dan maes is also republican and won the nomination without former experience. he is married and has three children. finally, tom tancredo is running on the american constitution party ticket. he represented representative -- the six congressional the record -- the sixth congressional district for many years as a republican and switched to the constitution party recently. he is 65 years old, married, and has two sons. each candidate wound up on the ballot after unexpected even spirit of first was governor ritter's decision to not run. -- unexpected events. the first was governor ritter's decision to not run. many have called this the strangest races ever for governor in colorado. gentlemen, you'll have 30 seconds only -- what has been the strangest part of the journey for you? mr. tancredo? >> the way in which the entire campaign has developed,

starting two months ago to three months ago. it is now at a level that i must admit i am even surprised at. arnett and neck in most polls i have seen -- we are neck and ne ck in most polls i have seen. it is one of the more interesting aspects of this campaign, undeniably. >> dan maes, the strangest part of the journey for you? >> it has been 20 months now. having so much momentum going into the primary, winning the primary, and expecting a lot of good support after the primary that mightnd out not not be there. how'd we just, keep moving for, and achieve our goals? then dealing with the entry of another candidate into the race is definitely interesting for all of us. >> thank you. mr. hickenlooper are? >> this grant is part has been for us -- the strangest part has been for us to look at who we

are running against. for a long time, it was scott mcinnis attacking me. then it was dan maes and scott mcinnis. now it is tom tancredo attacking me. we have tried to keep focused on the facts and issues and tried to make sure we have a positive vision for the state as we move forward. >> thank you very much for your candor. the polls are showing the biggest concern for how colorodans is the economy. we have asked neil westergaard from the denver business journal to join our panelists, cbs4 political specialist terry jessup and political analyst eric sondermann. candidates, you will each get one minute to answer their questions. neil, you get the first question. that welcome, gentlemen. i want you to imagine that i am the c l ->>- welcome, gentlemen. i wanted to imagine that i am the sea eel -- the ceo of a

company considering moving to colorado. i'm told this is sending you have to deal with if you are elected. -- something you have to deal with if you are elected. car -- colorado is laughter almost lost in its support for colleges and universities -- colorado is last or almost lost in its support for college and universities. high school graduation rates are tumbling. you read little money compared to other states to offer me -- you have little money compared to other states to offer me in the way of incentives. i do not care about skiing or 300 days of sunshine to convince me to move to your state. [laughter] >> by almost every major, we're one of the top states in the country in terms of overall business environment. forms magazine, which is not a liberal magazine -- forbes

magazine, which is not a liberal magazine, laid out colorado as fourth in the country. near the center of the country. if you have a national sales force or marketing force, that helps. we are geographically located so that you can connect to the rest of the country rapidly. we have investment in quality of life, beyond the climate for the 300 days of sunshine or the rocky mountains. it is a place where people want to live, especially young, talented people. we had a study a few years ago ranking colorado, denver, boulder -- the metro area, as the number-one place where recent college graduates want to come. >> dan maes, what would you tell the hesitant ceo? >> i appreciate the opportunity to sell you on the state of colorado. "rich states, poor states" the

three reasons why our economic future is so strong in colorado. no. 1 is our residential property tax rate. a frieze of our income for people to spend -- it frees up our income for people to spend. there is the taxpayer bill of rights. the taxes will not go up unless you vote for those to go up. these are very strong fiscal aspects to the management of our state. i want to do three things for you as a business owner. i want to reduce regulatory burdens in the state, which means that you should have last hurdles to get over, move into our state more quickly, and lower the tax burden. wish to get rid of our small business personal property tax -- we should get rid of our small business proposalpersonaly tax. we have to go back to quality of life. look out the windows to the west. >> he said he did not ski, if i recall.

