? >> yes, we can! yes, we can! >> you had the chance to set the direction of this country for many years to come. just like you did in 2008, you can defy the conventional wisdom. the kind of conventional wisdom, the stale wisdom that says you cannot overcome partisan politics, that you cannot overcome all the special interest money, that says you cannot tackle the biggest challenges in this country. in today's -- in two days, you've got the chance to say yes, we can to the country. cleveland, there is no doubt

that this is a difficult election. that is because we have gone through an incredibly difficult time as a nation. nobody knows that more than the folks in cleveland and the folks in ohio. for most of the last decade, middle-class families have been struggling. this did not just part of year ago or two years ago. between 2001 and 2009, the average middle-class families of their income across the country go down by 5%. when the other side was in charge. between 2001 and 2009, job growth was slower than at any time since world war ii. meanwhile, the cost of everything -- from health care to sending your child to college -- kept going up and up and up. to many families could not send

their kids to college. too many families could not visit the doctor when somebody got sick. americans -- too many of them were working two or three jobs and still could not make ends meet. these problems were then compounded by the worst economic crisis, the worst financial crisis since the great depression. think about it -- we had a recession that was so bad we lost four -- 4 million jobs will for joe and i were even sworn into office. then we had another 750,000 jobs lost a month that we took office. 600,000 the month after that, and we lost almost 8 million jobs but for our economic

policies could even be put into play. when joe and i got to washington, our hope was that both parties would put politics aside to meet this once in a generation challenge. although we are proud to be democrats, cleveland, we are prouder to be americans. [applause] and we had confidence and continued that confidence. and there are republicans out there that feel the same way. but the republican leaders in washington, they had a different calculation. their basic theory was, you know what? the economy is so bad, we made such a mess of things, that rather than cooperate, we will be better off just say no to everything. we will be better off not even trying to fix the economy. and people will get angry and they will get frustrated and

maybe two years from now, they will have forgotten that we were the ones that cause the mess in the first place. in other words, their basic political strategy has been to camp on new having and the ship. -- to count on you having and the ship. -- amnesia. it is up to you to let them know we have not forgotten. that this election is a choice between the policies that got us into this mess and the policies that are leading us out of this mess. if they win this election, the chair of a republican campaign committee calls on us to pursue the exact same a agenda then before i came in office.

we know what that agenda is. you can distract -- described it very quickly. cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires. cut deals for special interest. and then you cut middle-class families lose to fend for themselves. you do not have a job? tough luck, you run your own. you do not have health care? too bad, you are under run. you have kids that cannot afford to go to college? pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. you are on your own. this notion of there's turned a record surplus into record deficits. you heard about how they're going to cut debts and deficits? visa the folks that ran up the deficit. -- these are the folks they ran up the deficit. they nearly destroyed our economy. [applause]

i bring this up because i do not want to relive the past. we have been there before. we have tried what they are selling. and we are not going back. [applause] we are not going back. cleveland, imagine the republicans were driving the economy like a car. and they drove it into the ditch. and this is a very deep, steep date. gelignite and ted -- joe and i. and ted, we had to put on our boots and rappel down, money down there and dusty and hot. somehow the republicans they

fled the scene. now they are up on the street and they are looking down, and we call them done to help, and they say, no, that is all right. they are sitting on a slurpee, sometimes kicking dirt down into the ditch, making it harder for us. but that is ok. we kept on pushing, we kept on pushing, we kept on pushing. [applause] and finally, finally we got that car back on level ground. it is moving -- it is. in the right direction. it's a little banged up, it needs to go to the body shop, it needs a tuneup, but it is pointing in the right direction. and just as we are about to go,

we get attack on our shoulder. we look back and who is it? it is the republicans. and they are saying, we want the keys back. we can i give them the keys back. they do not know how to drive. you cannot give them the keys back. they can ride with us. but we do not want to go back into the ditch. have you noticed when you want to go forward, if you put your car into d. if you want to go backwards, you put it into r. i do not know about you, but i want to go forward. [applause] but because of the steps we've taken, we know of your face the possibility of a second oppression.

-- depression. the economy is growing again. the economy has created jobs nine months in a row. you have a track record here in the state of ohio. massively expanding education, seeing job growth, month after month. building infrastructure, to put people back to work -- that is ted's record. that is lead's record. at the federal level and the state level, we have been working hard, but we have got a long way to go. we have got a lot of work to do. i know there are a lot people out there who are still hurting. i know that there are families, some of them hanging by a thread. he keeps me up at night, he keeps the show up at night, he keeps ted up at night.

that is what we're fighting to fix. but the way to fix it is not to go back to what got us here. it is to move forward with the policies that are getting us there. d and lee and joe and i, we have a different idea about how the next few years should let. it is an idea rooted in our belief about this country excels. we did not come from wealth. we did not come from fame. but our families understood that in america, if you work hard, if you are responsible, if you do the right thing, you have got a chance. [applause] and our families taught us that government does not have all the answers to our problems.

