the president has been on issues and representing true, fundamental democratic party issues. we are all democrats and we understand the importance of making sure democrats are empowered. they may not turn out the same way. show up on election day, but i will not donate money. >> do you need us? >> absolutely. >> what is in it for us? >> there is much that was accomplished in the first 2.5 years. there's much more that needs to be done. we can either work together to continue that work and finish what we started in 2008 or can be relegated back to the sidelines and see what a republican president with

potentially republican majority in at least one house does to this country. we had that starting in 2000 and get it up with massive deficits and the war in iraq, and violations of our civil liberties, and corporate interests like wall street running rampant through washington. that is the choice. this president's is as committed to the ideals he ran on today as when he was in springfield in 2007. he has fought as hard as he could. washington is a hard and frustrating place. we do this under tremendously challenging circumstances. we will keep fighting for them. on some of the things that you care about and he cares about, i promise you he is as frustrated as if you are. we have not been able to get it done. >> he seems to be frustrated with us, or at least members of his administration have been.

i thank you for being here and acknowledging us. but i'll ask again, what is in it for us in a second term? what big ideas are we going to see? will he return to some fundamental progressive values instead of focusing mostly on what he can get done with republicans? >> i will do that, i -- but i want to address what you said about being frustrated with our critics. >> we are also his supporters. >> yes, and at times, we have become frustrated with our critics, but it is not all of our critics. when glenn beck and john boehner and mitt romney attacked

us, we expect that. when our friends attack as, we get frustrated. we want you to push us. we absolutely do. the president comes from a tradition of grassroots organizing, community organizing. a lot of the pushing that you do on a national level he did on a local level in chicago. but when you retire did you think you're doing the right thing under circumstances, and the people you care about most are attacking you, that is frustrating. it does not mean it is not the right thing to do. >> we understand how that feels. >> absolutely. everyone gets frustrated. it does not mean -- it comes from a good place. we care about the same things that you do and we want you to believe that we are sincere and getting does done. >> i would say to the president,

right back at you. another question from the audience. obama madepresident more recess appointments, particularly to the federal reserve, and elizabeth warren? [applause] >> i believe that you cannot recess of. to the federal reserve. but we have made a number of them. if we have to do more, we absolutely will. it is something for the president. as it relates to the appointment of elizabeth warren, she has done amazing work of fighting of vigorous republican opposition trying to undermine her every step of the way. the president is considering to move that forward. she is one under consideration,

and we will have an announcement on what we will do their sen. >> we will look forward to that announcement. on climate change, why does the president not taking on more of a leadership role on climate change? will the president do everything possible to support the epa against efforts from republican governors who are trying to fight federal air quality enforcement? >> the president is obviously being pushed hard in the last congress to try to get a cap and trade legislation, and it could not get through the senate. which was unfortunate. it shows how tough a piece of legislation this is. even with 59 democratic senators, there was significant opposition. it was not particularly close to happening. he will continue to push for it. over time, he thinks that we can do that. as it relates to --

>> does that mean before the election or is that a second term goal? >> if pekin get it passed in congress tomorrow, he would absolutely do that. but that is not going to happen. it could not pass when we had a democratic house and it is even more challenging now. that is the reality. as it relates to the epa, the president has repeatedly threatened to veto attempts to undermine legislation that would take away the ability to regulate greenhouse gases. administrator jackson is doing great work protecting our air and water. he continues to work with her on that and supports her on that. >> another question from the audience cheered when will president obama keep his promise to close guantanamo? [applause] >> this is something where everyone in this room can help us. >> what can we do for you?

>> call members of congress, democrats and republicans, who have supports efforts blocking that right now. including a democratic senate, and many democrats and house have voted for legislation that prevents us from transferring people that we want to bring to trial in the united states to try out. we're completely limited by bipartisan congressional limitations on this. we have dramatically reduced the number of prisoners there due to transfers to other countries and bringing some here to trial. but right now there are legal prohibitions to prevent us from doing it. >> you have mentioned a couple of times that it is very difficult for the president to get things done when he does that have people in his own party willing to support him.

