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 voters in this state. if you look at any polling data, in over 800 meetings i have had with voters, i have been asked five or six times about gay marriage or abortion. people want to know about jobs. >> iran on those issues in the republican primary. i think it is cynical. if you want to talk about economic issues, we have to talk about those two. your positions are as far out of the mainstream as your positions on these issues. this is about, in his view, protecting oil companies and

others. it has nothing to do with colorado. what it is not about is supporting our economy here in colorado -- >> let me talk. let me respond to that. i am not the one that has accumulated three trillion dollars of debt in the united states senate. that is senator bennett. that is out of touch with all the broader values. did -- colorado values. when you rubberstamp a health- care bill, that is wrong. we can talk about economic issues. >> we are out of time. we can keep this going. >> it is always great to give the voters a chance to ask the questions. we also give our candidates a chance to ask some as well. this is the head-to-head portion of our debate.

they have one minute to answer each question. senator bennett lost a coin toss giving him the choice to answer the first question. he chose to answer the first question. >> senator, you have four months said that you will not take a position on the employee free choice act. he said he disagreed with the language in the house bill. you did not explain what you meant by disagreeing with the language in the house bill. do you disagree or agree with certain provisions? i want to know what you like about that bill. do you like the ability to take away the right to secret ballot, or are you in favor of mandatory arbitration with the federal government decides the conditions in the workplace?

>> it is great to take questions from viewers, but we should give them the dignity of answering the questions they ask. one thing i like about the bill is shortening the time frame between a first book and a second book. -- a first vote in a second vote. that is where intimidation can happen. what i really would like to see is labor and management working together to make sure that we can solve the economic issues that we face. i believe this is a very divisive issue. i think more time should be spent on how we are going to create jobs in this country and stop exporting them overseas. the tax policies you support will send jobs overseas. we need to build them right here in colorado. secret ballots and arbitration -- that was the question. you ask me what i liked. i think that a secret ballot rules should not change. i think it is the american way to have a secret ballot. being the only person up here

that has ever conducted collective bargaining, i am skeptical of the provision. -- the arbitration provisions. it is important to keep collective bargaining negotiations in the hands of parties. >> the next question is mine. thank you. you have said you do not support a renewable energy standards did you do not support tax credits for renewable and clean energy. we have seemed more job growth -- seymour job growth -- seen more job growth. in that part of the world that we have anything else. 20,000 jobs already. 30,000 more jobs coming. i would like to know three things you do to support this important issue in colorado. >> if you made a great point on your previous debate, senator. we have to import solar panels into this country because we cannot make them in this country. the reason 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 that is based on good science, and energy policy that encourages energy growth so we can do the sorts of things you are talking about -- make the windmills here, make the solar panels here, and create the kinds of jobs that manufacture those in the private sector. i would decrease the corporate tax rate. i would buy sustainable and low-cost energy sources. i would make sure we do not impose a health care bill on our employers of the cannot -- so they cannot manufacture. >> the next question issuers. >> senator bennett, you've 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. you have been on the committee on aging. the committee on aging has

oversight for social security. you have missed a 92% of the meetings. why are you missing 70 meetings? -- so many meetings? >> i do not accept your map of the number of meetings i have missed. that has a 1% voting record. -- i am one of only 12 senators that has a 100% voting record. i have not missed a single vote. i have traveled 30,000 miles having tell all meetings where i have not made up a new facts or said new things based on how receptive the audience was. it is hard to take that question from somebody who has missed 113 days of work in the d a's office what you are campaigning on the taxpayer's dime. no one has ever questioned my work ethic before. i think my record speaks for itself. >> i wrote the amendment in the health-care bill that says that our senior's medicare will be

protected. it got 100 votes in the united states senate. it was the most bipartisan piece of legislation passed in the senate. i do not think our seniors want to see the privatization of social security. i am glad to give you a specific plan of social security. i have been talking about it for months. >> i have turned back to much of my salary to the taxpayers since i have been campaigning. you have turned back nothing. the senate has been in session 39 days in the last 140 days. you have little ground to stand on to criticize me for where i have been in relationship to the taxpayer. we have decrease crime in our county bite 50%. you had nothing to show from your time in the senate. >> i would like to go back to the viewer's question from a minute ago.

abortion in cases of rape and. -- and. -- and incest. my question is, who is going to go to jail? >> to is going to go to jail? >> we decriminalize abortion in the case of rape and incest, too is going to jail? >> i do not think abortion will decriminalized any time soon. you have once again tried to take this debate off topic. we are talking about issues that are important to colorado voters. we are talking about jobs. we're talking about your vote on health care. we are talking about these colorado voters want to know about. >> you're not answering the question that i have asked you. this is the time when you need to answer just as i did. >> finish, please. >> once again, i am going to focus my campaign on the issues colorado voters care about.

i have said that i am pro-life. i do not believe in exceptions for rape or incest. i am hopeful we can work together as a country and reduce abortions. that is the key. the votes in the united states senate have been two. one is for federal funding, and the other was for foreign organizations that conduct abortions. that is the scope of the united states senate. >> we will end it right there. thank you for your questions. it is a great way to find out what is on our candidate's might -- minds this evening. we have a question about four policy. >> with all the focus on the economy, the war in afghanistan is not getting as much attention. america's security trumps all other issues. mr. buck, i know you oppose announcing timetables for afghanistan. senator bennet, i believe you

have a different view. would each of you outlined what would be the best course? >> i believe we need to define our mission very clearly. need to give them time to secure the nuclear weapons in pakistan. it is a worldwide concern that those weapons be secured. the pakistan government cannot be counted on to do it and we cannot do it. i think we need to start coming home in the middle of next year. this is the largest shooting war -- longest shooting war in our country's history. we simply cannot afford it anymore. i believe the troops that have come back to colorado's share that view. i do not think they want to state their longer than that. we will have a presence for a while, but we need to start bringing people home.

>> i think we have the wrong policy in afghanistan. i do not think we should be in the business of nation-building in afghanistan. we set certain goals and we accomplished those goals. we need to draw down our forces and bring them home. i think it is a mistake to set a time table and tell your enemy when you are leaving. i think we need to do three things. the first thing we need to do is make sure that afghanistan is not a safe-haven for terrorists. i am saying that when you look at other countries that afghanistan is at least as safe as those countries. the second thing we need to do is to disrupt and dismantle the drug trade coming out of afghanistan. the third thing we need to do is support stability in central asia. we cannot lose more lives and we cannot spend billions and billions of dollars more to rebuild afghanistan.

>> we have lost 81 colorado residents in iraq and afghanistan. there was a role for nation- building. he has changed his position so many times on afghanistan. it makes it impossible to understand what it is. we need to make sure there is military stability there. that is another way of saying that our troops will be there forever. that region cannot be stabilized by the united states of america's military forces. it is unfair to ask them to do it. >> my turn here? these questions are critically important. do you believe the patriot act has served our country weldon? where are you on closing the

base at guantanamo? if you favor closing that days, why has that not happen? mr. buck, i think you are up. >> my son is in his last year of west point. i will in his second lieutenant bars on him in may of the next year. this is a personal issue. i think we have been well served by the patriot act. i think we need to look at it that 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. i think the idea of treating terrorist as committing and the unlawful acts as opposed to a terrorist or military act is wrong. i think this country is giving terrorist too many rights we bring them to this nation and try them in this nation. my opponent voted for funding the trials to be held in new york city of very serious terrorists. that is a mistake.

we should not give them our constitutional rights. >> thank you. >> i think one of the things that brought my family to this country as survivors of the holocaust was commitment to the role of law. it is crucially important that every generation pass that to the next. the terrorist threat that we face is evolving and is incredibly dangerous. i agree with my opponent, we need to make sure that we are vigilant in balancing our important civil liberties. we should not give them up either. i support closing guantanamo bay, but to answer the question directly, a number voted against the administration trying to close it because they did not have an adequate plan for what to do with the people that were there. until the administration comes up with an adequate plan, i

will continue to vote that way. it is in the long-term national interest of the united states to close guantanamo bay. >> thank you both. we will take a moment to ask a few questions. you each have 20 seconds to answer. in every campaign, and mistakes are made. what mistakes do you wish you could take back? >> i do not wish that i could take it back, but i would say it is a time to explain the $13 trillion contract. i clearly i am not responsible for $13 trillion in debt. i take very seriously this idea. i am comfortable with the mistakes i have made. -- the statements i have made. >> i recently made a statement

about global warming. i was trying to "someone. -- " son senator -- quote senator inhofe. i think the science is unproven in global warming. i think, unfortunately, it was 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 comedy you think he wishes -- comment on do you think he wishes he could take back? >> while. i think all of his commercials. i am short senator bennett is an honorable man. i am sure he would like to take back those commercials. with the colorado springs gazette says that you are running a sleazy campaign, i am short senator bennett does not want to face his three daughters and explain why he is doing that. >> here is what i would like to do. i will post every bit of evidence for every advertisement on our website.

you can take a look at that and make the decision of whether these advertisements are credible or not. tired of having my character impugned by him. i am sorry that politics has gotten this way. >> we know the time has been all consuming for your campaigns and has taken a toll on your families. how big of an impact has it taken on your families? >> it has taken an impact on my family. fortunately both the my children are out to state and do not have to watch the ads that have been run. unfortunately, my wife is in state and has seen them. i have tried to break the tv on a number of occasions and it has not worked. i think that my wife and i have grown closer i get a lot of ways. campaigning with my children was a great experience.

i think they got a lot out of that. >> everybody should understand that there have been far more negative advertisements run against me in this race. second, it has been a delight to be with my wife and three little girls traveling around the state. this has given them a chance to see the beautiful state we have. also, how much bigger a world that we live in. the struggles that other people are having across the state. >> we have reached the closing segment of our debate. we would give each can get one minute to make your case. mr. buck won the coin toss. he elected to go second. >> all like to thank you for putting this debate on. i am very grateful. it is important for your viewers to be able to see it. we are facing enormously difficult economic times in this country. we have a run rate deficit and

runaway debt. i believe we can come together, roll up our sleeves. we need to forget about ideologies and focus on pragmatic problem-solving. that is what i have done my entire career. i think that having experienced in the private sector and working in tough government situations at the local level give me a totally different perspective than 99% of the senators in d.c. i will do absolutely everything to make sure we are not part of the first generation of america to left these problems for our kids and grandkids. >> we have a great opportunity to choose between repeating our mistakes and creating a state and a country that our kids and grandkids would not want to live in.