government should be lean and efficient. we cannot waste taxpayer dollars. especially at a time as tough as this, but in the words of the first republican president, abraham lincoln, we also believe that government should do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves. we believe in in america the rewards hard work and responsibility and individual initiative, that believes in the free market, but we also believe in a country where we look after one another, where i am my brother's keeper, where i and my sister's keeper -- that is the america that i know. that is the america joe knows. that is the america had knows. that is the american you know. an america that invests in its future, and in its people, and

america that is built to compete in the 21st century. we know that jobs and businesses of tomorrow will end up in countries that educate their workers best, that built the best infrastructure, they have the strongest commitment to research and technology. i want that nation to be the united states of america. i want that to play a part here in ohio, right here in cleveland. we're going to rebuild. there is absolutely no reason that china should have faster railroads, that singapore should have more airports. we're the nation that built the transcontinental railroad. we're the nation that built the interstate highway system. right now we are seeing thousands of people working to

rebuild our roads and our railways and runways right here in ohio and across the country. rebuilding the infrastructure for the 21st century, putting people to work doing work that america needs done. we have seen in america where we have invested in innovation and ingenuity, where we export more than we import, where we make it easier to patents and inventions -- we do not want to give tax breaks to companies shopping -- shipping jobs overseas. i want to give tax breaks to companies investing in cleveland and toledo and ohio and the united states of america. american manufacturing, which is coming back, and in clean energy companies. i don't want to wind turbine built in asia but right here in the usa with american workers.

that is the choice in this election. we see in american -- in america workers that have the skills to compete with any other country in the world. we cannot afford to have other -- we used to be number one in the rate of college -- college education ridge. we used to be at the top of mouth and science. now we're ninth in the performance of college graduates. 21st and 25th in math and science. that is unacceptable. we made historic investments in education just like ted has done here in ohio. we're going to be number one again in the number of college graduates. now remember i said, it is a choice in this election.

the other side, their main economic idea of -- this is their main idea. to provide $700 billion worth of tax cuts to the top 2% of earners. the 2% of wealthiest americans, an average of $100,000 to millionaires and billionaires. i want people to succeed. i think is wonderful if all scared rich. i want everyone to have a chance to get rich. you do too. this guy is representing. that is part of the american dream. but the wake able to pay for these tax cuts is to cut education by 20%. and to borrow the rest. let me tell you. the you think china is cutting education spending money?

is germany cutting education by 20%? it is not because they are -- it is because they are not playing for second place. they are playing for first place. the united states of america, we do not play for first place. we do not played for ninth place are 21st place or 25th place. we played for number one and that is what we have got to do in education. and that is why we committed tens of billions of dollars in unwarranted subsidies to big banks and steer that money to where it needs to be going, to students right here in cleveland state and all the way across the country, increasing college grants and scholarships. that's why we want to make permanent our new college tax credit worth $10,000 in tuition relief for each young person who

is going to college. that is the choice in this election. that is what america is about. that is what we believe in. we see an america where corporations are thriving, but also living up to their responsibilities to treat consumers fairly, played by the same rules as everybody else, and that is why we major insurance companies could not jack up your premiums for no reason. or deny you coverage just because you are sick. that is why we major credit companies cannot hit you with hidden fees or penalties. that's why we made sure taxpayers are never on the hook again for the in responsibility of -- irresponsibility of wall street bank. we see in america where we do not pass on a mountain of debt to the next generation. we have to go back this trillion dollar deficit that i inherited.

we need to do it in a responsible way, not by cutting education by 20%, not by hurting our children or our seniors or better class families, or by borrowing at to give tax cuts to folks who do not need them. we will ask for shared sacrifices of all americans. that is the choice in the election, the american of we believe in. we have got a lot to work to do over the next few years. ted has got a lot of work to do here in ohio. lee has got a lot of work to do in washington. and we will need to work together. democrats and republicans and independents, to get it all done. but so far we are not seeing that. i guess they are feeling cocky, maybe. the republican leader of the house said that this is not a time for compromise. that is a quote.

the republican leaders said that his main goal is to win the next election and to beat me. the about this. it is not to get the economy moving, not to create jobs, not to reduce the deficit. their top priority is to win the next election. we have not even finished this election. [applause] but that is the mentality that we are fighting against, cleveland. that kind of politics that we have got to change. the politics that always put scoring points ahead of solving problems. and that is where all of you come in, each and every one of you here. the only way to fight that kind of policy, the millions of dollars and negative ads that

have been pouring out, using these phony front groups, millions of dollars. the only way to fight that is millions of voice is ready to finish what we started in 2008. we have got to get cleveland out to vote. behalf to get everyone in ohio out the vote. in ohio, you can vote early. there is early voting just a few blocks from here so you can go right after this rally if you want to vote. because if everyone in 2008 shows up to vote in 2010, we will win this election. a lot of you got involved in 2008 because you believe you're in a defining moment in our

history. that is what i believe. you believed that we were in a time with the decisions we made would affect our children, our grandchildren, for decades to come. that is the reason so many of you knock on doors, make phone calls, went out and cast your vote for the very first time. and it turns out, as i said at the time, change is not easy. and so throughout the past 20 months, we have been pushing and working, and i had a great partner in joe biden. [applause] you could not have a better governor than ted strickland. and we have made progress, but i