john? >> regardless of what people say about the higher education funding in colorado, it is important to understand that we have the highest degree of per- capita education attainment levels of any state in the nation and have had that for a long time. we have a well-educated workforce. we a people who are dedicated. we have a technology-based industry worth $19 billion per year. when you think about what that adds, not just to the economy of the state, but what it can provide for every business that wants to move to the state, that is an incredible and getting shot -- an incredible advantage. it is well established. we have an enormous amount of research that could benefit any company in colorado. we should not offer incentives, economic incentives, tax rebates, tax incentives. history proves that they really do not pan out that well for the state or the taxpayer. if you want to come to colorado and be treated fairly by the

state, then this is the place and i will be the governor -- we will be the governing system that will provide that for you. if that the -- >> the economy is important. neil, another question? >> congressman, this question is directed toward you. you are strongly against the idea of incentives. you told the business journal that "we have given away too much." you said you did not know if we had ever recouped an investment. according to the denver metro chamber of commerce, the wind systems group received $50 million in incentives through the state and local governments. reey have generated -- the are 28,000 -- 2800 new employees. there have been quite a few jobs created through employee

purchases. given that and a $1 billion they have invested in plants and equipment, how is that $50 million in incentives not a good return? >> not every single case has the wrong return on investment. in this case, it could be just fine. that is okay with me. $50 million is not, for instance, the kind of money that we talked with united airlines about a few years ago. other airline industries that came in under those investment schemes ended up costing taxpayers a lot of money. you have to be very careful about that and very judicious. the other thing is this -- especially in that particular industry, we made the decision to give a tax break to this particular company because it is part of the green-energy economy. i am leery about government

picking winners and losers in any field, especially in an industry of that nature. i do not say it is wrong in every case, i am just saying be very judicious. >> thank you. john hickenlooper -- a good idea, bad idea -- tax incentives to draw business? >> i agree with the congressman. you have to be judicious in their use. they do not solve everything pure the right to use of tax incentives is a great advantage -- solve everything. the right use of tax incentives is a great advantage. something that we lose is the recognition that we also have to retain businesses that are here and help them expand. as we think about incentives, we also have to look at how to provide incentives to the companies that are already here to hire the next employee. how can we make sure they recognize their success? it drives me crazy as a business person when there is a big

incentive plan for the redevelopment of a building. it would bring in a couple of competing businesses. i would like to see more effort to retain businesses and help them expand. >> dan maes? >> i have to dovetail off both answers. it is easier to keep an existing client then find a new one. if we treat our existing companies really well, frontier airlines -- what happened? what could we have done differently? keeping them here would have been easier than trying debate a new company -- to bait new company. let's make sure everything is sound first. we have analyzed tax incentives on a case-by-case basis. we want to design a mutually beneficial solutions so that when the time is up, when the three-year or four-year tax break is up, they will just go to another state did we have to make sure that does not happen. >> thank you.

terry jessup. >> all the candidates have talked about cutting spending. it has not been very specific. where do you, specifically, see the waste in government that you would help cut to solve the state's growing budget crisis? what areas do you consider to be untouchable as far as the budget is concerned? mr. maes? >> that is a great question. there are 16 divisions in our executive branch. can we use 13 or 14? can we merged some offices -- merge offices? can we put hhs in a different department? should people still be on payroll? we need to reverse and go back to a head count of a couple of years ago. then you go into the general budget section. i see public safety as the closest thing to being sacred in

our state. let's look at the other departments and bringing department heads in to say, this is your job. come back with a plan to cut your budget by x percent. it is their job to do that. we might guide and help them, but it is ultimately their responsibility. i have children in public school. we need to get serious about spending amendment 23 and bringing equity back to our budget. >> tom tancredo? >> we have to look at mandated programs. when i was in congress, we were always looking at medicare and the va system, another part of the mandated system. these are programs that are on autopilot, essentially, that we have no control over, really. in colorado, we have some of the same problems. in medicaid, for instance -- we expanded medicaid in 2007. we did so in a way that almost

doubled the number of people involved in medicaid. it doubled our expenses. we did this unilaterally. we made that decision through the legislative process and also through something called the tobacco tax referendum or initiative. we have to unwind that. we have to look at that. that is where the money is. it is in medicaid in colorado and in the education arena. we have to look at things like pera. we may have to change the structure. it is where all the money is and where it will go. >> thank you. mr. mayor? >> i have done this in the restaurant business and for the city of denver. we have had eight budgets at the city, seven of them deficit budgets. it is not fun. we try to bring business principles to the process to make sure we're doing the right thing. there's a lot of redundancy that