we all protested when the congress ran up more and more debt. as taxpayers we have to face the price of that debt at some point. we set e-mail's to our senators and representatives when they're going to pass the health care bill because we knew the burdens it would place on us. we told our progress that we did not want them to stymie growth and to get off the backs of small business. they did not listen to us. they ignored us. on november 2, will have the opportunity to make sure that the people in washington, d.c., do not ignore us anymore. go to my web site and click on the advertising section and see what other news organizations have said about those advertisements. >> we appreciate you being with us this evening. we hope we have helped voters prepare for campaign 2010. it will be a very interesting election day. our partner, colorado public

television, will be rearing this debate. next friday will bring you the gubernatorial debate life. we will be aired the same evening on channel 12. for complete election night coverage, join us on colorado public television. you can also find our debates online. we will have complete coverage of campaign 2010. thank you for being with us this evening. we hope we have helped to make an informed decision this election year. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> the midterm elections are eight days away. each night on c-span, we show you events from key races around the country. we start tonight with live coverage of the kentucky senate debate with rand paul and jack conway. here is house cq politics is reporting on redoubling efforts to help endangered colleagues. of the 54 democratic women running for reelection, but doesn't face tough battles. -- 12 are facing tough battles.

the gop wave could dramatically diminish the number of women in the democratic caucus. our live program will continue with a discussion on social media hosted by politico, facebook, and george washington university. that is under a little more than an hour here on c-span. >> this week on "the communicators," the role of the public and private sector in cyber security. >> what role will unions have in the 2010 midterm elections? this is mary kay henry,

president of the service employees international union. this is just over half an hour. we want to welcome back to the table, mary kay henry. and i want to begin by talking about your political budget. you have about $44 million that you can spend on campaign 2010. will you spend it all? guest: yeah. the $44 million is the contribution of 300,000 of our members. they make decisions honor to prioritize their voice in this election. host: part of the citizens united case allowed unions like yours to dip into your general treasuries as well to spend on campaigns. will you do that? guest: we haven't done a lot of the general fund money. we've used the voluntary contribution of our members in order to finance this election. host: so how much total do you think you'll be spending on

campaign 2010? guest: the $44 million. host: where will you spend the money? can you give us specific states? guest: well, our members are active in 44 states. i know there's increased activity and volunteer work of those in pennsylvania, ohio, florida. i was just in nevada and arizona, illinois, washington, california. we are everywhere that our members live and work because we see it as a way to have their voice heard about the future. host: people talk a lot about unions' ground game. is that how you'll spend the majority of the money over the coming eight days in a ground game effort, and how do you go about that? guest: we've had members off the job since september and they've been door knocking and recruiting in their workplaces and they'll work to remind voters the choice that we face about needing can indicates and elected officials that stand on behalf of working people in this country. and that's the ground game that we do.

host: "politico" writes, "the vast majority of the political budget is being used to educate, motivate, persuade and transport members to the polls." she writes, "it's a blind spot that's becoming a sore spot for some republicans who argue that the secrecy of that effort, we don't know how that money is being spent necessarily, shroud -- shroud the spending." guest: it's completely transparent. we have people that voluntary contribute and that money is invested in 700 members that are off the job, recruiting tens of thousands of volunteers. and to i would like to challenge the interests that have created a lot of these pacts in the last couple of

weeks that are up on the air and we don't know who's financing the american cross rods and a lot of different negative campaigning that's going on now. guest: i -- host: i want to talk specifically about nevada because the fciu has a real presence in that state and president obama was able to win nevada. and some have pointed to the ground game that fciu has in that state specifically. harry reid said his ground game along with fciu is going to be even better than 2008. can you talk specifically strategy in nevada? what are you doing? guest: we have been working with the rest of the labor movement. i was at a kickoff in las vegas on saturday morning where we are door knock, shoulder to shoulder with the rest of labor in the congressional district three that dinah titus is running. and then those doing door knockling, phone banks, a lot

of -- knocking, phone banking, a lot of people to get out on november 2. host: early voting, have you seen any numbers? do you know how it's looking for -- guest: what we heard in nevada on saturday morning is that 60% of the labor households have already voted through early voting. host: what does that mean for harry reid? guest: we need to make sure that everybody understands that we face a critical choice on november 2 and get additional votes out for him. what i care about on november 3 is that whoever's elected helps america get back to work because people are suffering. we are working harder and earning less and we need to address those problems through our government. host: what's agenda item number one? guest: jobs. host: how do you go about that? guest: we want elected officials to join hands with corporate america and reinvest in our economy.

we don't think this is a government solution, that there needs to be a public-private partnership in creating more jobs state by state and federally. host: ok. go to phone calls. democratic line, houston. good morning. you're on the air, houston. caller: hello. hi. host: good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. the question i'm asking her. she's with the union and helping with the votes and everything. and what i'm saying is -- i wish i could have got in with the tax cuts. now, with the union -- what the union is telling them about jobs is, of course, we do. with her, i know she's with the union and everything, but the tax cuts for the rich -- you know, didn't help us at all here. the unions have been out in my neighborhood too. they've been knocking door to door and they're with the union. they do help with the jobs and things.

the tax cuts didn't help. so we need to get out and get this for the jobs because i know i have a lot of relatives and everything about to lose their home because they lost their job and they lost their job before 2009, in 2008. they had lost their jobs. so the union is very, very good on that. so i was trying to see what could i do to help get that out, too. i'm not part of the union but i'd like to get out there and i have a lot of senior citizens in my church. what can i do for them to go and try to create jobs and, you know -- host: ok. we'll leave it there. mary kay henry. guest: you can do exactly what you just did on your phone call. you explained how important things are for working people that were concerned about job loss. and losing our homes and you need to talk to people in your church and the senior citizens that you work with and get them to vote on november 2, and then

after november 2 you can create and demand more jobs both from special interests and corporate that need to reinvest in america. host: new orleans, william on the republican line. you're on the line with mary kay henry. go ahead. caller: good morning, ms. henry. i would like to ask this rather simple question. what specific republicans are you promoting and supporting by your members given the fact that the salaries for public service employees are paid for all of the taxpayers seem to many of us that this particular union, which is the largest supporter and largest spender in this election of any group contrary to the motion of the chamber of commerce, where do we have representation? where do members who simply do

not agree with the democratic line or the president's administration, where do we have representation? guest: thank you for asking the question. our members make decisions on who to endorse based on interviews and a requirement that any candidate walk in the shoes of one of our members so that they understand the key issues that our members face. and so i don't know the names of specific republicans that we've endorsed, but that happens state by state and i know when i was recently in missouri there were republicans that our members there decided to support and there are republicans that we're supporting in indiana. and then to your second point about our investments, you can go online and look at how we have made a decision to spend the money, but our members make the decision about how to invest the political money they voluntarily contribute. host: florida, jeff, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing today?

host: doing well, sir. caller: and good morning, america. there are suggestions that i've been really pestering congress and all the house of representatives. and i think -- i'm 54 years old and i remember seeing my parents have all the troubles with the economy. and now it's coming around again to the point where they're forgetting about the little man. i was thinking that maybe it's time to mix things up like -- i mean, this is a wild idea but it might work. changing all the republicans to lemons -- women and all the democrats to men and let the independent party be the referee. and as far as jobs, how about making unemployment in the next 90 days. host: what one thing has sciu done to get a job? name anything? guest: we fought in congress to make sure that the jobs bill

passed. and the federal medicaid program was extended which meant that our providers and public sector workers were able to continue to hold their jobs and we supported green initiatives in california to create new jobs through solar and wind energy. we've been working with many other unions in state by state to create jobs through the initiatives that senator harry reid just did in nevada on a speed train from las vegas to los angeles. so there's a number of examples of where we've worked on concrete job proposals. host: let me go back to nevada and compare and contrast. here is something in "the baltimore sun," real voters will race to the polls. american crossroads is planning to spend $10 million on its ground game. it says crossroads alone will generate nine million phone calls and five million pieces of mail before election day. can you compare that to your effort? guest: our effort is one-on-one communication.

it's not mail and phone. we do eye-to-eye contact at people's homes, in the churches and at our workplaces. and so we've found that of conversation with people, based on their life experience is the best way to get them to vote. host: all right. cumberland, maryland. george, democratic line. good morning. caller: hi, gretta. how you doing? host: doing well, sir. caller: the unions are making a mistake. they don't talk about their achievements. before ronald wilson reagan fired the air traffic controllers, the union and the middle classes is what made this country strong. the unions paid the most taxes which was true. but they got all the deductions at the end of the year. when they received their deductions, what they did, they bought united states saving bonds. they didn't invest in -- they didn't invest in the stock market which helped the government to create more programs and to help the

elderly and the needy. guest: i think that you make a very good point, sir, and i will accept the notion that we've made a mistake by not making it crystal clear how unions helped build the american middle class and that's why i think unions need to be at the forefront of demanding jobs and restoring the middle class. and helping workers form unions so that we can lift wages in this country. because the jobs we create have to be good jobs that people can support their families on. host: a tweet here responding to our earlier tweet with seiu has done to create jobs. unions aren't there to get you a job. there are there to help you keep your job and be treated fairly. john, republican line, go ahead. caller: good morning. my question is -- all this money that's being thrown into these elections by the unions and the chamber of commerce, every president talks about jobs and these companies talk about -- organizations want

jobs. why didn't they take that money and use it and create jobs instead of trying to elect these politicians? you take harry reid in nevada. he's been there 40 years. he's a millionaire. most of the people in congress are lawyers, and they're all rich. host: how do you square that the millions of dollars being spent on campaign 2010 and then asking congress to do something about jobs? people who weren't contributing this amount of money are thinking to themselves, why aren't we spending this kind of money on jobs? guest: well, for a union member like the one i met yesterday in maryland where i was door knocking with her in principles george's county. she's a family childcare provider. she sees her voluntary political contribution and her volunteer work on the doors as a way that she participates in the political process. and so it is for us a way to elect officials that are willing to stand with us after november 2 and call upon government and corporate america to get us all back to work.