know that sometimes we're dragging out this change, and there are all these negative ads and pundits on tv, and they're still lot of unemployment added. sometimes people feel discouraged. and the excitement of election night and inauguration day a starting to fade. bono was up there and people thought that that was a fun time. and he'd see me on tv, and he is getting gray. [laughter] is starting to look old. [laughter] but look. but, look. [applause]

i want you to remember -- do not let anyone tell you that this fight is not worth it. do not let anyone tell you you are not making a difference. because of view, there is a woman somewhere in ohio who no longer has to choose between losing her home and treating her cancer. because of you, somewhere in ohio there is a parent can let their child in the eye and say, yes, you are going to college. we can afford it. because of you, somewhere in ohio, there is a small business owner that kept their doors open. because of you, there are nearly 100,000 brave men and women who are no longer at war in iraq -- because of you. [applause]

so do not let them tell you that change is not possible. here is what i know -- it has always been hard to bring about change in america. think about it -- this country was founded on hard. we started off as 13 colonies, having to battle the most powerful empire. a lot of people said, well, you cannot do that. and then they decided, we are born to try a new form of government. of, by, and for the people. and they said, we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal in doubt by their creator with certain inalienable rights. among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. that idea has not been tried

before. there is no certainty of success but they knew it was worth trying. and over decades, they had to work to make that work. they had to abolish slavery, get women the right to vote, workers the right to organize. all of that change was hard. imagine that our parents or grandparents and great grandparents if they had set that this is too hard. i am getting discouraged. what if they had just given up? what they had been called names and worse and they said, we cannot do this? they said yes, we can. they understood that the only thing that prevents us here in america from achieving our dreams, the only thing that

limit the us is that we might not try. the only reason we're here is because past generations have been unafraid to push forward even in the face of difficulty and uncertainty. that is how we came through war and through the depression. that is why we have civil rights and workers' rights and women's rights, and that is the spirit that we need today. the journey we began to gather was never about putting a president in the white house. it was about building a movement for change that in doers'. it was about realizing that in the united states of america, if we are willing to fight for it and work for it, if we believe in it, if anything is possible. cleveland, i need you to keep on fighting. i need you to keep on believing. i need you to knock on some

doors. i need you to talk to your neighbor. i need you to tell your friend. i need you to go out and vote. i need you to get your friend the vote. if you are willing to step up to the plates, then we will win this election. we will win this election. we will rebuild our economy and are middle-class and we will reclaim the american dream. god bless you. and god bless the united states of america. [applause] ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] " [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> ♪ sun coming up over new york city looking up the promise of the promised land one kid dreams of fame and fortune one kid helps pay the rent one could end up going to prison one just might be president only in america dreaming red white and blue only in america

we all get a chance everybody gets to dance only in america sun going down on an l.a. freeway newlyweds in the fact of a limousine all in one is everything -- all they want is everything he came out here -- she came out here to be an actress he was a singer in a band.

they just might go back to oklahoma and talk about the stars they could have been only in america ♪ . america where we dream as big as we want to if we all get a chance everybody gets to dance only in america ♪ ♪ ♪ only in america ♪ where we ddream in red, white, and blue

only in america where we dream as big as we want to we all get a chance everybody .

♪

[song playing "higher and higher"]

♪

>> c-span's light election night coverage begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern. your calls, e-mail's, and comments. what's live coverage on c-span. after the rally, we talk to the columbus dispatch about the status of ohio's midterm elections. before we go to calls, on the line with us is a writer for the "columbus dispatch." a couple of statistics -- this is the president's 11th visit to ohio. it has been reported that the two candidates have spent more than $25 million, a record on this race. why is this race is so important? >> ohio is a bellwether state.

it 14 obama if in 2008 and -- it went for obama in 2008 and went for bush in 2000 and 2004. it currently has eight democratic governor and that was a boon for obama in 2008. the governor is considered a moderate, he played a critical role connecting the obama ticket to the lunch bucket style democrats who generally voted for hillary clinton. she did when the primary here. the governor plays a key role in helping obama when those votes again in the next presidential cycle. >> to a your colleagues -- two of your colleagues have a story that says these men running for the governor house don't agree

on just about anything. the governor says there is almost nothing we agree on, almost all the way back from our days in congress. talk about their different approaches to governing. >> the republican challenger comes from a business background. he was in congress for a number of years and left and went into the private sector. he vows to approach government like a business, he talks about the state department of development as the economic engine and it essentially privatizing it. gov. strickland has strong ties to unions and trade unions especially illegal cleveland and toledo areas. he has pushed for a prevailing wage laws and may differ on economic issues quite a bit. social issues, you have not heard that much about, but they

both basically focus on their party's platform. strickland is pro-choice and his opponent is pro-life. but those issues were not as common as they were four years ago. on economic issues, they are far apart. >> national and statewide polls have the republican head by a slim margin. what are you learning about the get-out-the-vote efforts for those who have not already voted? >> it is probably unprecedented for a midterm election. the ohio party likes to point out there are largest party in the country and have amassed a big get-out-the-vote effort throughout the state. they are hindered by some scandals in the cleveland area involving a local democratic party there and that may be why you see a push in that area with the president's visit and some other things. there a local party has been crippled by the scandals that

have rippled through cai hope the county, where cleveland is located. -- tie hogan county. the republican hails from the central ohio, which is a split area between democrats and republicans. it is likely that his presence on the ticket will help republican candidates. for strickland to when and democrats to do well, they need a strong vote in the cleveland area. >> in the senate race, the margins for the republicans seem to be much wider. >> that was decided at the beginning and was arguably decided the primary level. the democratic nominee for set face a primary challenge and it was a brutal primary, leaving him and his opponent somewhat

bloody. it left fisher without much money in the bank and he was never able to recover. the republican nominee did not have the primary, so he waltzed through with a lot of money and has been ahead of%. >> thank you for briefing our audience -- he has bee >> c-span's local content vehicles are on the road in the final days of the midterm election. on friday, we travel to get in ohio's featuring john boehner.