we could find a number of savings by centralizing -- technology services, a human- resources. we have done that in the city and save the significant jobs. so many baby boomers retiring, you do not have to do massive layoffs to end up with less employees. how do you put together management? who are the right people? have a vision for your priorities. it make sure you protect even as -- you need to make sure you protect even as you are making cuts. public safety and education are both high priorities. when you find savings, the best alternative to having to cut budgets is to stimulate the economy. had we get that back on track and generate more revenue? -- how do we get that back on track and generate more revenue? >> could you address what level of funding for colorados colleges and universities you would find a brit, how you plan to get there, whether you would

limit -- you would find appropriate, how you plan to get there, whether you would limit that, and anything else? >> we have to think about changing the structure. one thing that we hear every time we do this is that there is something that needs money. where can we find some to solve that problem? there is a different way of looking at this. there is a different way of operating the system of delivering -- the system, of delivering education that could save money and improve the quality of education. we do not always have to look for where to get more dollars for the demand. there are not that many dollars available. we have to come to grips with that at some point in time in our life, in this state and throughout the united states of america. in higher education, let's look at the possibility of increasing productivity on the part of professors in these institutions. go from 13 hours on average in

the classroom per week to 30 hours per week. it does not have to be every institution. that would save $50 million for the state -- just that one change. >> john hickenlooper? >> obviously, education is critical to all of us, higher ed especially. that is why i chose my running mate who has experience running community colleges and csu pueblo. there was a bill that provided that colleges and universities could raise tuition if necessary. how do we make sure we do not price lower-income families out of higher education? if tuition goes up, how do we get scholarships? there is a matching gift that allowed us to go out and -- go

out to every classroom and say, if you work hard enough, we will guarantee you go to college. that is a big part of the spirit we can see technology is a tool to improve the data -- that is a big part of this. it technolog -- technology is a big tool to improve the way we deliver education. >> why do we have 7 four-year colleges within a 40 mile radius of each other? maybe we can drill down costs and duplication and bring the costs down in that part of the state. higher ed is really being picked on because there is not enough money in the general fund. why not? because our economy is lacking. our administration has said it is ok if we're at 8.5% unemployment. the national unemployment rate is 10%. what if we got our rate down to 5%? our tax base could grow. then we could get money back

into higher education. we need to start giving money back into high gear and at higher levels and reduce costs. -- into higher ed and to higher levels and reduce costs. we need to look at this seriously. >> candidates, thank you. this touches the accord -- a cord with yours. there has been a truths -- this touches a cord with viewers. you have been busy. you have stood tall. >> that adds have been relatively tame. the art of standing -- out-of- state groups have spent very little since the primary. the candidates have fielded ads of their own. some of the claims are worth unpacking. thank you for being here.

in this part of the debate, we will play a clip of an ad and then give you time to respond to the claims are made. we begin with the most expensive -- most explosive ad. it features a father of a three year-old boy who was killed when an a legal immigrant crashed into an ice cream store. >> he was arrested but never turned over because of the -- because of the century city policies that american labor supports -- that mayor hickenlooper reports. >> denver is one of nine police departments that had arrested this illegal immigrant and not turned him over to immigration and customs. that phrase "century city" implies that the city of denver is doing something different -- "sanctuary city" implies that the city of different is doing something different than other

cities. i did not find that to be true. how do you defend these claims? you have repeatedly said he will stop immigration cold if elected -- you will stop immigration cold if elected. how do you do that when policy is largely set by the federal government? >> the emotional aspect of the ad is a result of the way that the man feels about what happened to his son here that is him saying what he thinks. the fact -- his son. that is him saying what he thinks. denver is one of nine places in which he was arrested and he was never turned over to of i.c.e. you do not have to arrest a person. you simply have to turn them over to i.c.e. and then it is off of your shoulders. if you do not do that, you operate a sanctuary city. there is a difference -- a big difference. aurora sent thousands more names

over and a much higher percentage of the people they stopped to i.c.e. than did denver. it is really out of proportion. denver stop a lot more people. there is a difference in the way cities handle these things. denver has been a sanctuary city. >> mayor hickenlooper? >> this is one of the sadder, seamier side of politics when you take a human tragedy to use as political capital. this individual was stop the number of times. his name was turned over -- was stopped a number of times. his name actually was turnover. when you stop someone without the right and it -- the right and in addition -- and we arrested everyone who did that, violent criminals would have to be -- the right identification