so for us it's a part of the way that we help get the economy going again. host: hastings, minnesota, bailey, independent line. caller: good morning, ladies. i have two questions. i wish mary kay will please explain to the people that are benefiting good things that unions do. and the stimulus money that [inaudible] the stimulus money is helping people because we have a lot of people out there, republicans who say on tv say that stimulus is not working but at the same time they got memos requesting money. thank you very much. host: thank you, hastings, minnesota. guest: we have people wanting

safer staffing in hospitals. we have teachers, school employees that say we need to invest in quality education for our kids so that everybody has an even start and can grow up and accomplish things that our generation only dreams about now. we lift wages and benefits for workers all across the economy. so i appreciate you reminding me to underscore that. and then the second point you make i think has been part of the discussion already in the questions and answers about the amount of money that is being invested in this election. host: next phone call, georgetown, kentucky. caller: my dad was a charter member of the united mine workers back in the 1930's. he worked in the coal mine for many years and union meant food on our table. i understand. i have been in business myself, but i understand all unions too. but what i am very upset about is in the 1960's when we tried to make a good thing for

medicare, they took all the money -- i work for general motors. i was supposed to have my insurance on my life. i have to go to medicare at 65, and that relieves the insurance companies that general motors had. this is bad to all workers in the united states because insurance are profiting from that. we don't have insurance now for -- worth crap because of all the things that's went down, bad things and all of our money and the social security money was taken and given to wars. host: ok. that was bonnie in kentucky on the democratic line. guest: bonnie, you make two, three, four excellent points and that's why we need to stay with hands joined together and say on november 3 that we want our government to make sure that social security is solvent, that the medicare program works and that you and i need to work together to hold insurance companies accountable. and not being able to increase

premiums so we can afford health care coverage. host: in this campaign 2010 season, this is an email from jane in wisconsin which says that democrats and liberals and special interest groups -- guest: well, the difference in this election 2008 is that the spending gap is way bigger as opposed to the citizens united decision. we're being outspent by hundreds of millions of dollars. i think that's the focus that we wanted to put on the 2010 elections is that hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent by we believe corporate interest that are trying to influence who gets elected so

that corporate interests are protected by the next congress and not working people. host: marietta, florida, mike on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. hello, can you hear me? host: sir, you're on the air. caller: yes, hello. i have a question. hello. host: mike, we are listening to you. go ahead, please. caller: yes, ma'am. i have a question for the union person. the obama administration has shown a number of concessions to the unions. there have been an issue recently about undisclosed funding going to various candidates. and during the so-called disclose act, the unions were excluded from this. now, the unions have historically had close ties with organized crime. are the unions willing to disclose money received from prostitution, drugs? guest: sir, the information you have is wrong. the union does disclose every

contribution our members make voluntarily to our political fund. there is access to that record and there is absolutely no money that our union receives from outside of our membership. we run based on the dues that our members pay for their collective bargaining and their voluntary political contribution. host: what is the average income of your members, one tweets in this morning? guest: we have 2.2 million members in seiu and about half of our members earn between $15,000 and $20,000 a year. our collective bargaining has lifted them from mainly jobs to about $11 an hour jobs. and there is another half of our members who are health care workers, registered nurses and public service employees who earn between $50,000 and $75,000 a year. host: we'll go to vegas. bill on the independent line. go ahead, bill. caller: hey, good morning. i wanted to ask ms. henry.

i'm a retired teamster and i love the unions. our unemployment here in nevada right now is 15%. why are we going to support harry reid? harry reid is part of the problem. we got to get rid of these old guys and, you know, and get some new blood in there. host: why should somebody like bill support harry reid? guest: he has done three things just in the last six months to create new jobs in nevada. and i think what he is trying to do is get reinvestment in wind energy that's going to be built in -- right outside of las vegas. .

she has said many things. when you look at the overall lection, we are trying to say that there is a sharp difference in contrast between candidates that would stand with the working people and help get america back to work to restore fairness to our economy and fairness -- candidates that want to stand on the side of corporate interests.

host: napa county, california. caller: i had to commute to the bay area for like 15 years for a good paying union jobs. i was a machinist and we had a little plant down there. i have less than half of a dozen people that ever complained about donating to the democratic party, the union. the most people to complain about unions are the people and have never enjoyed the benefits of being a in a union. all of the stuff that you get that you do not get in the private sector. living wage, of being able to pay your rent, that is one of the fundamental problems in this country right now. what percentage of union members in your organization are republican? i will take my answer offline.

thank you. guest: we have 30% of our members that are registered republican. we have a national republican member advisory committee that helps us to think about how to represent the interests of all of our members. whether they are registered democrat, republican, or independent. >> -- host: would you say that you are backing a 30% of republican candidates? guest: no, because none of our registered members think about who we endorse based on party affiliation, it is based on who is willing to stand beside working people. we stand beside the greatest crisis we have ever faced in our generation. our members are more committed than ever to make sure that we elect people that will stand with us. >> does that mean that -- host: does that mean that your level you are talking to the local and

telling them which candidate you believe who best represents your interest? guest: no, that is done in candidate meetings where they walked a day in our shoes and members make the decision. host: back to the foul line. republican line, missouri. i like how you claim you are for the working people, but when the tea party started up there was a tea party member that was selling don't tread on me buttons and your people savagely attacked and beat this man. lied and lied again trying to defend their actions. they were found guilty in court.

the teachers' union wants to teach nothing but marxist and socialist agendas and ideologies. i have spent my life fighting against socialism. against marxism. here we have your union and a bunch of the other unions, you people will not be satisfied until you turn this country into something like that nightmare in greece or france. host: we have the point. guest: we have a disagreement about what happened in missouri. i think that what we can agree on is that this is an incredibly wonderful country and that american workers are full of ingenuity and great ideas. productivity. i feel that my responsibility but all americans is to make sure the 25 million people can get back to work. that is how we have respected dignity every day.

host: next phone call, carol, independent line. caller: i would like to ask mary kay henry if your union is the same one that had in the stern. -- andy stern. guest: he is our former president. he helped to create getting our union organized, organize more workers, and under his leadership 1 million more members joined the union. host: debra, your on the air. caller: andy stern, to see the one that unionized child care

providers only? they call it a fair share and there is nothing fair about it? bought out by the unions to pass both laws to make us state employees on paper only? so that your union can take our income whether we want to join or not? guest: mullah she built the union over 16 years without any collective bargaining agreements before we were able to convince the state legislature to allow for a lot for home care providers that earned minimum- wage to be able to bargain for a union. the nl and july $11.50 an hour for the first time after a 16 year struggle. host: ben, los angeles. caller: good morning, ladies. i have a question.

i am personally taking care of my extremely disabled son. we are the beneficiary -- beneficiaries of in home services. every time that i get my check the union membership fee is deducted. i have tried to give this back to the union without success. i am wondering if there is any relief coming from the union presidents of this. -- office. thank you. guest: thank you for your service to your son. it is so incredibly important. yes, you have a way to contact your local union.

i will make sure that your issues handled. caller: yesterday i saw karl rove in he had a contribution sheet from a union because that was all that was disclosed. that it was somehow equivalent to the group's going to republicans. i do not hear anyone making the point that when you disclose the fact that a union is contributing, you publicly know who the elected officials are and you know what their stance is. you do not allow anything about these other groups that are created. guest: you are right, it is completely transparent in the union about who gets to it and how the money is spent.

that is not happening with these new groups that have been created where there is no disclosure of the hundreds of millions of dollars in where they come from. host: san diego, good morning. caller: i am a big supporter of unions. i understand the historical importance and representing the working people. the one thing i have a problem with, when i talk to my parents, other members of my family in corporate management type jobs, they do not like the unions because they say that the main problem they have with it is because they cannot fire people that are not doing a good job. i am wondering if there is any movement in the union's. i think that there could be a compromise on this in the unions.

guest: my experience is that good management can use progressive discipline that has allowed. we do not support employees that do not perform their jobs. i have never had an experience where management cannot take the action necessary to make sure we have a work environment where everyone is doing their jobs. host: michigan, you are on the air with mary kay henry, the president of the fbi you. go ahead. caller: can you tell us what the top 10 executives in your union make? give us a salary? guest: those salaries are approved by our 77 member executive board, ranging from $190,000 per year to $200,000 per year. host: last phone call, petersburg. you are on the air, chuck.

guest: -- caller: good morning, mary kay. i was wondering about issues. everyone is worried about social security entitlements now. how come no one talks about social security having a balance of $2.50 trillion. the government has taken it out of social security in loans. where has that money gone? guest: i think that the point you are making is that we need to make sure that social security is a round for the next generation and the one after it. i completely >> our live programming continuing in the half hour with

the uses of social media in the 2010 election. it is hosted by politico, facebook, and george washington university. the midterm elections are eight days away. we will show you keep debate and races around the country. we start with a live coverage of the senate kentucky debate. we will follow with a page from minnesota's governor's race, and a pair of house races. andrado's fourth district new york's 24th. the next segment is about 40 minutes. host: david keene is the host of the america of -- erican conservative union. let's begin with the amount of money being raised and spent by ouside groups. >> it appears that in this cycle

we will have more than ever. yesterday it was equal, talking about union money and business monday, independent money and all of that. i am not one that finds that particularly disturbing. i think that individual givers and the rest can do that. there has been a lot of complaining over the years. in specific places where there is special interest money that impacts a member of congress or what ever, that is legitimate. butverall i think that the country benefits from a more robust discussion. host: the tea party movement? guest: it really has brought a lot of people into the political environment that have not been inolved before. you have got people attacking,

people phrasing and all of that. in my view, when their issues that really concerned people, new people get involved. the people that have been involved in not like that. they never havethey never will. it sets things. i spoke to a good friend of mine who does nothappen to be a conservative. he said that in his small town that went to a tea party rally and that there were more people there than he had ever seen in his town. and that he didn't know any of them. of which is a big deal in a small, midwestern town. tremendous energy of the republican side this time around. on the issues that they tend to favor, the republicans, they're

upset with the direction the obama administration has taken the country. host: that debate has already begun. you have people like john boehner, who wants be speaker of the house, following his money to the tea party candidates. eric cantor wants to move up. following monday to these tea party candidacy is. some of them do not like what these two party candidates did in the first place. >> one of -- guest: one of the reasons that they wonin 2008 was that a significant number of republicans were getting upset over the way that president bush was operating.

the conservative vote was down by a point or so in those elections. if you look at the most recent polls, the battleground surveys that are out, the good news for republicans is that of monks those people that dislike both parties, they are leading by 2- 1. however, those folks do not really like them more than they like the democrats. i think that republicans will win the house. they will look at the people that gave them their margin skeptically. those folks are going to say, ok, now you have the ball, you are up against the need to perform. host: does it more accurately reflect what is going on with voters and their mindset? should the republicans put forward some new leaders?

guest: i think that they are. host: john boehner will basically be speaker of the house. guest: in dense of his stance as an anti-earmark candidate, someone who has been there awhile, he is doing well, unlike others that have been there awhile. to do and i, john boehner is an old, familiar figure. to barack obama he is a familiar figure. but to the average american, he is not. the question is, will he performed if he becomes speaker? just like the republican party, he has got a shot and the it. host: from "the wall street

journal," tea party groups across the country plan to hold the feet of republcans to the fire. the first test in office will be the debt ceiling. raising it or shutting down the government, how should they vote? guest: i think that the overall question that you have pointed out is absolutely the le of people interested in policy without being elected officials. the interesting thing, washington is a seductive city. people both parties get here and soon forget why. the most important thing in their mind is that they should stay here because it is not just important to have people in congress, to them it is important that we have them in

congress. they decide that their resources that they develop our it way to stay. not just republicans and democrats, but everyone that comes here. it is very tempting to go along with the crowd in duwel. the people on the outside that walk to the precincts for them, do phone calls for them, they say -- here is why we elected you. not so that she could ejoy a washington park -- washington cocktails with your colleagues. host: it goes back to the original question. if you want to change that mind- set, perhaps people will turn around and elect, predictably, john boehner, eric cantor. but that is how they have operated for a long time. guest: a the question is --

will they operate sufficiently? both congresses will be very different. the caucus of democrats will actually be more liberal. the republican caucus will be more conservative. i know enough about john boehner and mitch mcconnell to know that they know how to count votes in their own caucus and it will reflect the views of t caucus. they will be far more conservative than they were. you will see, if you will, new leadership with older faces. host: congressman john boehner has made on the cover of "and newsweek." this message -- john boehner

will be on a short leash, the tea party? but up with spendi. guest: i think that that is right. what is it that is animating the energy that we have out there today? the question of overreach, big spending, and the government that they think is out of control. if you elect a new congress with those concerns, it seems logical that you should hold that to taking cognizance. to what we have had people that go out there, and this is true as republicans and democrats, they say that we're going to washington to represent you end we will do something about it. within months, they forget. if you want to have an impact as a citizen, you have to do more than contribute and elect people. you have to keep in touch to

make sure that they remember why it is you did those things. host: de how difficult will it be for them to vote for raising the debt ceiling or shutting down the government? . there are a whole series of issues that the public will hold officials accountable. we are in washington, but your viewers are not. the world looks very different to less than a does to people in peoria or sarasota.