>> he is a lot better than we have in there for speaker of the house. a lot better. >> they can compromise to get through disappeared that they cannot, they will have to take a stand for what is right. >> we are here today -- we are here to follow it will probably be the next speaker of the house, john boehner. we want to find out who he is in contrast to and to nancy pelosi, find out what he stands for and what she stands for. >> i wish i could answer that better. he has stronger values, the ones that i share. he has the experience.

>> he is outspoken. he is strong for constitutional policy. the health care bill was unconstitutional. you cannot demand that people have health care. he will definitely stand up for better fiscal control of what we have right now and try to get this massive unemployment all of our back. do we seem extreme to you? we are very supportive of what the peabody is doing. i think you are seeing millions and millions of the people just like us to feel that way. i do not think it is coming from the deep party. i think the divisiveness is coming from policy that is getting away from pork, individual, bedrock america. this is a different country today. >> i do not there.

-- i do not new. -- i do not know. [applause] >> how is everybody? [applause] ♪ >> what i really want to do now is to introduce to you the next speaker of the united states house, john boehner. [applause]

>> thank you. >> i want to say eight banks to all of you for being on our team and doing everything you can to help us win this election. we have a lot of great candidates around the country, but no candidate has run a better campaign for the last year and a half and jim renacci. i am proud of him, i am proud of his team, and i am is proud of all of you for the job you are doing on his behalf. [applause] all you to sen nancy pelosi and those other democrats right

where they belong. back in february or march, we were at the white house for a health care summit. what we have ideological differences and philosophical differences, the president said, "that is what elections or for." >> or was he not right? if you are tired of all the spending, if you are tired of the government takeover, and if you are tired of obamacare, that is what elections are for. [applause] the other day the president was giving an interview. he was talking about people who disagreed with him. he referred to people who disagreed with him as "enemies of."

i was president reagan, and president bush, president clinton, george w. bush -- the reserved the use of that war -- of that word for global terrorists or dictators who hated freedom and hated america. for the president to use that word, "enemies" for those who believe we should have smaller, more accountable government, i find it rather appalling. i have a work for those people. it is not enemies. for those people who would have the audacity to stand up and fight for a smaller government, to fight for the constitution, to fight for our freedom, and to fight for a smaller, less costly government, do you know what that word is? patriot. [applause]

i want to say to all of the patriots, if you have differences with what has been going on in washington, remember what president obama told you to do. that is what elections are for. i want to tell you what -- what is happening here is happening all across our country. i have seen it with my own eyes all around the state and all around this country. the american people want something done about what is happening in washington. if we are lucky enough to be the majority and i am lucky enough to be the speaker of the house, it is going to be real different. i am not talking about different than what the democrats are doing, but i am talking different. [applause]

it is time to get serious about spending. it is time to get serious about the big problems in our country. it is time to fix the congress of the united states. no more 2003 hundred bills that no one has read. no more phantom amendments after they come out. it is time for us to fix the congress. if we do not think the congress, congress will not be able to fix the big problems in our country. it will just not happen. i have 11 brothers and sisters and my father owns a tavern. i would do every modern job there was. i am here because i grew up in america, a country where you can be anything you want to be and do what you want to do. i truly never wanted to leave my business and go to washington and do this.

i i really did not. but i will tell you what, i went there because i believe in our country. if we create opportunities for our citizens of light in a country in the world. if we do not get all of this government and make it less costly, the those opportunities will not be there for our children and our grandchildren. this is a fight. god bless all of you. [applause] >> i talked to him three times today already. i have to get down their periods whole lot. hold on.

i know him real well. hell are you doing? i am good. thank you. how are you doing? [cheers and applause]

>> watch out folks. watch out, everybody. we have to get this bus out of here.

[horn blowing] >> i kind of agree with congressman boehner. specifically, the constitution is not a living document, it is set in stone from the beginning to the end. >> based on what i have heard, i believe we have a strong forceful leadership. he seems to have the vision for the country. he will carry that forward based the one he said today. >> we are looking forward to change in the right direction. change to conservative -- chance

to consataway from socialism. we want our constitution to be safeguarded and be the law of the land to be safeguarded. i want our freedom to be safeguarded. >> i think john boehner will be and all the some -- will be an awesome leader. he is not going to tax everybody to death. that is part of the problem now. nobody has any money because they are being taxed to death. >> i like him. if he stays true to what he says, he will be a good person. but he is a politician. >> it seems a lot of people came to hear john boehner speak. it seems like there is a lot of opposition to the president right now it seems like a lot of

people are very upset. a lot that people could not explain to me the exact details of the politics they dislike. there was a lot of the motion. people seem to be upset at the president. >> c-span's local content vehicles are on the road covering campaign to doesn't in events leading up to tuesday bawdry midterm election. >> in it addition to all of the campaign coverage and are tied debates, there is a lot more to c-span's video library. the american story from american history tv and everything we have aired since 1987, all free and index online at the c-span video library. >> our political coverage continues with the georgia governor's debate from earlier tonight. which are the candidates,

democrat rory barnes, and nathan deal. this raised lanes republican. the debate took place at the studio of georgia public broadcasting by in atlanta. this is about one hour. >> this is a debate involving the candidates for governor of georgia. let's meet those candidates. they are roy barnes, the democratic candidate.