and arrest everyone who does that, violent criminals would have to be out on the streets. we do not have the programs. this is inherently a federal problem. there are four basic issues around immigration that would help solve it on a national basis -- secure border, i.d. systems that work, guest worker permits, and consequences when businesses break the law. >> mr. maes, this ad did not attack you. do you have any thoughts? >> it tracks some positive dialogue. we have an attack and the response. we have no solutions. i have presenting solutions on immigration for almost 20 months. activase e-verify -- activate e- verify and punish employers who do not use it. we have several bills on the books that are sitting on the

shelf, not being taken seriously by the mayor or by our governor. they could be taken more seriously. we should involve colorado in the secure communities program, which would help us screen for more illegal immigration. there are some solutions, rather than just dialogue. >> we will move along. let's turn now to an ad by mayor hickenlooper. yours were the wackiest out there, for sure. you said, what you have had fun, you have not forgotten the serious challenges facing colorado, spending, namely, and jobs to >> as a business owner, i have created over 1000 jobs -- and jobs. >> as a business owner, i have created over 1000 jobs. we have fewer employees than when i came in.

we need to cut jobs in government. >> several viewers felt that this made controversial claims. talk about job creation as a businessman and job cuts as mayor in the same breath. >> if you are looking at how to get the economy going, it is not through more government jobs. i think people expect government to be smaller but more effective. over the last seven and a half years, we have 7% fewer employees at the city and county in denver. we did not do massive layoffs. in the private sector, my experience of creating jobs -- a lot of it was dealing with red tape. there is excessive regulation. you do not have that much time to figure out how to hire someone. the becomes burdensome. what we focused on -- it becomes a burden.

what we focused on was getting government out of the way of stifling jobs and helping it be a catalyst to create jobs. jobs will always come from the private sector. >> mr. maes, do you agree that is the way to create jobs? >> that is true. we need to get government on the way and give courage and confidence back to the private sector to say, you know what? i will hire one more employee this month. i will open a branch office in el paso county. right now, business is sitting on its checkbook. they have no confidence about state leadership. we need to get government out of the way. it is always a delicate dance. here is what i need to do. we must downsize state government, not just to balance the budget. we have seen the nickel-and- dime. we need to make state government smaller and create jobs in the private sector. >> mr. tancredo?

>> the mayor has been running a kinder, gentler campaign geared he is always very affable. -- campaign. he is always very affable. this is election for governor, not student body president. the reality is the mayor has the same attitude and ideas as the present governor when it comes to job creation or business enterprise. on more than one occasion, he said he would not eliminate or repealed the executive order that unionized the entire workforce. he has the same ideas with regard to picking and choosing winners in the areas of oil and gas as opposed to "a green- energy economy what ro." to as the other day, he proposed a very interesting thing called a voluntary tax on oil and gas. i do not know what that is, but it is difficult, unfortunately,

of the same kind of thinking -- typical, unfortunately, of the same kind of thinking. >> we'll let you respond. >> when we said we would attack homelessness and we went to foundations that support -- foundations and businesses, we now have cut chronicle's list is by 60%. i am not sure what is wrong with that -- chronic homelessness by 60%. i am not sure what is wrong with that. i did not run for student body president. [laughter] >> the voluntary tax that you propose -- i think those were your own words. it was nothing to do with homelessness. it was a voluntary tax on the oil and gas industry for them to contribute to a pot of money used for higher education. when you are the government that regulates the industry and you

tell them that you want them to provide for you money through a voluntary tax, how voluntary is it when you are the regulating authority? are they really going to come forward and say, not me? they will get regulated out of business if they do. >> finally, let's look at one by mr. maes. it did not run on local stations, but it did on some cable stations. >> let's put a stop to politics as usual. tell my opponents the political gains are over. it is time to stand up and fight for colorado. >> which opponent are you referring to? explain what he meant by political games. >> there might have only been tw of us when i recorded that. i am not sure. -- two of us when i reported that. i'm not sure. here is what i was community taking -- communicating. it is time to create positive