because we are here and we know what cannot be done. that is the problem in life, oftentimes you ask people to do things and they know they cannot do it. that is why in politics and elsewhere, we need people who don't know what can be done. that is when things that can be done get done. that is what is happening in new jersey right now. three years ago, nobody would have predicted that a governor in new jersey would take the steps that chris christie is taking. that it was heading toward the cliff and about to go over. he not only has done the things, but his approval rating has gone up. people as he did that, said look what he is doing. this is going to kill him. in fact, it has not. that creates consternation in washington because we are used to environment in which there is

only one answer. that is how we take care of an ever-growing government? do we raise taxes? do we run up the debt? what do we do? when they get to washington, they don't really talk about what we ought to do is bareback. now the world is in a situation, not just us, but a lot of places are having to pare back and it hurts because money is like drugs. the fact is there are a lot of people who are benefiting from government spending that is out of control and it is difficult for them to say i know i'm ruining the country, but i like it. host: let's go outside of washington. johnny on detroit on the democratic line. go ahead. hey, johnny. i am going to put you on hold. you got to turn that television down. we'll come back to you in just a minute. front page of "the washington post," "election day could bring historic split." it says here, "not since the

election of the 1930's how the house changed hands -- guest: normally that changes at the same time. host: thinking you can't do nothing, knowing you can't do something? guest: well, actually, it could be healthy. obviously in terms of the issues, the agenda in washington, the house is more important than the senate because if you're in charge in the house you can push your agenda forward and you can make the agenda. the senate is a little different and should be a little different the real question there is -- do you have the 60 votes you need to just overcome ur opposition? if you don't have those votes and you have a house that can push an agenda forward, then you have a possibility of sitting down and really working something out. the two parties then have a choice. shall we do nothing? that's mott the worse thing to do. or should we get together and try to work with the parties -- withhe party's in control?

with the democrats in control of both houses and not just democrats but liberal democrats in control of both houses with a liberal president, you had a president who began by sayg, we're going to be bipartisan, we're going to take all these things into consideration, saying we're being to do exactly what we do and we're not going to listening to anybody else. that won't happen in november. host: let's try dan in virginia. go ahead. caller: i think the electorate is seriously confused about the misuse of labels. the political water is muddied because people use words like conservative and liberal to refer to all sorts of different things. and that really bothers me. i was vice chairman of the publican committee in the place i lived at the time when george bush i became the candidate of the party. and i got out. i figured the republican era was over, and the reactionaries

have taken control of the party. and there's still people that i recard as reactionaries posing as conservatives. i tell people all the time that a true virginia conservative is an 18th century british liberal, somebody who opposed to monarchial principles, who doesn't want a strong central government. guest: i agree with it but conservatism, liberalism, is really essentially coalitions so not everybody agrees. conservatives from the beginning of the modern movement when there were six or seven of us, have been spending lo of time fighting with each other over what it is that they all believe because we got different priorities. not necessarily different beliefs but different priorities, different issues of priorities. i find it remarkable, and i, you know, most conservatives would have said that the election of the first george bush was a victory of

moderation. this fellow resigned as chairman because he thought he meant the reactionaries were taking over. it depends upon what you see depends on where you stand. ho: this tweet says the senate will remain democratic, the house will move rightward. guest: the repealing the health care bill requires the president to sign the repeal. that doe't mean that the republins shouldn't vote to repeal it and force the president to veto that repeal and then go back, perhaps, and pass their own health care provisions and challenge him to either sign or veto those it also is a situation in which even though they can't repeal it while president obama ss in the white house, they are in a position to slow down its implementation, to not fund some of the things that are necessary and to essentially cripple its implementation in

that way until they are in position to repeal it. and the argument i think among republicans is, well, if he's going toeto the repeal, why should we pass it? the argument for passing it is you told people would -- for realing it. if he vetoes it it's on his desk, not yours. so you have to throw that ball to him and not keep it in your court. but your caller's technically correct. as lonas obama is in the white house with the veto pen and the republicans don't have 60-plus senators, which they're not gog to have, then they're not going to successfully repeal the health care bill. host: david keene, what is the american conservative union? guest: the issue was founded in 1964 following the goldwater election which makes us the oldest, if there's any value in today's world, and probably the largest of the grassroots traditional grassroots organization. we do two things that most people would be familiar with or that most political junkies would be familiar with. the first is that for the first

30-odd years we've done ratings of congress which are considered the gold standard of ratings. there are a lot of ratings out there. there's defensratings, social ratings. the a.c.u. ratings are different. we take all the strings in the movement, put them together and rate congress so someone can look at it and say on a conservative scale, where does my congressman or senator stand? the second thing is just for as many years we, along with some other groups, but we as the principlorganizer, have been the sponsors and host of what's called the conservative political action conference, or cpac. some people think it's a pact. it's not a pact. it's a convening of conservatives here in washington every spring that has grown from 125 people the first time we held it back in the early 1970's when ronald reagan was speaker to 10,000 people last year. and it's become sort of a must-attend event for

conservative activists around the country. and also, as you may or may not know, cpac was the first nonstudio event ever broadcast by c-span. host: on that, though, traditional grassroots, so compare yourself to what you're seeing happening in the tea party movement and have tea party supporters been part of -- guest: oh, sure. cpac last year, we honored the tea party. the tea party is really, as i said earlier, a whole bunch of new people who haven't been involved before and they are focused because of the times in which we live on economic issues. and the conservative movement -- and we've sort of measured this ove decades, consist of really three strains, if you will, economic conservatives, limited government people, people like me, social conservatives, people

interested in educati issue, right-to-life questions, second amendment questions and national defense conservatives. we used to call them anti-communists, but that was for a different day, but people who believe in a strong and active national defense. and those strings have not varied in size. the largest is the economic wing of the movement, if you will, but the others are very influential because social conservatives came in the 1980's as an active political force. they brought with them voters and obviously americans have always been concerned about national defense issues. so the strength of the movement is -- this is what we try to do. there are groups that focus on all these issues. lord knows you hear those names all the time. but what the a.c.u. tries to do is bring these people together on questions where there is broad general agreement and suggest to them that they ought to take -- fight about their differences outside and work together inside and we've done that fairly successfully. many people that attend our

conference, for example, probably don't work together much during the course of the year or talk to each other but they do come and they do spend that time together and i think benefit from it. so our role is the umbrella oup of the conservative movement. and we've done that, i think, fairlyuccessfully over the years. host: let's go to the democratic line. connie is joining us from chicago. caller: good morning. thank you. how are you and your guest? host: doing well. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: my question is to your guest. i heard you reference that the average american voter does not know who john boehner, eric cantor and all those other coervatives are. well, i am an american average voter. i'm very much aware of john boehr. what he stands for, what the republicans will and will not do. they stood by idly when george jr. wain office.

they did nothing. they said nothing about all the debt spending, invading iraq, spending trillions of dollars, innocent people getting killed. when we elect our first biracial american president, then all of this controversies come up. they want to do everything in their power to bring him down. they hire and scream about the money. why weren't you screaming when george bush was in office? guest: the problem with political parties is they see themselves as teams. when your president is in power, members of the team tend to take positions to support the president regardless of their beliefs. one of the problems that many democratic congressmen have right now, for example, particularly the so-called blue dog democrats that are running in contested districts is that they have over time positioned themselves as more fiscally

responsible, moderate democrats and yet almost to a man they have -- or woman, they have voted consistently for every spending program and every big government program that this administration has advanced. and as a result, the same thing is being said by some republicans about them that this lady is saying about republicans. and that indeed is the akness of party loyalty bause party loyalty often gets in the way of a commitment to principle. and she may be an average voter but i guess the polls are all wrong and i guess the obama attempt to teamonize boehner just didn't take off -- demonize boehner just didn't take off either. the fact is most people don't obsess over politics the way i do and the way you might and the way our caller might. most people aren't political junkies. they become active like the tea party people when they get angry, which was the case in 1994, or they get scared, which is the case this year.

and that's why we got people focusing on this election in greater numbers than might have been expected a year or so ago. host: give me the races that you are concerned about that either a tea party candidate or third party candidate might pull away from the traditional republican candidate? guest: well, interestingly, first of all, the tea party candidate is sort of a misnomer. you got candidates who won because of tea party support in primaries, and you got candidates who might or might not otherwise have won but courted the tea party vote but the tea party is not a party. it's a group of people that really don't run candidates. in fact, i think that the democratic hope of the summer, whicwas that they would do this and siphon votes away haven't really developed because they tend to be more sophisticated than their critics gave them credit for. in the general election they are doing what voters often had

to do was choose the better candidate or choose the less bad candidate. in fact, there are a number of places in a number of congressional races, the -- there have been democratic caidates who tri to encourage tea party candidates to enter as third party candidates and the only major race which has taken place is the nevada senate race which there is a supposed tea party candidate who is himself a reid supporter and has been funded by hairy reid's allies to try to -- harry reid's allies to try to shave votes off the sharon angle line. i do think there are some of these people who will not vote for the general election candidate because they're not to their liking. that's always true when you get activists. but i don't think that's going to have much impact. i think the net impact in this election is going to come from the energy that the so had been called tea party people have injected -- so-called tea party

pele have injected in the system. host: let's go toon independent voter. bill in day -- lets go to an indepeent voter. bill in deyton, kentucky. good morning. caller: thank you for having me. in 2002, george w. bush and tom donahue stood on the white house grounds and they stated that outsourcing of american jobs was good for america. in the audience of those people that were there was john boehner and mitch mcconnell. i wonder how they stand for that? secondly, mitch mcconnell and john boehner both, during the time that they have been in politics, they have more than five times raised their income. host: ok. david keene. gut: you know, we ten get the question of, how does this

ndidate make money? we got that going on both parties, incumbents that have been successful. remember years ago republicans pointed out that lyndon johnson was poor when he became senator and rich when he died. i don't -- senators and congressmeand elecd officials have as much right to make investments as long as they're not doing it a illegally as anybody else. i don't fault anybody for the ability to pay their mortgage and to make successful investments, particularly since most of them are successful in the ones that i make. but you know, i think that the specific question -- one of the great issues of the next four to five years is going to be the question of trade. and that's been -- particularly in hard times, it's very easily to cite foreign enemies as the reason that you're doing bad low. and the question of how many jobs are creed or here and how many jobs are created there