he was governor of georgia from 1988 until 2002. nathan deal served in the u.s. house of representatives. the libertarian candidate is a graduate from morehouse college in atlanta. our format tonight in the first round each candidate will answer a question from one of our three panelists. in the second round, each candidate will ask two questions to the candidate of his choice. there will be an opportunity for rebuttal in this realm. in the third round, the panelists will continue to question the candidates. each candidate will have 60 seconds to make a closing statement. before we get started, let's meet our three panelists selected by the atlanta press club. we had the editor of the georgiou report. we have a reporter for the associated press. and our final panelists is orlando montoya of savannah.

in the first round, the candidates will be asked a question by one of our panelists. the candidate will have 60 seconds to answer that question. the first question comes from tom crawford. he will ask that question of nathan deal. >> congressman deal, on several occasions it has been reported that your congressional staff, whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers, has bet a lot of time trying to enter the with state and local government officials on behalf of your private business interests. do you consider it a profit -- proper to use federal employees for these purposes? >> i do not believe he will fight that we have intervened on behalf of any private businesses. it is altogether appropriate for anybody to be able to ask questions of public officials. that is all that we have done. we have asked questions, for example, of the revenue

commissioner when he was abolishing a program for inspecting vehicles. i believe it was a safety issue. i asked him what he would do to replace the program. he said they would privatize it. i said, ok, if that is what you want to do, that is fine. the only other inquiry that was made was a question asked of our county officials about the status of the road. there has been no public money spent on either of these projects. i think it is altogether appropriate for someone to be able to ask questions, whether they are a public official or not. that is all that has been done. >> thank you, mr. diehl. the next question is for john mond. >> despite york and is busy as the first african-american on the ballot, that african- american has been devoted to a

statewide office in georgia. >> i think georgia voters ought to understand that if they want a different outcome rather than be broken promises they have had over the years, if they vote for my opponents, nothing will change. i think with all the disgruntled voters out there that they realize that i have also gotten over 1 million votes. that has never been done before either. this is a chance to make history on tuesday. if voters really realize that getting back to the founding principle of and respect for individual rights, of a limited constitutional government, more freedoms and liberties for individuals to be able to control their own lives, if if those are the things that are imported to heads -- important to them and that is what they are concerned about, that their choice should be john monds. i take my message has been resonating. i think what used a real shock

the world with the results. >> our final question in this round is 4 mr. barnes. >> we need to deepen the savannah harbor. u.s. said it is time for government to act to finance the project on its own. is that not an exceptionally risky move? we get the money for that? >> it is a risky move. it is caused by the fact that our congressional delegation does not seem to have enough influence to be able to get the funding to deepen the port. they keep saying we are going to do it, and we are not. if we cannot allow this port not to be deepened for the ships. i think that what we would probably have to do is go to some kind of private partnership to raise that kind of money and let a portion of it be from the state. but what ever has to be done,

that port has to be deepened. where is sam nunn and richard russell when we really need them? which you ever have thought that there would be a -- that the state of georgia it would not have enough influence to be able to deepen our home port? >> thank you, mr. barnes. that does conclude route 1. it is now time for our candidates to ask a question of the opponent of his choice. the would be 30 seconds for the question, 67 is for the answer, and 30 seconds for the rebuttal. john monds will ask the first question. >> my question is for congressman deal. if you should be familiar with the constitution of the united states. according to the ninth amendment, there are certain rights retained by the people that may not be enumerated in the constitution. can you give me an example of rights retained by the people? >> i think the people maintain

almost all of their rights. the 10th amendment is our states' rights amendment which says that the state and the people or the repository of the ultimate power and that the federal government should only have those that are enumerated. i believe the people possess the right to have their own money and to not have it taken away from them unduly by government. that is why i have a platform of cutting taxes in the state, a being frugal with the expenses that state government is going to be spending. i also believe that people have the right as the constitution says to keep and bear arms under the second amendment. that was specifically put in place to protect that right. that is why i had the endorsement of groups like georgiou carry. there are all enumerated powers that are there for the purpose of limiting the federal government and giving the repository of all those powers back to the states and to the people. that is why we need a good,

strong governor who will serve as the rights of the states. >> mr. monds, you have a rebuttal. >> the right to bear arms is integrated in the constitution. if the right or the people to keep their money, i do not believe you believe that by your track record. i did not hear any other examples. it is hard to believe that a congressman for 18 years with knowledge of the constitution cannot be better than that. >> the next question for one of your opponents? >> congressman deal, i ask you this question. in 1992 with the general assembly and the state senate was taking up a bill dealing with the first ethics bill, there was a hearing held in a committee ends senator feinberg was there. there was a discussion of solicitation of contributions. if you turn to her and said, "i