solutions, cutting taxes, bidding regulations of the back of energy, getting good energy jobs off -- back into our state. it is time to stop-bang attacks, career politics, -- stop negative attacks, career politics, those that detract from positive solutions for our state. >> do you agree? >> attack ads are in the minds and eyes of the viewers. if you're talking about somebody else's positions on the issues -- i do not mean this in respect to dan -- if you're talking about their positions and they are positions with which to disagree, if it is stated very clearly and cogently, people on the other side calls it an attack. -- call it an attack. what is actually an attack and

what is analysis of troops, public policy supported by your opponent? -- what is the analysis of a true, public policy supported by your opponent? >> if you step back, there is a reason why general motors does not do attack ads against ford or toyota. the recognized -- they recognized that diminishes the product and the people using the product or believe in that person. that is a big part of why we're so fractured in this country and so divided. i keep telling people that, election day, november 2nd, is not the beginning, not the end. no matter who wins, we need everybody on board to turn this state around. >> thank you. good work. we asked our viewers what they

would ask our candidates. you can imagine that we heard from them. gloria? >> you'll have 30 seconds to answer these next questions. in our u.s. senate debate last week, the candidates told us gain marriage is not a federal issue and should be decided by this -- gay marraige is not a federal issue and should be decided by the states. please explain your position on legalizing gay marriage. >> i have said this from the beginning. i do not think that we should be telling churches who they should marry into they should not -- and who they should not. are some people going with a natural, sexual orientation? natural, sexual orientation? if that is true, and most scientists believe is, how can

we say some people get a different legal system than others? should we not all have the same rights? >> mr. maes, could you answer the question? >> i would be glad to. i think marriage is designed to be between a man and a woman. i am not opposed to certain civil remedies. i am not prepared to accept civil marriages. i'm not prepared for marriage between homosexuals or lesbians. i want to make sure they have equal footing in the legal environment. i have made it clear that i am open to the dialogue but firm on marriage between a man and woman. >> mr. tancredo? >> to the greatest extent possible, we should be making sure that people have the ability to have the kinds of things that other married people have in terms of access. if someone is in the hospital, being able to see them. making sure you can leave your will to anybody you want.

that is not being jeopardized by any thing i know. there are basic things that i believe are absolutely true in terms of rights that all americans have. marriage is between a man and a woman. >> in the past year, colorado has struggled with how to handle medical marijuana. overnight dispensaries or popping up on every street corner. -- were popping up on every street corner. why not have a 5% sales tax on medical marijuana? >> i have been clear about this for many months. i was opposed to medical marijuana. it is now part of our constitution. i honor our constitution at the federal and state levels. we have to manage that from the constitutional level. let's not kid ourselves. this is 1 foot in the door toward legalization. i am opposed to legalization. we need to make a pharmaceutical solution.

it was sold to us for chronic pain. let process this chemically and get it done with beneficial solutions in the fat -- in the pharmaceutical market. >> mr. tancredo? >> how do we deal with this? it is here and has been legalized by the constitution, as dan said. we let local communities now deal with it. they should determine how many, if any, are going to be allowed to exist in their community. it is a local decision. as far as a 5% tax, i do not know how much it is right now. i have never purchased any so i do not know. i have never purchased any kind of marijuana, to tell you the truth. by% sounds good to me. >> you do not -- 5% sounds good to me. >> you do not think the state should have enforcement control? >> i am saying local communities

should control the number, whether they want them, and if they say, no, that is the way it is. >> mayor hickenlooper? >> the states has to set the parameters for this. i have met many people -- the vast majority of people my age or older -- i still cling to myself as middle aged although i have my aarp card. it is being abused. i am not sure about the 5% tax, but our public safety people are already stretched thin. to put this unfunded mandate on them is another additional resource. it needs to be focused on making sure we stop the abuse of the system. let's make sure that medical marijuana is not going to kids. we talked about funding for

higher education. let's talk about k through 12. then i have your pledge that he will not cut any more from k through 12 public education -- can i have your pledge that you will not cut any more from k through 12th public education? >> it would be disingenuous to stand here and tell you to not worry. it is possible we will have to cut that budget. i do not know the extent, but i would not say it is off the table in terms of cuts. what i will say to you is that we will look at ways to, again, deliver education in a much more creative fashion. an educational environment that will be better and less expensive. >> mayor? >> i also cannot promise that. the bottom line is that, if we're going to have a tough budget year, how can we take what we have and get more out of