depends on what kind of job it is and who loses it and who gains it. so i think -- and i think that as the economy drags on, you already see it with the administration's attempt to, in the last few weeks to say that the real problem is china. some of these things are dangerous. some of them are natural. but what you're going to do get is a real debate and i think a real debate and conversation over some of these issues is healthy for the country. but i wouldn't characterize what support for trade in the way that your caller did, nor indeed would i support what i characterize the concern about some of these things as simply someone who wants to return to strict protectionism. i think we have a big debate on thisssue. i think it's one of the most real important issues that congress is going to face. host: speaking of jobs, next phone call is from michan. judy on the repuican line. go ahead. caller: yes. thank you for having me and

thank you for c-span. we are very hard hit here in michigan. you know, it's just -- i live in an affluental neighborhood. when we go down the street, i'd say at least 30% of our businesses have been shuttered, even in of a lieutenant -- i watched this tea party movement for years. i am aight-wing republican. i think i see something very unique about them. they play our existing party system to gain access to the national political theater. i'm just concerned when their candidates get into ofce, and it looks like they're going to, are they going to caucus by themselves and then go caucus these republicans? are they going to be wered down? the people who have been elected because of tea party support, what really is going to happen in the internal workings on the floor? i would like to see that they wouldn't be watered down, that theivoices would still be heard, even if we can't repeal health care 100%, really, i

think their voices need to be heard and they need to be heard very distinctly or i think our two-party system is going to be really in trouble. i am going to hang up now and listen to your comment. host: all right, judy. you were shaking your head when you said -- guest: i don't think they'll caucus by them self. they ccus but they also played in the main game in order to have influence. the new -- you take the senate in parcular. we don't know how the senate's going to come out. i suspect the democrats are still going to be in charge but there are going to be a number of people of republican candidates elected to the senate which may be tea party candidates. mark rubio, sharon angle. paul in kentucky and ron paul in -- and that would make for a different caucus. if you have a party leadership that didn't get it and just didn't ubs, then you would have

a split. but i can tell you that i think that mitch mcconnell in kentucky, regardless of what a caller might say, knows how to count those votes. i think those people will be included, and along with jim demint and others that are there will have tremendous influence on the republican caus in the senate and on the direction of the party nationally without taking themselves out. i don't think that's the goal. i think, as i said earlier, i think the tea party people and the candidates they support are a bit more sophisticated than their critics give them credit for. i don't think they're going to isolate themselves in the corner and moan and grown about the issue of the country. i think they are going to get out. host: revised i haddings of a magazine -- revised edition of a magazine. major garrett now is a print reporter with the national journal magazine.

it's party of a cover story with an interview with president obama. here is the cover. special issue starting over. it says the president saying, "i got a lot of work left to do." plus, it includes an intimate portrait of vice president biden. we go to boston, jim, democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you. thank you for taking my call. i'm concerned with the conservatives not really having any answers. we lose one factory overseas. that's a tragedy. we lose tens of thousands, that's a disaster. that's 28 million people out of work. and republicans have no answers for that. nobody's talking about putting people to work. host: ok. david keene. guest: well, i would dispute that. we have different answers. the administration thinks that you put people to work with public projects. and that the money that's spent should go into public projects. the republicans view the

economy as being vibe rent when jobs are created -- vibrant when jobs are created, the tax environment and the re are something that allow investment in this country and allow jobs to be created. i tell you, i think the most unconscionable thing that's happened, if you look at the way the recession has dragged on, and then if you look back at the great depression and the like, it's uncertainty. there's a lot of cash out there that's not being invested and it's not being invested because people don't know what the rules are. sometimes the rules themselves are more important than what they are. people -- people who invest money, people who create jobs, people who hire people, people who go to work have to know what the rules are. and the congress, when they -- rather than vote on the tax cuts, whether to hold -- whether to extend them, whether to end them, whether to end them for some people and extend it to other, punt it and kick the ball down to perhaps to the lame duck and perhaps to january. they're now talking, we'll do this in january. what that means is that for two

months at the least they have -- they have consciously decided not to have rules that anybody can count on. and that as opposed to how that vote might have come out strikes me as almost unconscionable gen the economy in which we live. host: we have an email from a viewer who is asking about taxes. says, are you willing to admit that trickle down economics does not work? if not, then i hit it republicans in this country will fail as they have during the last several times they have been in the leadership. each mcdaniels admitted that tax cuts doesn't pay for themselves. your thoughts? guest: some tax cuts do, some tax cuts don't. one of the things we've known at the national level for sometime is that if you create lower marginal rates and encourage investment and job creation you actually oftentimes, most cases get more revenue. capital gains tax cuts, for example, always have produced more revenue than was lost to the government by letting

people spend their own money. the fact is, though, that over time what we've had >> we're going to break away and take you live to george washington university. there is a discussion underway about political campaigns and their use of a social media outlets like facebook and twitter. live coverage now on c-span. >> we're trying to understand the impact on media and how they connect, communicate, devon and interact. the panel you will be hearing this evening will be fascinating and timely. i would be remiss if i were not to mention that we have two prominent alums who are involved in the panel. one is adam conner of facebook to graduated from our school of public affairs here with a b.a. in political communication. the other is mindy finn, who

graduated with an m.a. in political management at our sister program. we are delighted to have them visiting with us, the extended family here. now to our moderator, ben smith. he writes a blot on national politics for politico which has been a game ginger. we're happy to acknowledge that fact and a knowledge -- but a game changer. during the 2008 campaign, he covered the democratic primary and continues to cover national politics for this very important blog he authors now. he was a political columnist for the "new york daily news." he has started three major political blog in new york city. he will introduce the panel to you. i'm anxious to hear the panel and what they have to say. pearls of wisdom along the way.

i presenter moderator, and smith. [applause] -- ben smith. >> thank you for coming today. thank you for the welcome and for this gorgeous room. it is very generous. i am a senior political writer at politico. we are all delighted you could join us for going viral, how campaigns are using social media. thanks to the folks at politico for live streaming it and c-span for carrying it. we will look at how campaigns are using social media as the 2010 midterms race to the finish and thank everybody for taking a few minutes out of the 2010 midterms. most people will go back to their desks and cut campaign ads and tweet them out. most of these folks are very deeply involved in the 2010 campaign.

with the vote one week and one day away, we will look at a number of thematic areas and offer thoughts on the future for social media. at the end of the panel, we will take questions from you in the audience and from folks on facebook. the folks today are deeply in gauge in the cycle in a number of different ways. -- are engaged in the cycle. please welcome from my left and you're right, please welcome philip de vellis, a senior associate and vice-president of new media. i first knew him when he was the subject of a brief worldwide manhunt for the guy who made a video that depicted hillary clinton as this orwellian figure, the video was -- vote

different. he had this cryptic user name and there was a massive hunt for he was. he got his roommate in trouble the works for the obama campaign. but now he does all sorts of stuff, making real television ads. some very good ones. though i think with more than 4 million views on youtube, it might be hard to match. sam arora is a democratic candidate for governor of maryland when he was -- who i met when he was a slight lead this great twitterer for the hillary clinton campaign. he is also a leader of the american bar association and a graduate of georgetown law. mindy finn is from engagedc and founded the rebuild the party

coalition, the republican party. she is with the heritage foundation and the service director for the met ronnie for president campaign and has also worked for the bush campaign. adam conner is the washington d.c. assistant manager for policy and a will public policy at facebook where he does government our region directed the 2008 election efforts. prior to opening facebook's washington d.c. office, he worked for lilly's slaughter. professor matthew hindman is an assistant professor in the school of media and public affairs. he wrote that it was going to be

a big deal despite what everybody said and turned out to be right. he has written a book called "the myth of digital democracy." it is out of princeton and won a prize from harvard. he is described as a leading techno skull and has suggested some of the utopian prophecies about the internet are inaccurate. just to kick off, let's set the stage in terms of what is social media for a campaign today? >> i think it encompasses a lot of different things with various target audiences. it is one of the ways to keep the media up to date. i have often heard people say press releases may get ignored.

the same thing in a facebook page will get picked up. it is where voters increasingly are. we have more than 500 million users worldwide on facebook. it is increasingly a place where voters are and as technology and campaigns have always done, you want to go where the voters are having these conversations. it comes down to two aspects -- we have been very successful in having campaign's use social media. there is an online director, a facebook page updated by the campaign was content, and we have that outpouring there. where there is more work to be done and where i think it will be exciting to see where it goes in the future is a candidate to use it on a personal level and use it on a personal level. that won't just affect campaigns, it will affect how the legislative govern. if a great candidate would post

his vote every time the vote in the state house and his rationale why, that's something he has carried over into his campaign for congress. it is him doing it himself. when you try to impose a layer, the communications director, the chief of staff, between 140 characters, it is much less authentic. authenticity is what is helping to carry the day. we still have a lot of work to do there, but the more candidates involved, when they win, they can carry them into the government. >> what would you say the space we're talking about here is with social be a? >> social me is designed to be interpersonal. to the extent as achieve that goal, we need to be skeptical. in the battleground poll that just came out this morning, we asked the question to what

extent to you as a likely voter have you followed the candidate on twitter or asocial media site by facebook? 89% said never. we don't do that. 7% said occasionally. 2% said often. >> what will that number be in 2012? >> it will be higher. it will be because you see a big gap between the 18-29 year-old and everyone else. one-third of those in the 18-29 year-old demographic said they are often or occasionally using the social me yet to follow the campaign. >> may be a follow-up question for next time is not directly engaged in the candidate, but have you heard about one from your friends? that is the viral nature of facebook. you may not seek out brad? , but when you hear your friends talking about it -- you may not seek out a brand x, when your

friends talking about it. >> you were like the first e- campaign director. i would like to get your take on how this stuff has evolved since the forgotten days of the early 2000's. >> i think it is interesting. you are never going to have a critical mass of activists campaigning. i would be curious to see how many people have been active ever -- but the win back to the evolution of how people are using social media and working on the on-line aspects of campaigns in 2004. everyone was trying to understand the logs and out boggs l -- blog played into the election. when george allen had the macaca moment, everybody saw it as a dangerous medium for politics.

in a 2008, we were still dealing and youtube. we certainly -- we did not have a twitter presence. twitter was very late to the game in 2008. facebook was important, but it was a very small part of what we did. the rudy giuliani campaign refused to have a facebook page and got in trouble for it. >> was a day for small adjustment? >> they did not think it was a presidential. meanwhile, it ended up buying in in the but because his daughter had a facebook page and it showed that she supported barack obama. [laughter] as a candidate or a campaign, you have to have a facebook

profile whether people are using it the way they should, whether they are using a well, or not so well, there is definitely a divide their. >> it is a place we all have to be. one of the underlying questions as is it changing what is going on or just moving it to a different location? just because it can be so abstracted talk about social media, i'm wondering if you could tell me an example of somebody doing it well. >> i look at mostly from a video perspective. sarahpalin is effective and has the most fans. but as far as video, i really good example is the video some needed for an agricultural race in alabama. a lot of the have probably seen it already.