do not have to explain to you a solicitation is, do i?" do you think that was a row -- you think that was an appropriate remark? the utility of an apology? >> if you are asking me about a comment that was made 18 years ago? when you were running for governor in 1998 and that you were asked questioned about boats you made, he said, "anybody would reach back 20 years and ask about votes and things of that nature are simply a desperate candidate tried to sling mud." i do not remember the conversation with ms. feinberg. we both served in the state senate. i had the utmost respect for her. but i do not recall any conversation of that type. >> here is the article in 1992. there was a full had lied about it. in fact, she did take offense to it.

you never offered her an apology. i was just asking if you thought that was an appropriate statement to be made. >> to get a response? >> i will give you a response. >> i do not recall that i did anything to offend anybody. that is not my nature. anybody who knows me knows that i do not go around offending people. i do not recall the conversation. it is interesting to me that in a debate for governor here in 2010 that a conversation that happened 18 years ago seems to be the subject of controversy. that does not quite fit i think with the priorities that the voters of the state want us to be talking about. >> thank you. i do that to remind the candidates, no props allowed in this debate. >> the next question from nathan deal to one of his opponents. >> mr. barnes, you are the democratic -- your democratic a canny -- your democratic candidate for attorney general said he would not raise a legal

challenge to the obama health care initiative does he thought it was constitutional. you say you continue the litigation. if both of you are elected, how would you challenge obamacare, or which you simply give up that challenge? >> if you know the constitution of georgia and the procedures of operating, there is often, in fact not all fun, but sometimes conflicts between the attorney general and the governor. that this happened at least half a dozen types that i can recall. when that happens, the government -- the governor appoints an independent counsel. i think the independent counsel we have now is sufficient. i would continue to appoint her. >> rebuttal, mr. deal. >> i voted against obamacare because i thought it was a large power grab over the lives of individuals. i also believe this was an effort to extend the control

over an issue that is very personal and private. if mr. barnes says he believes that it is constitutional but he would pursue the litigation, that to me is the ultimate conflict. what would you spend the taxpayer's money challenging something that you think is constitutional? do you think the first witnesses that the government will call? it will be mr. barnes to say he does not think his suit is worth pursuing. >> thank you very much. we'll move to the next question now. >> my second question will also be for congressmen deal. you tell yourself as a physical -- as a fiscal conservative. i am still try to find out what that means. your record shows that you voted for their child left behind and an increase in medicare twice. with that type of record, exactly what makes you conservative? [laughter] >> john, you keep asking the

same question. i had been named one of the 10 most conservative members of the progress of the united states. 435 members. to be in the top 10 is an admirable position to have. i am m.a. physical conservative. in 2005 with the file -- in 2005 with the federal deficit reduction act, if we cut medicaid by $10 billion. that is multiplied across the state many times over. we also set an additional $10 billion out of the over all jurisdiction of the energy and commerce committee. i was an integral part of doing that. if you do not think that we should have pharmaceutical benefits for senior citizens, then you and i had a difference of opinion. it is a program that has worked exceptionally well. it is up to reduce the costs of other portions of the medicare program. i have a conservative record. i make no apology for that pack -- for that fact.

my record proves it. >> rebuttal? >> your explanation is some groups as you are fiscally conservative. you just outvoting for medicare twice which was one of the largest increases in socialized medicine since 1965. and a job left behind? i do not care who says you are conservative, your record does not prove it. >> the next question is for roy barnes. >> congressman deal, you voted against the family violence act and its expansion is four times. when time you're the only representative -- the only member of the general assembly that but did against it. you voted against the equal pay for equal work at four times. he voted against the violence against women act. you voted against the family and medical leave act. you voted against funding state and local governments for

catching up on dna samples of rate gets in 2003 and you voted against the minimum wage increase to $7.25 an hour. which do change in the of those votes to be could do it again? >> if you are asking things ago that some 20 years. let me set the record straight. i am the only one in this race who has been a juvenile court judge dealing with issues that families and children. i have prosecuted rapist and sent them to prison rather than defending them as you have done. i am the only one u.s. prosecuted people who had assaulted and murdered children rather than depending them as you have done. if you want to ask about federal legislation with a bottle things together and the first vote against the violence against women act was the bill when it bill clinton combined control of weapons. they combined everything under the sun. when it was a separate vote

under republican leadership in 2005, i voted for the act. it increased the funding for rape centers and for family domestic violence centers by 20%, where the largest increases we have seen in that funding. >> you have a 30 sector rebuttal. >> first, i prosecuted rapist to. if you're not the only one who's ever been a prosecutor. i prosecuted rapist over the years. i have set into the electric chair. how dare you stand up here and say just because you prosecuted in some form or another that you can vote against every protection that when men have had over the last 20 years. >> next question from nathan deal. >> first of all, we have a great slate of candidates running as republicans this year, up from johnny isakson -- i would ask mr. barnes, are there any