it? there is a classic example. it is a system of measuring student achievement. we do not get the results back for four months. how does that help teachers? how can we use technology and innovation and used successes in charter schools, find ways to extend the school days without extending the budget -- those kinds of things. we need to get more kids working harder. get more out of the money that we have. >> you know and have seen firsthand what is going on with denver public schools and the educational system. would you seriously looking at cutting education and higher ed? >> it would be one of the last places. but in the economy we are in, you just cannot predict what next year will be like. i have visited all of the schools in denver. there is a ton of stuff we could do to help teachers teach better without necessarily adding more

money. rick ad hoc who cannot make a pledge. it is impossible to say -- >> who cannot make that pledge. is impossible to say. holly have enjoyed some protected status under amendment 1 -- we have enjoyed some protective status under eminent. if you keep investing and spending money and expect to get a return -- the results will not change -- if the results do not change, it scores do not improve, why would we ensure the same amount of money to something that is not improving? >> thank you to all of you. we want to move on to health care and health care reform. let's bring these issues down to the state level. we have a guest from the colorado health foundation to candidates, you will have 45

seconds to answer -- foundation. candidates, you will have 45 seconds to answer. >> we have the unfortunate distinction in colorado of having the seventh-highest health care costs in the nation. costs incurred in -- costs are continuing to increase faster than other states. being as acidic as possible, what would you do to control -- being as specific as possible, what would you do to control costs and insure access -- ensure access? would you for scholar broadens -- force colorodans off of the medicare corolls? >> go ahead. >> ending up in the emergency rooms -- a very expensive way to treat any kind of illness or particular malady.

who ends up there today? many people who are not legally in the state of colorado, not legally present. they are using the system in great numbers. we know that it happens. there is a report that identifies about $1 billion in cost to the state and it goes to support the infrastructure for people who are here illegally. a huge chunk of that $1.4 billion is in this area -- medical care for people who are indeed in this country illegally. reducing that number reduces the cost of medical care dramatically. there are other things i have mentioned. >> mr. mayor? >> the challenge is, how do we do more prevention? how do we get people of all ages working out. i made my staff go up and down

the flights of stairs at city hall. how do we make sure we exercise preventive medicine? how do we make sure we have great out comes at great cost? there is a now -- right outcomes at right costs? there is a need to focus on pilot programs. we need new technology. we need to use telemedicine in rural areas. that kind of opportunity can help us decrease cost and maintain high-quality outcomes. >> we have health care costs and insurance costs. we need more competition. we need to be able to go online and shop for insurance in an intra-state action -- inter- state fashion. we need to look at fort reform.

we have physical damages and emotional damages. we need to put a cap on the emotional piece of things. it can really increase the cost of liability insurance. we need to streamline record- keeping and take advantage of new software and new technology. we need to get rid of fraud and waste. there is fraud and waste in every system government, especially medicaid and medicare. >> eric sondermann. >> so many questions, so little time. let me ask you about the amendment which proposes to allow colorado to opt out of federal health reform, specifically the health- insurance mandate. do you support this? why? if it is ruled constitutional, what major steps would you take as governor to implement the federal reform law? >> i have not really studied 63, but i know the general concept. i believe i support the general

concept. the federal government does not belong telling us what our health insurance should look like or telling me what service i have to purchase. it is unconstitutional for them to do that. i'm hoping that the lawsuit that the attorney general has joined in will be successful. perhaps the repeal will be successful. if not, then we have to sit down with experts in the area and come up with solutions. >> mr. tancredo? >> i support 63. i do not think its passage will have any definitive effect on the outcome. it is a way of saying, here is how we feel about the issue. there is no force of law implied. i do support it because i believe the federal government has no right to require us to purchase anything, actually --