for a conservatives is spoke to them. for liberals, there were bowled over and how could you not like this guy? he was really a character. he got 30% of the. he did not have much of a tv budget. >> i think sarah palin is an intriguing person in general, but how she uses social media, how she will drive people to page 4 announcements is an endorsement. >> i think for all of the high fluting analysis of new media that it pay -- that took place last cycle, it is clear that she's the most dominant political force particularly in social media. >> it makes sense because she's

folksy. >> may be one example everyone has heard of is john duffy. he knew he was going to run for congress about a year-and-a-half ago. one of the first thing he did was start to be very active on facebook. he was actually taking video, carrying a camera around. he would have someone fell on him talking about where his going and what he was doing and posted as to facebook. one of the really popular ones is he is a professional lumberjack in addition to everything else. they went to chop down around christmas tree and filmed it and posted it to facebook. when you talk about what kind of impact does this activity have, he was somebody nobody gave a shot at all. he was interesting because he was a former star and a young

family. but he was running against a chairman of the appropriations committee. it was building up this rock star, likable persona. he ended up getting up -- he ended up getting a lot of media attention and ended at schering david obey out of the race. now looks like he's going to win. >> [unintelligible] >> one of the great ones that surprised me and it goes back about a year-and-a-half ago, you may remember the 25 things about me where you're right at thing about 25 things about you and tag it. jerry brown very clearly rode his 25 things about him because it would have never made it through a professional communications director. i said authenticity is

important and fascinating and maybe you can be too authentic at times. that was a great example of someone who caught a lot of attention for because he understood what it was and took advantage of it. >> i think it's worth bearing in mind a very few congressional candidates are doing a good job using these tools. in preparation for tonight, i spent some time looking at the dozen closest races. what you see is with the median candidate, they have about 200 followers on twitter. about 1500 facebook france. there are some candidates who are skimming the curve, like the republican candidate in north carolina who is a twitter machine. 7500 friends on facebook. but the most important thing is that they have to be updated constantly. so many candidates just use them as window dressing.

i have a twitter icon on my side, so i must be cool. chuck grassley had this famous at of him using twitter which i think was to cast him as young and dynamic. >> if you seen his tweets -- [unintelligible] sam is running for delegate in maryland in the state house. >> my race in maryland in montgomery county is a very small race. it would not rise to the level of attention of congressional, but i went door-to-door and one of the things i would do after having a good conversation with somebody was to friend them.

yet to be careful when you do that, but to begin to develop a relationship with many voters with him would be harder to continue having a dialogue which would result in things like so and so likes my status. but it also begins a conversation that i hope proves useful. going forward if i do get elected, have a closer relationship with my constituents. >> is it draining at all? responding to messages, i can it running for a larger district, it must become the time sapp of responding to people individually. >> i'm of the generation that grew up with facebook. i graduated college in 2003 and i think facebook really took off and rolled out then. this is a very normal thing for me to be doing anyhow. so expanding it to a new set of friends seems fairly natural. but when we get to a level like

chuck grassley, i don't know if he's responding to all the messages he's getting. if he is, it would be interesting. >> how do candidates deal with that? people like authenticity -- how the balance the desire for authenticity with having a candidate making and calculated responses become as much their message and maybe also having their staff out there on facebook? >> we always try to advocate having the candidates do some of this on their own. not only as a make a more authentic, but the candidate, it immerses them in the experience of being on the side and knowing how to work in knowing these are real people getting their input. somebody who balances it really well is governor rick perry of texas. he is a several term governor,

so he's not a new, fresh candidates, but he is very into social media and his campaign has used it really well. he has his own personal twitter account, but it is him personally tweeting. i find that interesting because they are honest and authentic about it. sometimes he may not be able to as much because of his schedule, but they are able to update people through their account. as far as facebook goes, i would like to see more candidates on the platform, not just because it's more authentic when their posting, because they're carrying the feedback and seeing how others are participating in the site. >> i know there are candidates obsess with google alerts to the point where it can become distracting.

one presidential aide was telling me they would read this blog -- this person has one reader and it's you, stop reading it. >> i posted about this on the blog on our site. i read about troubling trends in digital politics. the fact that there is twitter and facebook and there such a pervasive part of politics, candidates that would obsess over what the newspaper headline was, now there are thousands of headlines to obsess about. they can become obsessed. maybe it is somewhat 15 followers on twitter or is not a very well connected. you have to coach them to say we have to weigh these things and prioritize them. >> one of my colleagues suggested how do you inject

videos in particular? that is the dominant media, into social media. this is what everybody wants, but how do you make things go viral? >> i think in order for you to go -- candidates want to have a viral video and the need to do something off the wall. and they say i don't want to do that, i just want to talk about my policy platform. sometimes you are able to figure out how to put those together. usually the as the go viral are completely off the wall and off message so they can get a lot of attention. or if you are attacking someone, or the big video i had, i just did it on my own.

it is really hard to do that in a campaign and that's why i make the tv ads now. it's hard to get a campaign to go viral. something you can do is tie it together with popular culture. sometimes cable news will pick it up. it's a marketing thing. you have to e-mail it around to reporters and try to get on tv. >> what works on facebook? >> a great example is something move on did. they combine the power of personalize viral video to facebook and it creates a customized video using information from your facebook account. you can create an

individualized video experience really gets people's attention. you can really help individualize and personalize the experience to grab people's attention. >> did that not freak people out at all? >> it came out of the idea that shark week did. it would show you -- >> [unintelligible] >> there was a personalized onion added during the campaign where you could put the names of your friends and they would show the video explaining why candidate x was elected. are there any notable disasters in the social media sphere? >> some people might say this

wasn't a disaster, but i think it is. the demon cheap video that carly fiorina did. she did this back in the primary. it involved people dressed up like a demon sheep. it got hundreds of thousands of views -- there ago. [laughter] guy who made the video was of the school that any publicity is good publicity. but she later on had some good videos and had some good stuff hitting barbara boxer. at that time, people were laughing at her and not with her. >> or at least not barbara boxer.

i don't know who was being left that but it's not the right place. >> do you have a favorite? >> i cringe when i see candidates reposed in their press release on facebook. it's clear that bought was not put into it and you are not communicating with me. you just have a feed to your web site and why would i want to visit that? >> that is my number one pet peeve. my second one is when candidates try to use facebook and twitter the same way. >> i do that and everybody hates me for it. >> but there is something that is even worse. have good content, it is not as bad. when it is just a link, is just there tweet.

>> it is the opposite of authenticity in away. there is -- this is the year we really have the masses on social media. >> politicians are very cautious people. do you advise them to loosen up and not spell check his tweets? >> you advise them to be less cautious. our culture is changing and that kind of document, there still are some of them, but -- that kind of got jet moment, there are still some of them. so we're going to judge related to -- the fact that they

misspelled something on twitter or the fact that sarah palin mixed up the candidate for pennsylvania -- those who don't like her will say she's an idiot. that's not going to impact them. there can be some funny things that can create a media stories. the other if you take a letter off it will lead to something else. the link she meant to have was campaign related went to some kind of korean -- some kind of hong kong soft porn dance. >> it was a japanese man playing the bass guitar. >> some might say it is good.

if someone needed to get attention that would not be the dumbest thing to do. >> she is trying to project some more human quality. to interest other -- [laughter] >> which of these things is not like the other? >> this was the double third person posting. candidate x and then they put their name and talk in the first person. it was the most annoying thing. and so i remember thinking we should have a talk with through their director is. it is flow of things. i was advised not to use the

third person but if you will, you should not do it in a media- annoying way. >> you should write that down. >> i think in terms of disasters, it is easy to get caught up in these -- the tactics and the horse race. in terms of the policy disasters, sarah palin was doe responsible. -- or facebook. erout death panels -- hje notes made it a huge issue even though was not part of the issue. it changed the political discourse in a way that has implications for policy. i wonder if you have any way of characterizing the scale. it is obvious. >> her presence on facebook is

not totally one on the internet. it is a focus of media attention. in a way that i think is a disproportionate to others. i think you cannot solely look at it as a facebook -- it is something like 2 million fans and that is what you have [unintelligible] but many of those people watching her are members of the media and that magnifies that beyond. >> do you think that it is helping her or hurting her? as a broadening or narrowing her support? as a national politician? everyone talks about this new way of communicating with your supporters. not broadening but intensifying in deepening your base. i do not know if anyone thinks she is helping or hurting

herself. >> i think she is steadily more likely to be [unintelligible] she is less likely to be president. >> if you look over time and our numbers, her brand has become increasingly toxic for [unintelligible] and in a presidential election. >> i think yes, that the social media is an important part of your brand. if you look at how people are getting to rallies, facebook plays a big role in that. >> it depends on her goals. if she is looking to be electable, she is not following the traditional path by any means. she is looking to intensify her support and communicate with people through facebook -- communicating the people through facebook does that. people do not know that scott

brown was active on facebook. you build that score and give bill the numbers and the intensity of support. >> a brown story is interesting. i can tell it quickly. i was at the rnc in 2005 and social media was the bad -- at the beginning and we would do trading. some people took it to heart and some people ignored it. one of the persons who took it to heart was the director of the massachusetts republican party. they had no money. one of the things they advise the few elected republicans when they did trainings, he said you need to get on the bandwagon with this thing. it is a free way to communicate

with their constituents and none of them listened except for scott brown. he was using facebook and using it personally. the small fan base he had, they were there all the way for free. >> people who are comfortable with that kind of informality, it is someone who was -- he was someone who was willing to share himself. [laughter] we love to take some questions from the audience. if you have any. >> this is a question for any of the panelists. jimmy mcmillon proclaimed his

political stance that rent is too damn high. the video has gone broke. has that helped him attract voters or is it scaring people away from him than people are thinking he is not going to win? >> he is not. part of the lesson is if you are in french canada with no hope, you can turn yourself into a media star. -- a french candidates with no hope, you can turn yourself into a media star. >> he does not pay rent. >> i wanted to ask about launching a campaign. i just looked up pc or [unintelligible] i decided to use that for a

promotional campaign to find out whether people like a mac or pc. how can i use that as a way of promoting and making money for a cause at the same time, giving the impression it is actually a legitimate campaign? >> that is a question that applies to political candidates. do you have rules about how to fake authenticity? >> we have -- require you to be the entity you claim to be. you're not defrauding the public. generally, it would depend on what your goal is. you could pass off one thing as another. it depends on what the end goal is.

it is to raise awareness, it needs to be connected to it. one of the biggest things people learn about social media and the internet is just because you put something next to each other does not mean it does not have an inherent connection that people understand or gravitate to. >> we have a macron. over here. >> i would make the argument that how many facebook fans to have is not as important as to your fans are. one thing i like doing when politicians post on line is read the comments. what i find is the mass majority are, great posts, we love you. it makes no sense to talk to the people who already like you. how could a campaign reach to the middle ground, the voters to, it is honestly going to take

something for them, how you reach out to that audience? >> i think the big takeaway point is you do not do that with social media. that is the fundamental shift we have seen since 2004. i spent a painful period looking at dozens of campaign web sites and they were terrible. there were really bad. there were scarring -- they were really bad, they were scarring. as you looked at a campaign site in 2002, it was obviously not just another cousin for free, it was aimed at persuading joe q. voter. changed that.