when bush was president, he had a minority in congress for a lot of that time. the power of the executive order he used quite a bit. he was able to get a lot done. why is it so much harder for president obama to get things done? [applause] >> a lot of the things that bush wanted to do he did not get done. privatizing social security, 41. some of them were bipartisan, but the tax cuts, they would not have passed without a significant proportion from democrats. a lot of the democrats who may oppose us on some things, they have supported president bush on those things. >> so president bush is better than by partisanship than president obama? >> i'm not saying that. there were democrats that

support -- that come from very red states. and that is important. but that means that sometimes there are people -- democrats that will support republican issues. either we beat them in 2006 or 2008 or the tea party beat them in 2010 by primary in them. that is the challenge there. >> maybe i am not that clear on it, but is there anything the president can do without congress on any golf on any of the areas that we've talked about? anything without getting all of the democrats to behave. republicans will not. they have made that clear. they will vote no. what can he do to accomplish some of these goals? >> there are a lot of things we

have done that way. we have removed the bush ban on stem cells that way. we have to change federal benefits for same-sex couples that way. through executive action, and there will be of the things that he can do. bottle of the things that you're talking about here, climate change, immigration reform, those are things that require legislation. >> another question on twitter. what is worse, loss of tax cuts or medicare benefits? >> the answer is both. we have made sure that we will get a tax increase and we are abiding republican efforts to reduce their medicaid and cut their food stamps. as painful and messy as the five

over funding the government this year was, those are things the president fought to protect her does the things republicans wanted to cut. that is the debate in congress, and the president focused on making sure that while we have to cut spending and we have to reduce our deficits, those are things we have to do, but we have to do it in a balanced approach and not on the backs of the most vulnerable americans. >> that seems to be happening a lot at the state level. we see it happen with some of the things that we had to compromise on. and this is the question that people are asking a lot. a tax increase of a couple hundred bucks a year, isn't that better than slashing all the other resources that they depend on for their health care? >> it does not have to be an either/or choice there. i cannot speak to every state

capital around the country, but there are families that are barely getting by. $200 a year will matter a lot. we do not have to do that. states may make different decisions about how they balance their state budgets, and that is up to them to do. on the federal level, we do not need to do either one of these things to balance our budget. >> i read talking. memos, daily cos, greg sargent on "washington post," and i read a lot of people here. and i would say, as challenging

as it sometimes makes my job, the democratization of the media that on any given day, any person with an internet connection to make a real impact on the country, it is something that has been very powerful and important for our country. >> we only have a couple of minutes left. here is a question i want to get your reaction, you're going back to washington. you're going to be talking to people in the white house. and it will ask our things on the progress of left. what are you going to tell the white house about how the leftist feeling right now? >> it will not surprise a lot of them. there are a lot of people in this room who care about the president, support the president, a lot of the things that the president does, are very concerned about the direction republicans want to take us in this country, but are

frustrated at the pace of change. [applause] and i promise you, the president shares that frustration. if the cut, if it was in his power to do, if we could wake up tomorrow and have immigration reform, climate change done, that we could have the employee free choice act and things that he talked on on the campaign, he would absolutely do that in a second. but we have huge challenges, and it is not just that we have obstructionist republicans and recalcitrant members and our own party, we are also dealing with an economy that has been in crisis for a very long time. it did not just art in 2008. it is a tremendously worse. he came in when the country was on the brink of a great depression. he is governing in very challenging times.

is someone that have taught to every day for the last four years and i promise you that he is the same person who you remember from the campaign trail, the same person from springfield and des moines, caring passionately about all the progressive ideals that we talked about today, and he has fought for them the best that he could from the bottom of this art, and he will continue to do that. >> would you suggest that he made do more for us? >> i will say that we need to continue to have a conversation with this group of people and the people watching around the country, probably on the computers, some on c-span, and that you are very important part of the coalition that got him here and an important part of a coalition that stop republicans from doing things like ending medicare as we do it, and that ensures that this president is

reelected. he knows that, i know that, and we want to make sure that you guys know that. >> he came before when he was a senator. can we expect to see him next year? >> when are you having? >> it will be in the summer, though we do not know what city. >> i will talk to him about it. his schedule is challenging and i suspect it will be more challenging next year. but we should absolutely talk about it and maybe we can make it work. >> that would be great. after all this is a professional left. thank you so much for joining us. t think you got the message right? [applause] not too bad. >> thank you, everyone. aeveryone.ou ver