republican candidates on the ballot that he would intend to vote for? >> i will tell you what i will not vote for, mark butler. he had a mistress at the capitol. when it was felt aout that she was being employed, her employer fired her. mr. butler said an e-mail to her employer and said, "i will punish you if and make sure you remember this." as far as the rest of them, i like johnny isakson. i think he is a fine senator. i have not made a decision in that race yet. >> that is interesting. mr. barnes has spent tens of thousands of dollars -- has sent tens of thousands of dollars to federal people in the democratic party, some of the new art using be money to run against johnny isakson. i believe we have other

candidates who are very well qualified. i think this is an illustration of the fact that mr. barnes believes he can send these tens of thousands of dollars to the federal level to support the obama agenda, people like harry reid, like nancy pelosi and then have no consequences. i would urge you to be a little more impartial in terms of to he is going to support. >> thank you very much. this concludes our second round. this is the debate among the candidates for governor of georgia. for our third round, return to our panel of journalists who will ask questions of the candidates of his or her choice. the candidate will be allowed 60 seconds to respond. as moderator, i will determine if orbital is necessary. you begin with tom crawford. >> question for roy barnes, you have been criticized for ordering cases before judges that you pointed to the bench when you were governor. in the interest of fairness and

impartiality, should there be a state law that would require judges in future situations to recuse themselves from presiding over a case if it involves the person who appointed them to the bench? would you support that? >> forever? i do not think that is important without -- i do not think that is inappropriate without limitations. for two to three years we did not appear before any judge. we did that voluntarily. i did not go and ask for these judges. they are assigned on a rotating basis. if any time there was a thought that it was not fare war impartial, there is a method of refusal where they bring in an independent judge to hear that. only one case did i tried before a judge, and it was a jury drawn up that was not appealed and there was no objection, the judges would always say, "mr.

barnes appointed a." both sides with said they had no objection. that is what happened when i appear before mr. deal's assigned to i appointed as the a -- i appointed as district attorney. neither side had a problem. i think mr. deal's side is a good jurist and a giddy a. -- and a good district attorney. >> mr. deal, i will give you a bottle. >> we agreed that my son is an excellent judge of the superior court. i do think that if you want to avoid any appearance of impropriety, there should be some type of prohibition. he says he has not tried in the cases in front of them, he has handled many cases. the haggling is sometimes all that is required to get a supplement. we have seen cases as recently as the last month in which a 8

$460 million judgment was entered. the judge that elevated it to triple damages was a judge that mr. barnes appointed. >> i would give you a brief rebuttal, mr. barnes. >> that is absolutely false. i did not appoint mel westmoreland. he was either appointed by dale miller or he was elected first. it is an example of how to stretch the truth and try to make something out of nothing. >> us move on to the next question. >> my question is for congressman deal. the governor is about leadership, obviously. during your 18 years in congress, you're the lead sponsor of only seven deals that were made law and he did not hold any significant leadership positions. why should georgians believe you can be governor? >> when i went to congress, i did not go there to get my name on legislation.

in fact, but to the people who talk to me said they had too many laws already, they did not want me to bring my name on every piece of legislation. i have been the sponsor and co- sponsor of the important pieces of legislation. i was the original co-sponsor on a bill that became known as "megan's law." i was the author of the legislation that saved $10 billion for the first time that you had to prove you're a citizen to be enrolled in the medicaid program. i would take exception to your statement that i have not been in a leadership position. i was the chairman of the subcommittee on energy and congress. we had jurisdiction over medicaid. i oversaw major reforms in our health care industry and our health care programs all across this country. if you talk to someone who has been involved in those, they

would tell you exactly that. >> i would like to address a question to all of you if i can. i would like to see how your numbers add up. how do we get to a balanced budget? what will be revenue be, who gets cut, where's the money coming from? i like to start with mr. monds. >> when you talk about free markets, if you do not know -- you do not know how it will play out. the best thing to do is create an environment. that is what i talk about. we want to get rid of the personal and corporate income tax. once we get to a broader base sales tax without some many exemptions, that allows the marketplace to flourish. as far as getting on the spending side, that is why we favor zero-based budgeting. you should reduce the budget 25% every year. i would definitely sign that. in a free marketplace, you do

not necessarily know how it will play out because things go exponentially. >> i did not tell you this initially, when all three of you are asked a question, we will cut your time to 30 seconds. thank you for staying within that mr. monds. >> everybody recognizes that this will be a typical year financially. i believe 0-based budgeting is appropriate. i believe you must also prioritize where you're spending should be. i prioritized yet in public safety, education, transportation, and health-care. i do believe there are areas we can improve on. we should improve our collection of our current sales tax. i have found the one who believes the current collection process is appropriate. we can increase revenue that way. >> i believe we should go to a point of sale collection and sales tax.