any goods or services. i think it is unconstitutional. in terms of what we can do, the competition in this marketplace has to be expanded. i agree -- we've talked about this 100 times in terms of increasing the opportunity for health care and insurance companies to be purchased anywhere in the country without this kind of monopolistic hold. what about hsa's? health savings accounts help us control costs. >> mr. hickenlooper per? --mr. hickenlooper? >> if you lose insurance, you should be able to take your old insurance with you. most of us agree that people with pre-existing conditions should be able to have access and be able to purchase health insurance at a fair cost. for the life of me, i do not see what they're asking -- what

they're asking us to do is not to buy insurance, but if you do not, you have to pay fees that allow us to make sure that people who have pre-existing conditions can get insurance. if we do not all somehow pay into it -- we can debate how much or what approach to take -- but if we do not, people who wait until they get sick and show up at a hospital -- the system could never work that way. if you want people with pre- existing conditions to be covered, that is the only way to do it. >> terry jessup. >> despite the fact the colorado has experienced the highest unemployment rates in a generation, our state as a significant workforce shortage in health professions. projections show that by 2025, colorado will need an additional 200 primary care providers.

that would jeopardize care to many communities. how would you tackle this problem? >> all of these dire predictions in terms of how we will keep up with the increasing cost of health care require us to begin looking at new and innovative solutions. in rural areas, we talked for a while about grand junction having 10 or 12 medical students from csu -- cu, sorry, spending their last couple of years out there on the condition that they would practice in rural areas. how do we use technology to make sure those areas are able to get adequate medicine? part of it is finding other incentives to other under-served areas. we need to get health clinics to do more preventive medicines. >> dan maes? >> i ran into a very unique program running in about 12

communities right now. what i learned about the program is it is not government- sponsored. are no tax dollars going into it. it is designed -- there are no tax dollars going into it. it is designed for those who cannot afford it. doctors and assistance volunteer -- assistants volunteer to help these rural communities. i think telemedicine is great. using technology is great. we tried -- we tried to get our daughter through nursing school. there is a demand for nurses, but there is a bottleneck at the university level that needs to be opened up. >> tom? we're want to speed this up. did you answer this one? sorry. go right ahead. >> agree with most of the things

that have been said, especially -- i agree with most of the things that have been said here, especially about technology. we cannot simply say that we need more money. there are innovative ways -- markets are wonderful things that come up with things we would not necessarily think of. i would bet you money that there are solutions out there, waiting for a government to say, the state of colorado to say, let's have had it -- at it. let's have discussion and debate on how to address these things without adding more money. >> thank you. 30 seconds for our next responses. the question will come from shepherd. -- sheperd. >> we're experiencing what some have described as an epidemic of childhood obesity. colorado has gone through -- but

to the 23rd -- up to the 23rd rate in job with obesity. how would you address this challenge to the health and where fell -- welfare of our young people? >> back to preventive medicine. we need to make sure we have more access to fresh fruits and vegetables. we need to make sure that we let people recognize that they controlled their health outcomes, that the level of what they eat and how they exercise is going to significantly affect them, despite the predispositions of parents and grandparents. >> regulation is not something i like. our children have to assist with diet and schools. we should go back to the

president's physical fitness program. let's get kids into gym class is, not in front of the computers in the library. let's make sure they have physical activity every day of the week from a young age up through high school. >> i was just thinking about my elementary and secondary school education here in denver, colorado. we did have about one hour for pe. i must tell you, it did not help me all that much, unfortunately. i was probably as out of shape then as i am now. in terms of what to do about it, jawboning is greater. -- great. talking about the importance -- the disaster of childhood obesity and the importance of being set, no problem. no more nanny state. the government telling me what to eat, how to address issues -- no. no more for me. >> thank you.

we want to move on to what we call our speed around. you have 20 seconds to respond. then it is on to the next question. the first few are specific. mr. maes, we'll start with you. you struggled to manage campaign finances. how would you expect voters to trust you with a multibillion- dollar state budget? >> that is a fair question. we ran our budget on a shoestring and with a lot of volunteers. we are rookies at this. we made some rookie mistakes. none of them were serious bid we did it with volunteers on a shoestring budget. give me $19 billion and i will turn it into a smaller budget and do a great job. >> you are a fighter. i cannot imagine you bowling out of any race because someone pressured you -- bowing out of any race because someone pressured you. that is what you asked mr. maes to do. >> i would have thought about what would be the best for the