if you look at the website, it was aimed not at the people who would be persuaded, people who would be in his camp. it was about raising money and getting volunteers and about mobilizing and firing of the base. social media, i have yet to see evidence that social media will persuade persuade voters. >> is a polarizing? >> on balance it is. >> the premise of the question is skewed. unlike traditional tv, there are [unintelligible] want someone is connected on facebook, there is no additional costs when you post that message. that is not a resource question. people are saying things like i love this candid it, that comment is coming to their friends. it creates a viral loop.

have you heard about candidates from your friends? we're learning in brands and campaigns that friend power it is something that is very important and we're seeing that at the next global online. facebook is more important. a lot of these posts do not get on your friends' feed. the top news will not have every update your friends do. they know some of your friends are annoying. that ends up having consequences. >> you have to reach out to non- annoying people. >> it is not just about boats. that is something that is important. we have a lot of communications folks aware talking about persuasion. part of this will be activating the folks who may become a volunteer and that is a good

point about when it gets on your friends' newsfeeds. and thet sarah palin candidates who are known aside. i raised a lot of money on facebook and i did it when my first filing deadline came out, this is how much i have and where i need to be and kept up dating every couple of minutes which i am sure was annoying. i was raising $5,000 an hour from people i never met before. friends saw it and it worked out. it cannot complain. >> we talked about how candidates are using social media. we're talking about -- one of the things campaigns do is train volunteers and supporters to use their social media profile not just for personal and social stuff but for campaigning and showing their support to have the effect that was mentioned. someone mentioned advertising.

we love to have these lofty goals and this is about empowering more people and getting people involved and imploring supporters. unlike tv and broadcasting era, there was a poll media and it is to way and that is true. advertising comes into play. >> what share of the budget is spent on the web in general and social media in to gather? >> i am disappointed because this cycle, it seemed like there would be some significant accent on line. things have not been going well on the democratic side. they refer back to what they know. i have had to scale back. reaching those undecided voters, they're not the ones who are out there seeking. you have to get in their face and it can do that on the internet. it can be targeted. it costs a lot of money and the budget has gone so low where you are spending a couple thousand dollars. >> it is less than 5% of what

you are spending. >> much less. they're doing the bare minimum. from your standpoint, republicans have by and from spending money on line. >> they are spending much money online? >> they are doing a minuscule amount. they just started. we can get into the reason. the donors are thinking put money in, we are on television. they're getting to the point that they're recognizing that is important. we will have candidates who come to us first. should we be doing facebook advertising or online advertising which is a real change. when you see this band will be less than 5% total. i -- there are exceptions. i have some ballot initiative

campaigns that are spending up to 15% of the money online which is a combination of facebook, video ads and search adds. >> we talk a lot about canned it's picking up facebook and maybe not doing a great job. -- candidates picking up facebook and maybe not doing a great job. >> one more point about advertising. we had to do this book advertising for every candidate. it does show up in the news. and you see the organic growth after that as well. it is a useful tactic. >> i am lisa lindo and i use facebook to be of pundits and have debates about the issue. one of the problems is like is

the only option. there is no participate. wantsll see havsomeone who to have a conversation but do not want to shop as liking it. they like the page just to get into a conversation with people on that page so it shows up in numbers as liking that person. i get over 100 requests who want to friend me. there are tea party who want -- and there are tea party people who want in the conversation. i go through their pages they like and sometimes i might not friend them because they have these lights on these horrible pages i would consider horrible. >> there was enemy book at one point. >> there are complicating factors. it complicates things. one of the important things to keep in mind is you want to

have -- ensure that the debate or discussion -- your example sound wonderful in comparison to some of the people have heard, people who decry the conversations that are going on. there is certainly, there is the internet and conversations that are less than intellectual and less than lofty. anyone who reads youtube comments know that. there is some genuine dialogue and discussion. whether it is you and your friends talking, all those things are interactions at some level. the level of positive and or - deep in your mind is the interesting point. >> -- negativity in your mind is the interesting point. >> i suppose this goes along

with the conversation we're having. three501c3s.for 5 i am curious on your thoughts on comments up.egative what should we do with this? your thoughts? >> it is a complicated issue. for -- you want to leave some comments of their but there are some people who are trolls and obviously abusive to other members. it is -- there is a book that

you can write on that whole thing. there is definitely some room to delete it. it is best to leave as much as possible. >> it is an age-old debate. in the early days of open commenting, you would have candidates and organizations who would say we have to leave all - comments. the learning curve -- there is definitely a learning curve. these are open formats. generally we it flies as much as possible, as much as you can stomach it to leave these comments so it can spark debate. your supporters will jump in and defend you. we tried to set standards in the official code of online politicking ethics. you can set -- if you -- there

should be. the people who do this work would take the stance do not delete comments. if something is profane or pornographic, you can take it down. just because it is critical, you should leave it up so your supporters can jump in and defend. >> the advice ois twofold. if you put up a policy of their, you can clampdown on [unintelligible] agree here is what we're going to allow and what we will not. if someone comes in and said something mean about policy, i guess it will have to take it down because someone is complaining. >> i guess that makes sense. this is a utopian question.

asking as the public -- will the [unintelligible] and give each person with an internet connection equal voice? short of that happening, to the degree to which you think there is something transformative happening through social media against things like the attacks from your opponents can be pushed through a different channel and maybe more effectively. whether a bid is something structurally changing. >> you wrote a book on this. we're running slightly short on time. >> i can jump in. i have not done the research or

studied it. i would love to hear your thoughts. it seems there was a relationship going back six years ago were you had a spokesperson for the campaign and besides, either the candid it or that person or the ones were allowed to speak for the candidate, sometimes it was a long press release with a lot of formality. even though there was still a structure to it, and there is some kind of hierarchy, there are more people who are speaking for the campaign. they are allowing volunteers and interns. those are the people who are invested. i think because we have gotten used to some of the walls have been broken down, you see these videos happening. there is a lot more creativity that is happening.

the ads are showing more people who are candidates and giving their message. even the press releases -- they are coming across much more authentic. and shorter and not trying to write their trade is for what needs to be said, hoping a newspaper or someone like you will copy and paste the whole thing and stick it in there. there is a much more dynamic conversation. social media has been disruptive where individuals feel they have more of an impact on elections. what we saw on these primaries on the republican side is activists were emboldened in thinking they could make an impact and they did. that would not have happened before the internet. you go back further and i do not think it could be argued that barack obama may have run for office had there not been their

ability for them to have the ground up support and take on the establishment of the party. we see some of this happening. that was a very utopian question. there is evidence to support what the questioner is saying. >> but have another question after this one. >> i am happy to answer the question. it is important to make the distinction between what you see now with on-line discourse which is highly professionalized. thanks to folks like yourself. -- who are very good. if you look at the blogosphere, there were a lot of new blogs coming and going.

by 2007 and 2008, there was almost no new voices that rose into the top 50 political fights. 538.com. owned by "the new york times". it counts now. i think we need to make the distinction between what is broadcast and the kind of political conversations you need to happen -- have around water coolers and kitchen tables. those conversations are important. what facebook is to the extent that people use it who do not agree on the web, they are being exposed to things like facebook to their friends.

i think that is to the extent there is hope for, in politics, there really a social media. >> de do think people are seeing an opposing view? >> very few people have networks hat are so homogenous laly democratic leanings or republican leaning that they will not be exposed to contrary information. >> what is next? what will we be talking about? what we were talking about in 2004 was different than in 2006. now this represents an expansion of these services in the new services that we're not thinking about will be broad. i'm wondering what we will be talking about before the 2012

election. >> 2012 will be the year of mobile. every election cycle they say it will be the year of mobile. there is evidence to show that 2012 could be the year of mobile. things like facebook and twitter are accessed through mobile. you probably see it in your statistics. the use of facebook through mobil is growing. >> they are twice as engaged as users to access -- do not access to mobile. >> it will be -- tailoring to the mobile space. >> [unintelligible] >> i watch them through my ipad

all the time. i do not know about 2012. more like 2016, tv merging with the internet. i do not watch much television. that is coming into your living room through things like global tb and other services. when that happens, it will move into targeted advertising. >> cablevision and fox are feuding and i am getting all my tv through netflix. >> there are ads -- there is hulu plus that has ads. when we get you, we will get

you. >> you can go back to billboards. >> i am wondering if the rise of social media usage might end up smothering itself. how're you going to break out? how will you be something that other people want to follow? there will be a tension between needing to refresh oppose story 20 -- refresh a story or a tweet. >> i think one of the things like people like sam and others who understand this technology, a [unintelligible] what sticks out is at the health

care bill signing and som eone took a picture and uploaded it. it is exciting and something we can start thinking about. how would affect some one [unintelligible] who can get to them in a variety of ways. how you can take a temperature on something that something pop up unexpectedly. i think the impact of government is exciting. >> do people learned as candidates and bring it to government? >> i think they learn about it as people. we know you are going to have one of those moments.

you can reconnect to someone you have not talked to or a grandchild that you have not met. >> [unintelligible] >> our fastest-growing demographics are older americans. >> what is next? >> i am excited about the possibility for ordinary citizens. one of the best examples is something that was just being possible a few years ago. groups of acquaintances who went to dinner and several of their cars got towed. it turned out they had parked it in a parking lot and the owner was running a telling scam. they had the mayor and chief of police and the city council, the whole page detailing how this

property owner was breaking the law and they found out the drivers were parking their cars intoe to beat other peoplee parking there. it was incredible collaboration. all loosely organized for people who did not know each other very well, organized through a few twitter tags. the big thing about the social media revolution, it is small. the kinds of interaction which would be too costly. no one is going to go through all that trouble, not one person had the expertise or the desire to do all that just for a $75 parking ticket and a towing fee. >> no media outlet would bother doing that story. but there are officials who were trained to respond to things

that are in print are responsive to social media. thank you for coming. [applause] and thank you gwu an for packing this room. thanks. good night. [applause] >> there are some advertisers at a networking reception. just down the block on 21st and g.