>> tomorrow on our coverage of the 2011 republican leadership conference wraps up with buddy roemer, texas governor rick perry, marcia blackburn, george p. bush, and reince priebus. that is live at 12:50 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> blackberry users can access our programming any time with the c-span radio app with four streams all commercial free beer you can also listen to our signature interview programs each week. it is all available around the clock wherever you all. download it free from blackberry app world. >> next, a look at the u.s. conference of mayors' annual

meeting here you will hear from shaun donovan. after his speech, a discussion on basic housing, assisted living, and technology. this is about two hours. >> ok, thanks. [unintelligible] >> welcome everybody and good

morning. this has been a great council. we have done a lot of fabulous work. for our cities and for our country, and for the u.s. conference of mayors. we continue as counsel to work on several initiatives. they include the metropolitan economy reports that we all look to that provide the analysis as to job creation and other things to relate to our metropolitan areas. our counsel continues to research economic development strategies. today we will announce a joint research initiative building all of the work of michael porter, with the initiative for the competitive inner cities group. topics will include capital

formation for inner-city businesses and the role of anchor institutions in economic development. we will expand our national dollarwise campaign. many of us have been the recipient of checks to our community to help financial literacy. we're also expending our employer-assisted housing program. we are very focused on one of the biggest issues our cities have encountered in a long time, and that is to address the housing problems that blight our cities all across the nation. we work very hard at that and we will have some conversations about that as well today. we're glad that everyone is

here. my name is michael coleman, and i am the president -- the mayor of the city of columbus. we are so pleased to have here by secretary shaun donovan this morning. -- hud secretary shaun donovan this morning. before we get to his remarks, we have to my left the president of the conference will provide us some words of when some today and comments. she has a lot to do with respects to the council and meeting the committee's and i turn it over the madam president. >> thank you very much, mayor coleman, chairman. and mayors. yes, welcome. i am so glad to be here with you today in this committee, because

when i took office as president of the u.s. conference of mayors it was and is still the agenda for our organization, the metro economies. i have focused on jobs. and secretary donovan was at the meeting at the white house when the administration first took office, and we were all there to meet with him. one of the things that we said, and i said before the president, was that jobs was priority number one. and we have never detracted from that message. it is about jobs. it is about our economy. and we were so pleased in that conversation with secretary donovan and secretary lahood and chu and secretary duncan, and mr. holder, for one of the

things that was a challenge for all of us, the silos and the federal government. ladies and gentlemen, one of the things that the administration has done, and thank you, secretary donovan, is that lots of silos between transportation and energy and hides, we thank you for that, because it facilitates our work to help you help our citizens. ladies and gentlemen, we are pg is anay because cd bo important program for all of us. it is the only one that sends dollars directly to cities. it is the program that we had used to help retain jobs, create jobs, and in cities, what it has

done is to help us create about 150,000 jobs. just think about the programs in your cities and how it helps your citizens, our citizens. the other thing that they have done is that it has produced about $13 billion in gdp. think about that. you're looking at revenues. they come into the state treasuries and the federal government treasuries because of this program that we are privileged to have from the federal government. we have a lot of work to do, because as you see, last year, we had the fight very hard to even retain a little bit more,

because the proposed -- the proposed cut was 65%. that would have been devastating. but we were able to work hard with secretary donovan and also with congress, and the administration to have that only be cut to 11%. ladies and gentlemen, we have a long way to go. 2012resident's budget for as a 7.5% cut. remember, the base that we had includes that 11% from last time so it will be more drastic for us. we have a lot of work to do. it is so vitally important that we keep our eye on jobs. let us not detract from jobs and our metro economies, because that is the engine that makes our country run.

leas and gentlemen, it is us, because those companies are located in our cities. and those nonprofits are in our cities. those are who we contract with that deliver some of the services that we have those dollars to help us, so that it is not always coming out of the property tax. remember, all of us with the companies and now cities and all of our people, we sent income tax money into this federal treasury. and this is the only program that sends money back directly to us. do not think your citizens -- do not think that they think that this program is important? is it not important for the programs, for those who need our

help? i think so. and we need to continue to fight the fight. we need to remember our citizens, and we need to remember that it is important to preserve these jobs that deliver the services for those people that we serve. they are the people who elected us to office. ladies and gentlemen, i implore you keep our eye on the ball. do not detract from our agenda. stay focused on jobs. grow the economy. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. we have c-span here today, so after secretary donovan makes his comments, we will open up

for questions, but i ask that each mayor first introduced themselves on each question and then speak directly into the microphone so that our audience can hear. again, secretary donovan has been a friend of cities and communities all over the country. he has spoken with us on several occasions. he is very a sizable. mr. secretary, we appreciate the relationship that you have developed with us all over the country. as you know we live in very challenging times. very challenging economic times and budgetary times. as our president just indicated, there are many critical programs that had been under attack, and in tremendous change, those things that help build our cities and neighborhoods and create jobs. we look forward to the ongoing collaboration that you have

always had with us. and thank you in advance for your comments for all the work you have done with cities all over the nation. so now, secretary donovan, welcome to this council for the new american cities. thank you for being here. [applause] >> thank you. it is wonderful to be back with you. i want to start by thanking mayor coleman. you have been such an innovator in so many ways. you talk about neighborhood stabilization, the work through those programs which been so critical to help the neighborhoods hardest hit by foreclosures and abandonment. we actually came to columbus to announce nationally the second round -- the competitive round of neighborhood stabilization funds because of the innovative work that you've done in columbus.