state of colorado if i did not think my presence in the race would affect the outcome. he has done a great job. he has worked very hard for a long time. i give him all the credit in the world for that. look, this is not going to work. >> thank you. mr. hickenlooper, you're referring to the gate he crime murder -- the gay hate crime murder and said that some areas of colorado have backward thinking. some people were offended. can you blame them? >> no. it was not just wyoming or colorado. it is all over the country. backward thinking exists in urban areas, probably even more than rural areas. now i will be attacked by the urban areas. >> thank you very much. quickly, if you are elected governor, who are the first two

people you would reach out to to help you govern? >> i have people in mind. i have identified craig to be in charge of the oil and gas commission. he is a county commissioner, a brilliant, young man. he knows more than anybody on that commission. >> jon tipton. dan maes, two people. >> our two previous governors. >> one of the most successful one governors has been mitch daniels in indiana. i would select my chief of staff next. >> thank you very much. it is your chance to tell our viewers and r voters why they should elect you as our next governor. one minute per candidate. tom tancredo.

>> we have come down to the wire. it is important to look and see exactly what separates the candidates in front of you. we are asking you for a job. we gave you an application. you fill that -- we fill that out and you check are references to determine who we are, where we have been, and what you're going to do. it is the best way to know whether the rhetoric we use will be descriptive of what we will do. look at what we have done. i would suggest -- it is true that i have been around. i have been in elected office in the state legislature and in the executive office of the federal government. i have a record. when -- oh, my gosh. i messed this up every time i tried this. when people look at what i have done in my past, they give me --

some give me an 92.7% rating and i think that is pretty good. >> the question is, do we want to repeat history or continue making history? this is an exciting time in our state. our economy and jobs is the message we hear consistently all across the state. we need someone who has done this, not just in business, but in the business-to-business environment -- reaching out to develop business, bring it into the state, securing it within our state, reaching out to oil and gas. i have 25 years of business-to- business development and management experience. i think that is what we need in the governor's office right now. this is no time for politics as usual. it is about bold leadership at a unique time in our state. we were not supposed to win the assembly and we did. we were not supposed to win the primary and we did. these are exciting times. i can bring exciting and bold leadership to the state of

colorado just where we need it. business development and creation. >> when i first ran for mayor seven and a half years ago, it was my first campaign. this is my second. i never ran for student council or class president. i am running because i think we have to get government to work. my life as a small-business person -- i have learned those lessons and those models work in making government smaller and more effective. some of the attack ads accuse me of clearing tables and washing glasses. i have major people worked together -- made sure that people work together and that is what i will do as governor. november 2nd is not the end. it is the beginning. we need everyone together -- democrats, republicans, unaffiliated. we all have to rule our sleeves

and turn the economy around. i give you my solemn pledge that i will put my efforts into it and make sure you are helding me -- here to help. >> next tuesday is election day. we will bring you live results as they unfold. it begins at 7:00 p.m. on caller on a public tv. thank you for being with us. we hope this has helped to make an informed choice in campaign 2010. have a great night and a great weekend. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> tonight, more political coverage with the alaska senate debate. you will hear from republican joe miller, democrat scott mcadams, and republican senator lisa murkowski, who is running as a write-in candidate. after that, the new hampshire senate debate.

later, an illinois governor debate between democratic governor pat quinn and state senator bill brady. >> with just days until election day, follow the key races and candidates on c-span with the bait every night. go online to do -- with debates every night. online to visit -- go online to visit c-span.org. you can see the jon stewart and steven colbert rally this weekend. falsies and's election coverage through election day -- followed c-span -- follow c-span's election coverage through election day. >> we connected with elected

officials and policy makers. watch live courage of the house of representatives on weekdays -- live coverage of the house of representatives on weekdays. you can see "newsmakers" on weekends. also, the prime minister's questions. c coverage of campaign 2010 as a political party's battle -- see coverage of campaign 2010 as the political parties battle for control of congress. c-span -- created by cable, provided as a public service. >> our coverage continues with the alaska senate debate with republican joe miller, democrat scott mcadams, and republican senator lisa murkowski, who is running as a write-in candidate. both the political report and the cq report, rate this as -- the cq report, rate this as --