you can meet folks who were on the panel and have a conversation. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] third and final debate

between the candidates for the kentucky senate. we will have that live free or at 8:00 p.m. eastern. here is a look at another race. ohio's 15th congressional district. rex c. spence local content vehicles are traveling the country visiting congressional districts to look at the most andcontested races. >> asking the -- there are some things that are going on right now with the elections that are pretty dangerous. it is not just the poisonous atmosphere of the attack ads. there -- the u.s. chamber of

congress [inaudible] >> there are folks out there to spend big money to keep the incumbent there. she votes with nancy pelosi 98% of the time. there will throw a lot of money at this race. they will say a lot of things that are not true. factcheck.org hit kilroy for running a misleading campaign. the people in this district know the difference and they know the difference between being nasty and being tough. there is a difference. >> ohio 15 is a little microcosm of the country or leased of ohio. this race is on the national radar in many respects because it is a typical district in the midwest, a typical district in the united states. there is a little bit of everything. any factor you would see playing

out on the stage you will see in this district. mary jo kilroy was elected in 2008. she is on the ballot again this year. her opponent is steve stivers. there are two minor parties can events and a right in canada. she was the key player in the health-care debate and crafting their regulations that were passed. upon and has made this an indictment of nancy pelosi and mary jo kilroy's role. >> people are angry. i guess they're angry. they have not seen the recovery and the attention that wall street is giving to main street. we have stop the hemorrhaging of

jobs and there are people that are out of work. there are parents that are worried about their children's future. i understand that. i know how angry got -- people got because i got angry to when i saw those executives, aig, take some of the money and pay themselves big bonuses after the taxpayers had just build the mall. which is what i voted against the second round of tarp because i was fed up with that kind of abuse of our taxpayers. i understand that. >> they're not really running away from her role as a member of the democratic majority. they are suggesting her role has been positive. they have gone a representative who has a high profile nationally who has a role in a majority that is doing a lot of stuff. they're not trying to minimize her as a member of the congressional majority. they're trying to push back on stivers as a former bank

lobbyist, someone who they see as basically a stooge for what happened under the bush administration, someone who would rule the clock back to an era when there were unregulated markets. >> my campaign is going to $80,000. the issues are coming up is jobs and spending, occasionally the health-care bill. the unemployment rate in this district is about 8.5%. one out of 11 people is out of work. we have to get people back to work. we want to make sure that we move this country forward and get people back to work. top stivers was atheir lobbyist and you will hear that over and over again. his role was to push the policies that favor deregulation and free-market trade he likes to talk about his as a "job

creator." he left 2 years ago and has been a private person ever since. mary jo gilbride in terms of her popularity this year against 2008, in 2008 she was helped out by a lot of obama turnouts on campus and the other parts of the district that saw a waiver of turnouts associated with obama's election. this year, the top of the ticket is the governor, not the president. the turnout will be less. she will be a little bit higher profile in terms of her profile in the district. she does not have a president to give her political coverage. it is notable that 2008, obama carried this district by a pretty large margin. she carried the district by a much smaller margin. the basic math here does not pencil in her favor if she is

underperforming the president and there is no precedent to top the ticket. it will be tougher. >> i have had this opportunity to serve for about 20 months into my first term. working hard for the people of this district. i want to continue to do that. >> please help us work all the way through to november 2 and i will work hard every day until november 2 and pass then if i am lucky enough to be your congressmen to try to make you proud. thank you so much. >> leading up to the midterm elections, where traveling the country and visiting congressional districts where some of the most closely contested house races are taking place. for a commission, the local content vehicles are up to, visit our web site. >> we are 15 minutes away from the final debate of the kentucky senate debates. rand paul refused to shake hands

with his opponent. >> your supporters gravitated to you because you were seen as a straight shooter, not a typical politician. you have been accused of backtracking from comments made about kentucky's drug problem and the national sales tax to the medicare deductible. what do you say to those who believe you have changed to get elected? >> do not believe everything you read in the newspaper. a lot of my positions have been know me. i believe the bank bailout was a mistake. i believe our problem is a spending problem, not a revenue problem. i have said i favor many different tax reforms that would simplify the tax code to as long as they lower the rates on

everyone, but i have said party needs to be given to balancing the budget. it is a spending problem, not a revenue problem. i do not think i have changed. my position on drugs was this characterized. i said that where drug funding comes from was not a pressing issue but i never said that drugs were pressing issue. i am a physician, the father of three teenage boys and i am concerned about drugs, have gone around the state to talk to share of about it and visiting drug rehab -- two sheriff's about it and a visiting drug visiting drugd rehab programs. >> you said drugs are a pressing issue and here is the thing. you do not have the guts to

stand by your positions. once you realize you cannot get elected, you step back. have the guts to stand by your position. >> if elected, what specifically will you do with your first 100 days in office to jump-start the economy by creating jobs in kentucky? >> jobs are the number one issue in the commonwealth right now. we are at 10% unemployment and families are being ripped apart and parents are losing their jobs. they're afraid they cannot educate their kids. when my opponent says that sometimes workers need to take lower wages and have some tough love, that is not a jobs plan. go to my website. i have kept the program at $30 billion. for businesses that want to create a job, they can take a 20% tax credit. it would create about 11,000

jobs here. i want to get the small and community banks lending to the small and medium-sized businesses. george yalobusha and mitch mcconnell bill out a bunch of big banks on wall street. the regulators came down hard on our small and community banks. the bond -- we need a top to bottom review of trade deals. we have lost manufacturing jobs. >> the first thing to understand is the government does not create jobs, individual entrepreneurs and businessmen and women create jobs. once you understand that, you cannot begin the debate. the next thing is let's keep more money in kentucky. let's send list to washington. the next thing is you need to have less regulation. regulations cost business one trillion dollars. we cannot compete overseas because we overregulated, overtax, overburden. president obama and his cronies are adding more regulation and that is what we need to change.

>> the next question from teresa hardin. what are your plans to improve education? >> i think the way we improve overall education in kentucky is we need more control of education in kentucky. one of the things that when you talk to school superintendents thewo presidents -- to presidents of colleges, there are many rules. i want to allow more autonomy for presidents of universities as well as all the way down the ladder when we talk about secondary education and primary education. let's have more of the decisionmaking process in the state and less unfunded mandates coming from federal government. >> as you know, this is an issue are were -- i know well. what rand paul did not tell you

is he is for eliminating the department of education. you heard right. there are a lot of students in the room tonight for on pell grants and stafford loans. what are they going to do? here is what i want to do. i want to keep schools -- students in school longer. the bill that was passed that allows students to get a loan from the government and repay it overtime with a small percentages of their wages will work. it will not allow them to drop out of colleges. doing away with the department of education, that may sound easy but it will have a really, really bad result. we need to stand up for higher education and get people into a system of higher education and we need to keep them in that system. >> out of the gate tonight, you brought up the commercial you approved. the announcer in the commercial

asks four questions why. i am curious, are you alleging dr. paul is not a christian or a good christian. >> the issue of the ad is why did rand paul ban the group for being sacrilege and because they made fun of christianity and christ? why did he join a group that was known for mocking people of faith? when is it appropriate to try a woman and have her kneel before files -- a false idol, aqua buddha? there was a story that said he made writings to the school,

when our people ever equal and when should we have protections against discrimination? these have popped up. there is a direct line about what he was writing about in college and positioned he was positions he was taking. >> jack wants to know when did you quit beating your wife? you have accused me of these crimes, why did you commit these crimes that you completely have made up, jack? do you know nothing about the process of accusation? do you know nothing about the fact that when you attack someone's character, you do not just do that, you do not just make up stuff that you attack someone's character. you really should be ashamed of yourself. run on the issues of the day, but do not make up stuff about me from college that you think you have read on the internet blogs. grow up. >> it was on "cbs news" and on

"politico" and in "the lexington herald leader." the woman who you tied up said and day talking about it again said it was weird to mushy ended -- it was weird and she ended her friendship with you. >> how do you argue with someone who makes no logical sense and makes up stuff to accuse me of 30 years ago in college? to even have a conversation with you, you demean the state of kentucky, you embarrass yourself. to bring out stuff from 30 years ago that is untrue, unsubstantiated, that your read on the blog. >> more on the kentucky senate

race as we wait for a live debate coverage in seven minutes. >> a campaign 2010 update. looking in at the kentucky senate race. joining us from the hotline studio is ed wilson, editor in chief of "the hotline." what's the thing between paul and conway? >> their not friends. after a final debate a couple days ago, paul stormed off-stage. he refused to shake hands with conway after allegations from the democrat that the republican candidate was questionable on christianity, didn't share the values of kentucky voters. it got very contention and very personal. it refers to aqua buddha, which is a joke that paul was playing along with when he was in a fraternity in college -- society in college.

this -- he's been running it on tv. accusing paul of essentially worshiping a false idol. that's really gotten under his skin. a lot of people are wondering whether or not this ad has gone too far and really stalled conway's momentum. if you challenge somebody on something so personal on religion it can become a big problem. it can really halt your momentum and give momentum by to the person attacked bied ad. it remind me in the minnesota race. there was a woman in the background screaming, "there is no god." that really backfired on dole. this ad may backfire on conway as well. host: reid, let's show the latest ad put out there by conway and let's talk a little bit more. >> i'm jack conway. >> why was rand paul's college

society mocked christianity? why did he once tie a woman up, tell her to bow down before a false idol and say his god was alkway buddha? why does rand paul want to end all faith-based initiatives and even end religious charities? why are there so many questions about rand paul? >> i'm jack conway and i approve this message. >> rand paul's new sales tax. >> 23% more on gas. >> that would include a fair tax change it to a sales tax. >> 23% more on medicine. >> i'd rather have a sales tax. >> on groceries and everything you buy. rand paul, you pay more. host: those were the latest ads by jack conway. you talked a little bit about how rand paul responded, at least, during the last debate, but has he gone to the

airwaves? >> well, he hasn't gone to the airwaves specifically on this charge but the national senate committee investing in this race. the strategy is try to portray rand paul as the other, of not kentucky. the ad, including the alk way buddha ad, you see rand paul wearing a turtleneck. it doesn't seem terribly off the wall, but it's a conscious strategy by democrats to paint rand paul as somebody who doesn't get kentucky, who's not in touch with the state. that has worked in some senses, especially when you're talking about rand paul's position on the federal drug interdiction in eastern and western kentucky, two huge issues in rural areas that have growing drug problems. but, in this case, jack conway may have gone a little too far. host: all right. let's show our viewers the latest rand paul ad and then we'll come back and talk a little bit more.

>> i'm rand paul and i approve this message. >> now, jack conway is attacking rand paul's faith. rand paul keeps christ in his heart. and in the life he shares with his wife and three boys. don't be fooled by conway's desperate attacks, it's shameless, disgraceful. gutter politics at its worse. what kind of shameful politician would sink this low? to bear false witness against another man just to win an election? this one would. jack conway. host: ok. reid wilson, these two candidates are going to square off again tonight. what do you expect? >> well, it's going to be a pretty heated debate. the last time it got so heated that rand paul even refused to shake jack conway's hands. this is a race that really hasn't focused on a lot of issues. it's focused on rand paul and it's really democratic strategy across the country. they're trying to take these republican candidates who associate with the tea party and make them look out of touch, make them look like the

unacceptable alternative even though the other guy might be an unpopular democrat. jack conway will stick to his talking points, attack rand paul, trying to make him seem like an outsider. rand paul will continue labeling jack conway a rubber stamp for obama and the genesis of all liberal policies which is what he's been doing for the last couple of months. i don't think you'll see a lot of discussion, deep thoughtful scullingses of the issues. it's going to be dixon poll. reid wilson, thanks for previewi >> for more information, go to our website.