i think the mayor is almost forgiven me. he has done such a great work on homelessness that we stole the person who ran his homelessness effort, barbara poppy. and in some many other ways, your work and sustainability and building columbus into a sustainable community of the highest order. you are a real begin to all of us trying to help you do this work at the federal level. congratulations and thank you for having me here today. thank you for leading this important council here. i also have to say thank-you to mayor kautz, who has done a wonderful job as president, and there recognize her successor who i had the pleasure of spending time with the in los angeles a few weeks ago. i look forward to working with him and all of your leadership as we go into what will be a challenging year for us.

and i want to come back and talk a bit about that. i also have to thank mayor loren for his very important leadership on the housing committee. whether it is out on the street doing press conferences, it has been a terrific partnered to us and leader. thank you to him as well. also a personal welcome to two new members of your organization. alan brown, who led just ran into on the way here, worked closely with me action hud during the clinton administration. ran the white house community empowerment board, and he will be a terrific addition to your ranks as the new mayor of jacksonville.

terrific addition. i also have to welcome rahm emanuel, who think you all know held the position at the white house as well. he will also be introduced -- a terrific addition to your efforts to try to make sure that everything that we do is a bad attitude and protected in washington. congratulations and welcome to the conference. i want to try to take 80 minutes and focus on the immediate challenges we are facing -- a few minutes and focus on the immediate challenge is that we're facing. there is no question that we have made real progress from the enormous challenges that we inherited. 2. by year's end, it is easy to forget, i think, that we were losing over 8000 jobs a month on

the day that the president walked into office. and whether you measure the progress by the more than 2 million private sector jobs that have been created over the last 16 months, and despite a disappointing report last month, the acceleration of jobs that we have had, 1 million private sector jobs created in the last six months, so we do have real progress. i want to take a moment to recognize the incredible work that you all to on the ground. you are the closest to those struggling in this economy. you have the most direct ability to affect the lives of people in your communities and to connect people to jobs in this economy. i have seen the role that you have played very personally, and frankly the way that hud

funding, which has always been critical, in this crisis that we're facing has been more critical than at any time that hud was created. i wanted to recognize in the efforts of mayors in the midst of this crisis, i've spent time over the last few months walking the streets of tuscaloosa, alabama would its mayor to help. hud as a critical role in disaster recovery, to help him recover from the man-made disasters that we face and the natural disasters that we face in some many parts of the country recently. joplin, tuscaloosa, mississippi, so many places that we're trying to help u.s. makers recover from. i was just in at lento with may

read. -- in atlanta with mayor reed. there was not only the block by block approach to help your communities country, but piece by piece also means the way that they have brought together not just the public sector, but the private sector, the nonprofit sector, all of the players you need at the table to help your communities recover from the foreclosure crisis. one of the things i heard loud and clear was the importance of housing counseling. is neighborhood stabilization funds, fha, which is part of hud, which 40% of the people in the country who purchased homes last year used fha financing.

but those who get counseling or 50% more likely to stay in their homes in the midst of this crisis. and if the congress -- and yet the congress and particularly of local and minister -- republican members in the congress focused on cutting this counseling. we need to have your help for housing counseling. i've also seen the remarkable work that you have all done to help those who have been most hurt by this economic crisis, those who end up on our streets. whether it is veterans -- and this is tragic, veterans are 50% more likely to be homeless and the average americans. despite his economic challenges, we just released our latest findings this week on what has happened to homelessness in america. we have seen a 01% increase over

the last year, only a 1% increase, given the enormous economic challenges that we have faced, that is an enormous accomplishment and it would not have happened without your support. one of the tools we have used is our homelessness recovery. we will meet reached 1 million people who had been able to stay off the streets to find decent housing, 1 million people that would have been homeless but for the homeless prevention and rapid recovery money. that money went directly to you as mayors to be able to change the way did you respond to homelessness and prevent it before it happens. and that is remarkable work. i was just in salt lake with mayor becker and soft how they -- think about this. the state of utah has reduced this by 69%, and all of the

