour county is spent wisely. i have the backbone to do what we need to do in washington. >> the district itself is several counties included in the upper kremlin. you have the two largest cities in the district. there are 14.5 counties included in district 6. it has always been democrats. bart gordon was here and he had it for six years. when he decided to retire, it was pretty much a given that republican would just take over his seat in the house. i think you take someone like a bright carter was not a politician, who has largely been in politics, but who says, given what? i am a democrat and i think i will go ahead and at least try to keep the seat a democratic seat in congress.

carter and black were both trying to disassociate themselves with politics in general and with washington politics. they are both running on the platform that, when they go to washington, they will not be part of the washington regime. they will go up there and try to make a difference for our area. they are both very similar in a lot of things. as a matter of fact, but carter has a conference asking for nancy pelosi's resignation. in doing that, as a democrat, he is trying to disassociate himself with the washington democrats. he is focusing on the issues that people around here care about, like jobs, obama and as this care. i think ms. black is against that. he wants to reform -- she wants to reform health care and you do not hear brett saying a whole lot about that nor on the taxes,cs of let's cut you know, decrease spending.

i think they agree on a lot of things and you do not hear a whole lot of back-and-forth between them so far. we are privy to a lot of polls in this area. but i would say that i am black, just by looking at the numbers during the primaries and by way of name recognition momentum, has to have at least a 10-point lead over brett carter right now. he is definitely the underdog. i think he knows that. he relishes that role because, like i said, he came out of nowhere. there are not a lot of people who know him as well as they do her. she was in a very nasty primary race with some other republicans. you have to wonder if they have come together now. it will be interesting to see who wins this. >> c-span's local content vehicles are traveling the country as we look at some of the most closely contested races leading into the midterm

elections. for more information on what the local content vehicles are up to this election season, visit our website, c-span.org/ltv. >> here is a look at political news. after four days on the campaign trail, president obama has no events scheduled for today. he is scheduled to be in rhode island to mark, helping to raise money for democrats. -- rhode island tomorrow, helping to raise money for democrats. he plans to travel again the weekend before the election, making it finally get out the vote push events in bridgeport, conn., chicago, philadelphia, and cleveland. for more political news, go to our website at c-span.org /politics. >> one of the great features of the c-span 2 library is the ability to clip and share programs with your friends. during this campaign season,

that includes several debates we have covered on c-span. if you are new to it all, what's the tutorial right there on our website. search, find, and share with the c-span video library. >> this week, two former parliamentarians, one british and one american. compare and contrast the house of representatives and the house of parliament. that is tonight on "q&a." >> now i discussion on president obama and wall street from today's "washington journal." this is just over 30 minutes. host: ginning us from new york. the autsdzsh of the book bought and paid for. thank you for being with us. guest: thanks for having me. host: let's get into the book and some of the quotes.

host: what's wrong with that? guest: nothing necessarily this book was based on a very simple promise. i just wanted to know why this sort of alleged epi center of capitalism fell in love, and this is even before it looked like barack obama was going to win. after lehman brothers imploded it was clear they was going to win. but they were giving a lot of u money to the obama campaign. and what i couldn't get my arms

around at least at the time was why would these alleged capitalists support someone who is, face it, one of the most liberal presidents or at the time one of the most liberal candidates we've ever had? you don't have to look far to find progressivism in barack obama's background. his spiritual mentor, reverend wright for better or worse was a mamplist. so i tried to figure that out and that's what this book is about, trying to understand why wall street does that. and the sort of premise of it is when you look at sort of big wall street firms, what they've done over the last sort of 30 years, they've done very well under big liberal governments. they make a lot of money when government is the biggest. not only that, obama obviously is someone who courted them. and courted them in interesting ways. like john mccain, when it comes down to it, couldn't stand being in the same room with these guys.

different tempers, different personalities. also politically john mccain is not as much of a progressive. if you look at all the guys that run these firms, jamie at jp morgan chase, go down the list, the gentleman who ran goldman saction, they're all political progressives. and that combined with the fact that these guys make a lot of money over big government, i came to the conclusion that as much as they don't like being yelled at by barack obama being called fat cats, i believe, even though they're supporting

guest: that's true. i mean, all you have to look at, you know, listen, there were temporary bailout mechanisms put in place by the bush administration known as tarp. i actually broke the tarp story at the time. i remember the market when up like 500 points. we could debate the reason why we did that, whether it was good or bad, all day long. but if you look at those mechanisms and you look at them going forward after the initial blute, the guarantees on their debt, the low interest rates which he doesn't control directly, the fed does, but he was very much in favor of keeping those policies in place. i mean the president. and many other policies.