then i think you take each department -- we have done this before on several occasions -- we had september 11 in the midst of my term as governor. we had to prioritize heavily. teachers in the classroom -- if you cannot educate your children in 8480 day school year, i question what exists is a stay at all. >> a question for congressman deal. in 2007 and reported total and, on your tax return of $205,000. the federal taxes you paid amounted to about 1% of that. your campaign has declined to provide information that would explain how you're able to do this. i will ask you explain to us now how you could have a total income of $205,000 and pay only 1% in federal income tax. >> you and the other people in the media and made a big deal

about the fact that i helped my child with a business that was a retail store. they had tremendous losses. as you know, losses offset profits and offset income. that is exactly the way it happened. it was fully disclosed and fully appropriate with the tax laws of this country. as i have pointed out before, i released 29 years of tax returns. if you look at those, i have certainly played -- i certainly paid more than my fair share. if you do not think people should be able to take advantage of losses to offset their income, then that is a major change to our income tax law. i have abided by the tax law. i paid the taxes that i ago and i will continue to do that. >> are you happy with the answer? >> yes. >> my question is for roy barnes. what is one thing you do differently if they decide to send you back to the governor's

office and one thing he would not change for the first time you were in all this? >> i think the policies we had were right. when you again smaller class sizes, higher standards in education, teacher salaries being at the national average for the first time in georgia's history? are you against a mass transit system that this traffic light in the atlanta region? are you against boards sorted by teachers? argue against the program that brought about -- are you against the program that brought about rejuvenation of our rural areas that has now been targeted and reduced? i think the policies were right. the problem i had was a two- fold. i did not spend enough time building consensus and try to explain why we had to make these changes the rapidly in order to remain competitive. i should have slowed down to

explain that more. i think that i would do differently. >> thank you very much. >> mr. deal, you had the endorsement of george right-to- life which appraises every night stem cell research. the state could be -- the state could get jobs in this area. it the decision had to be between jobs and embryonic stem cell research, where would you come down on that? >> i do not in yet to make those kinds of choices. i think it is very clear that there are major areas where scientific breakthroughs are happening in both adults and stills, every night stem cells that are currently -- adult stem cells, and the embryonic stem cells and artificially created stem cells. our state is profiting right now from stem cell research. we will profit even more. we are going to have be blended warrior program.

it will give us a great opportunity to do some breakthrough experimentation with dealing with spinal cord injuries. ross nathan is trying to get at -- is trying to get more effort from private sources to bring distinction to our state. i do not think you should create like for the sake of taking it for scientific purposes. that is a moral issue and i stand firmly on the moral issue. >> this is an issue i think all the candidates to go on the record on. mr. monds, your position. >> there are some things government should not be involved in. that is the private marketplace and the free market should deal with. that is my take. it is not about government having the answers or solutions, it is about getting government out of the way and reducing its impact on people's lies. government should not use what industry here in georgia can

participate and are willing to create jobs. >> mr. barnes? >> i am in favor of a stem cell research. i think some of the greatest breakthroughs we have seen in our time -- i cannot believe that anybody is against this. it fathoms the imagination. we had a breakthrough here at the shepherd spinal center. it looks like it may help cure paralysis with the embryonic stem lines. there was an outcry by the same group that endorses a deal that was asked about this as we have to stop this. i do not believe that an embryo in a petrie dish is a life. i do not see how we allow these people that are suffering life-

threatening injuries and life- threatening conditions to be deprived of these live-saving measures. even nancy reagan is in favor of the embryonic cell research. >> thank you. the next question from tom cropper. >> congressman deal, in the last question i ask you you mentioned there were some substantial business losses you suffered with your family. i believe there is a $2.3 billion bank long coming due for you in february. given these financial decisions and that the governor is responsible for the state budget, should taxpayers be concerned about the financial judgment and decisions you'd be making in condition -- in connection with the budget? >> many people have asked me, what would you do this? the answer is always as most

georgians would say, when you have a child and if you need to help them, you help them. that is exactly what i did. i did not necessarily run the business. i let my daughter and her husband make this judgment calls. my wife and i have substantially reduced the debt. it was not at the $2.30 million. we had already paid down on a payment schedule that had been previously in place. we will be able to dispose of this debt. we have a contract on the building in question. they should have no concern about me. i have an interest in another business that you have also ask me about from time to time, which is a very successful business. i have shown that i can manage the money of the people in this country. i never turned over to% of the allocated money to my congressional office back to the taxpayers. that shows that i can manage responsibly. >> this question is for all of you gentlemen.

i wonder how quickly you would move to address the tri-state water wars. is this something you would addressed next year? >> lessor with john. >> like most things in which u.s. and many levels of bureaucracy, there is not a quick fix. one of the problems is the federal involvement in the issue. that just goes to show that when you go to try to fix problems or if you are thinking about new solutions to problems, you do not want to have an extra level of bureaucracy. we do not want to get the federal government involved. we need to negotiate from a power strength. we need to make sure that florida and alabama know that we are serious. that is the way that we get into it. with all the different players involved, it is hard to say exactly what will happen. the negotiations will continue. it is not known to be a quick fix. it has not been poured the last

40 years. >> i would aggressively pursue negotiations with alabama and florida governors. the next governor, and i hope to be that governor, will not have the luxury of four years to try to resolve it. we are almost at the halfway mark of the three-year timeframe. i think what we have to do in the interim is this. we have to show that we are doing everything we can to conserve this valuable resource. we need to show we have a conservation plan. the general assembly started that process this year. we have decreased the leaky water pipes in our major cities. we have to return the water in a cleaner fashion. in the event we are not able to complete it within the timeframe allowed, i think what we have to do is ask for either an extension of time or ask the judge to reconsider some of the parts of his ruling. i think