basically where instituted by barack obama. what i tried to look at in this book as well is the benefit of obama nomics. were there equal benefits? main street got the stimulus package, $800 billion shovel ready projects, which never came to bear. if you know anybody in construction they're probably looking for a job. yet wall street, it's interesting, literally weeks, months, i would say a couple months after the financial collapse, wall street was making a lot of money. so that's another driving force. who got the benefits? main street got the stimulus package. which, even by their own estimates, failed. yes, if we didn't spend the money things might have been worse. but the sort of efficacy of spending $800 billion as opposed to other stimulus measures didn't really work out very well. wall street on the other hand did very well under the

stimulus package put in place for big business. by the way, there's a reason why big business loves barack obama. all you have to do is listen to jeffery mills, the head of ge will talk all day about how we're all democrats now. now, why is that? because ge is feasting off of major het asides from the obama administration from all those green jobs and other subsidies. i used to work for g.e., i used to work for cnbc. host: guest: listen, this is an open and shut argument. you talk to anybody in the

business world, and you ask why do we have rying gdp, gross domestic product? the economy is expanding. it may be slowing down right now, but we have positive gdp growth. why do we have that yet massive unemployment? now, businessmen will tell you, large and small, will tell you, here's the deal. i'm afraid of my costs going up. i'm afraid of cap and trade. i'm afraid of regulation. i'm afraid of another $1 billion i have to spend on health care. businessmen are rationale. they look at their cost structure. and under obama nomics, the cost structure for the average business in the middle of a very, very difficult economy is going up. and that's part of the absurdity of what he is doing and that's what this book pointed out. businesses have to pay more money in all these regulations. that means they're not going to hire people, they're going to hoard cash. and it's pretty transparent. we all know it. this book was written a couple months ago, it takes a couple

months to publish. but that is still the case, which is the scary part about it. . .

host: hot and paid for, he should have waited until the current election because this election will set a new standard for being "bought peekabt." guest: my book is not about campaign finance. it is basically a book that tries to explain to people that despite the rhetoric, a lot of people think wall street is full of white ring republicans. it is basically showing that it is not really the case. and the terms of politicst they

employ -- phone calls.your mike from atkinson. caller: good morning. this is about the federal reserve. it seems to me they go hand in hand. guest: without getting too much into this, there's something called quantitative easing where the fed actually goes in there to pump money into the money supply by purchasing those bonds from the bank. they have the money on hand. they give money to the bank. what you see there is something

known as quantitative easing. they are pumping money into the money supply. you are correct. that part -- that is part of this book as well. the partnership between wall street and government, especially in this form, goes back about three decades and involves not just the fed, but the fed is involved in wall street. the problem is it to look at the bailout for into thousand a, a lot of people think that is the only time that. though wall street. they have built about like four or five times. the mechanism they use is often the fed. they go in and purchase fed is securities and put money into the system. by the way, when they do that, it softens the pain. when you soften the pain, you create more of hazard or there is no consequence to your actions. that is why wall stree of hope .

they were demanding answers. guest: it is kind of ironic, is it not, that the people and categories that supported obama the most are basically the feeling the most pain from his policies. you cannot deny the fact that he was left was something that was really horrendous, a financial collapse, an informant ratcheting up massively. the real question is did his policies do enough to prevent that from going off the tracks?

the portrait to make in this book is his policies made a bad situation worse. this is pretty quantifiable. businesses were not facing these increased costs right now, big businesses, they would be hiring more people. those increased costs to indirectly from his policies. these are irrefutable facts. if you look at the stimulus package, the main driver of how he was going to repair main street has been an utter failure. it has been failing for years. those government stimulants of measures and never really worked out as well for main street as planned. listen. wall street makes a lot of life from that debt. general electric can make a lot of money for the subsidies for

grain jobs. the actual job creation has pretty much diminished. they spend $800 billion on a stimulus package. they were going to give some of the money to the states, which they did. there were supposed to use that to build "shovel ready projects ." they used to not cut money at the state level. these are positions them their work that in new york state. that has been the record of obamanomics. host: charlie gasparino as a correspondent for cox business channel. you said the economic engine was put in direction before obama.

surely from new orleans on our democratic line. good morning. caller: this man on television as a joke. everything he says is barack obama is wrong. barack obama is wrong. he could still do something for this country. you have those two white wing people on. you had six callers, two republicans, two democrats. what is it with c-span? they must be dragging their -- host: i appreciate the call. what call was a lie? what are you talking about?

caller: he is saying that barack obama had the $800 billion bill. the last thing you said just before i came on the air -- he is from fox news. what do you expect from fox news? they lie and spread misinformation. host: we invite authors from all political stripes and backgrounds. guest: i should point out that i also write: tim -- columns for "the huffington post." i have worked for the news pages of "the wall street journal." $800 billion was spent by barack

obama. that is called a stimulus package. ibm evenhanded about big government. the government was a function of the bush administration as well. i am not saying that barack obama invented big government, but when you look at the last two years of obamanomics, we are talking contemporaneously here and what is going on right now with this president. george bush was president two years ago. we have a new president. this is looking at the spoils of obamanomics. the benefits have been unevenly doled out. big business and wall street made a lot of money. they like divided government as much as anyone else. they did very well under this president and that is what this book is about. host: eastlake, ohio, on our independent line. caller: mr. gasparino, they are

not hiring because the people who are still working are working harder, longer, and they're working for less because they have taken away our 401k's and lowered the hourly rates. they will not hire until they have to. i do not think this has anything to do with taxes because they have been the same for 10 years. the jobs have not come in. the other thing contributions for campaigns, they go to the many who they think will be in power. do not give me the baloney that the democrats are loved by wall street, because right now wall street is giving major bucks to the republicans and the tea party. guest: they are giving it to the

republicans, but not the tea party. let us deal with your question that. i mean, olistening. unemployment has not been the same and stable for the last 10 years. we should point now that you have to ask a businessman while they are not hiring. they should be hiring now. what happened 10 years ago has nothing to do with why they are not hiring now. unless they are -- the reason they're not hiring is that every businessman wants to make more money. .hat is their modus operandi you hire people to produce more goods because the economy is expanding. what every businessman worries about is that next year but they

cannot maintain their profit margins. they cannot maintain profit margins and higher more people because their rising costs. those costs are all related to the growth of government that this president is advocating. you may not like that, but that is what they are saying. your beef is with them. it is pretty empirically clear. host: tens of millions with -- of middle-class families with disposable income will grow this economy and those days are over. guest: that is true to an extent. my dad was an iron worker and i grew up in this area of my entire life. i did not come from a privileged background, so this week. he was out of luck work all lot

during the 1970's. one of the things he told me over those years was that he needed rich people to be rich. when rich people spend money, it helps the family. rich people should take a breath. the people in the top income categories to the majority of the spending, the majority of the hiring in this country. if you burden those people with regulation and if you take money out of their pocket, ey willcona

tough fight of his home. german baucus could be the chair of the financial committee. guest: he is slated to be the next chair. what happened was in the late winter of 2009 and spring 2010, wall street started worrying about the obama administration turning their back on them. what you see now is the end result where the money started flowing to republicans. the republicans are really

interesting, especially in the house. when they created tarp, the bailout mechanism for the banks, it is interesting that hank paulson, the bush administration secretary treasury did not really work with the house republicans. he was working generally with people he knew from his days at goldman sachs. he was the ceo of goldman. that was generally nancy pelosi and barney frank. those were his main conduits. republicans were always very uneasy about tarp. one year later all these bailouts, the republicans started returning. jamie dimon was famously known as the shadow secretary. he met up with barack obama in

washington. they were complaining the far left tilt of the democratic party. even more than the policies, i think the heads of the wall street firms hated being called fat cats. dimon despised the name calling. if you are being called names by the president, people will be less likely to give you their money. i go through that in the book. that was senator baucus's comment to them. host: charlie gasparino is with us. he has written a book, "bought

and paid for -- the unholy alliance between barack obama and wall street." caller: think you for taking my call. i think there are four reasons president obama will lose the house. the first is because president obama scuttled the pan-american truckdriver initiative where we were going to have truck drivers from central america and mexico drive in the united states. people will have to pay a lot more for their goods now. everybody's stuff comes by truck. everybody uses either water, gas, oil, and it comes through well casing.

we will not get that-cheap. there's also a family planning where he will allow abortions. we will not have as many illegal immigrants because they will be able to do birth control. host: we will have our gas to take any number or all of them, your choice. guest: i do not know what to say to this one. i bet those are not the four top reasons why the republicans will win the house. host: that me go to this twitter question. we have lost our homes, our jobs, and their futures because wall street gambled with our homes. there is no demand. guest: absolutely true.

i have been covering the big wall street firms for 20-22 years. they gambled recklessly and irresponsibly, but this tries to show why they gambled irresponsibly and recklessly. one reason why is they always felt they had a partnership with government. in the last 30 years, there has been four bailouts, at least four. that is the root of the problem. going forward, how can we prevent this in the future from happening. one way is to not do what is being done in the recent financial reform bill which codifies the notion of the too big to fail into the law. they will tell you it does not exist, but the dog-franc bill is the bill that is going to prevent a financial crisis. too big to fail is to step in

to bailout "systemically important" institutions. if you want to know the reason why people gamble recklessly, it is because they believe they have a partner in the government and they will get a bailout. it is human nature to do that. if you know you're going to vegas and you can gamble everything because the house will bail you out, you will gamble everything. one of the problems going forward is that the financial reform bill that was passed essentially makes that even worse. the question is what do we do to prevent this in the future? listen. there is one reason for the banks to go in and make them smaller and less risky. i would do a free market proposal. most of these banks now combine commercial banking, customer deposits with risk-taking.

if you want to roll the dice in the securities market and put those customer deposits that are insured by the fdic and rest, we will not insure it. the taxpayers will not insure that deposit. that was one reason we had to bail out citigroup. citigroup went under, the american taxpayer would have been on the hope for something like $800 billion of deposits. one way to prevent that is to no longer insure deposits at the want to take risks. host: wall street did not gamble with our homes, wall street and barney frank tdid. our last call for charlie gasparino. caller: good morning. it seems that this has been going on for the last 40 years. now we have an unholy alliance of either one of the two political parties, whether it is the bush republicans or the of

mitch mcconnell republicans or any of the democrats with wall street. going to you, personally, and what i have watched you do on the fox business channel night after night after night after night from day one -- day 1 -- host: what is day 1? caller: when he first came on in his program. guest: that was five years ago. that was before barack obama. caller: you seem to be doing some black journalism. host: black journalism? caller: you are calling them in my party a bunch of crooks. guest: i think you are wrong.

i have attacked both parties pretty equally. one thing i am very critical of is the absurdity of raising taxes and expanding mandates on businesses when we have to create jobs. you may think that is good to be forcing businesses to spend more, but when you do that it has an economic impact. that economic impact as close to 10% unemployment. this book is very critical of both republicans and democrats. that is

been an american century -- far from it." guest: george bush does not deserve any kudos year. i am writing about this issue which is about the last couple of years of obamanomics. everyone should be worried about the size and rapid growth of government. this is pretty simple stuff. we are selling more dead than had in savings. we may have savings in the future, but we have to go into debt and sell it to people who are not necessarily our friends, like the chinese. we are trying to have a massive change in the size and scope of government. i think americans are uneasy about this. we are having a national debate

about this right now playing out in the midterm elections because people are very worried. you have to ask yourself why gold is going through the roof right now when it startup businesses cannot get seed financing? one reason why is we have a situation where investors are worried about the future. host: his latest book is "bought and paid for -- the unholy >> tomorrow, david keene, chairman of the american conservative union discusses how -- discusses what conservatives are looking for. mary kay henry, president of the service employees international union talks about the union's money roll in the elections and efforts to get voters to the polls. and richard barrett, coordinator of the un team on negotiations

for ending the war in afghanistan. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. on c-span. >> this week on "q&a," two future parliamentarians. they talk about the roles of parliament in congress. >> this week on the premises miliband, deaed faces off. they discuss unemployment and budgets for foreign aid. the prime issues questions is tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. -- the prime minister's

questions is tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> helping with questions this morning, we have zachary goldfarb with "the washington post." daniel wagner has the first question. >> i and send you need to have a finished copy of the report to the printers sometime next month. why do not start by giving us an update on the commission's activities. >> we are working hard. ñ ÷@x ÷@x ÷@x ÷ ÷ we have reviewed millions of pages of we have reviewed millions of