nonprofits, organizations and the city that have come together to do remarkable work. that is why we have been able to ensure that a flood of folks have not ended up on our streets around the country. and i have seen dole works that are block programs to. one of the things we have to help under -- congress understand is that these are not just urban programs. a large share goes to rural communities around this country. -- i was inliston williston, north dakota, and i saw how that was helping them meet the desperate housing needs

that they have. they have a shortage of people for the jobs that they have because of what has happened to the energy industry there. they are desperately trying to build affordable housing there and they have been able to use r block grant funds in rural communities be able to do that. we have to remind people in congress that these block grants read -- reach every part of the country, red, blue, and everywhere in between. and finally i have seen the way that you have been innovators in connecting the funding that we provide on housing to all of the other pieces that make your communities work. our sustainable communities grant, $170 million we provided last year for the first time, has helped you connect housing to transportation in ways that make an enormous difference. i was with the los angeles mayor

who put his credibility on the line to get 0.5 cent increase past. i visited in santa monica where they are using a block grant to rezone an entire neighborhood around a transit job there will be a thousand new jobs just surrounding that one transit stop thanks to the work that we're doing for sustainable communities initiative to help rezone and create new density, new jobs, new commercial space, and housing surrounding that transit stop. those are a few examples of the ways in which we have worked with so many of you that are here today, so many of your colleagues around the country to make this recovery real, to use hud tools. as we sit here and think about the new american city, i reflect

on my own interest in cities and how i started down the path to become hud secretary. i grew up in new york city at a time when frankly many were questioning whether there would be an american city. the south bronx lost 75% of its population in just one decade. there was an exodus from some many of our cities around the country. we sit here today, almost 50 years after hud was founded, literally when our cities were burning, and i can celebrate the success that so many of you have had in making the american city something we can all believe in again, that many people are moving back to, and what you need to help you support that new american city is a hud that

brings the flexibility, new tools, and in many ways, frankly, what i inherited was say hud stock in the model of the 20th-century when you are trying to build the new american city of the 21st century. i want to talk for a moment about the work that we need to do to reform hud, to continue to make progress with you, and also to demonstrate that the funding that will be a real challenge for us, to bring to hud to bring to your communities this year, that we can put that funding to work in innovative, efficient, effective ways. so let me touch on a few of the ways that we have tried to transform hud to be a better partner to you. one of the things that we heard loud and clear is that you need a partner to help transform

public housing into housing that creates jobs for renovations. we know that there are up to $30 billion of construction work that can be done in public housing around the country, and yet our rules and regulations are standing in the way of allowing you to move forward. it is not just the funding but the old inflexible with the public houses -- and flexible ways that public housing is operated. we've seen a transformation of the most distressed public housing around the country, but we also heard that many other kinds of affordable housing, privately owned, did not have access to the same tools. we created a tourist neighborhoods program that allows you to transform that housing as well -- a choice neighborhoods program that allows it to transform that

housing as well. you've said you're tired of going to six different agencies to apply for funding and not have the federal government work in a coordinated, comprehensive way. we have brought together arne duncan and his team and we will bring promise neighborhoods funding to help transform schools at the same time you are transforming public housing and other forms of affordable housing. we have heard that if people do not feel safe in the cannot walk the streets, their kids can now be out in the playgrounds because they are afraid for their safety, we cannot be successful in those communities. so we brought the department of justice and their initiatives and funding together with our public housing and choice neighborhoods funding. we of for the health care is a critical need. inre making investments community health centers alongside. all of those pieces are being brought together in our choice

neighborhoods initiatives. but the truth is that we will not transform 1 million units of public housing but that doesn't grants this year, and they will be under attack. we will have a tough time finding those this year. we're working in and out -- in our budget to bring private capital into public housing. we believe that there is $25 billion of private capital sitting on the sidelines which could be invested in public housing. the total over 300,000 construction jobs around the country. we have an initiative that would allow a quarter million units at to convert to project-based accounts and put people back to work and help to transform those communities. that is an example of the work we are trying to do.

we're trying to simplify and streamline our rules. that is where we need your help. we want to save $1 billion over five years while serving the same number of people. that is the kind of more efficient, smarter programs that we will need to help get done. we need your support in congress to get that done. and finally, let me touch on cdbg. there is perhaps no more a single important program to all of you, and the most flexible tool that we have, absolutely critical. in my prior life as a local housing official, it was the biggest -- i was the biggest beneficiary of the funding. i know how important it is to the work that you are doing, whether building housing or

supporting a boys or girls club, or all the various services, infrastructure, and other things it can help to support. what i want to say is that we are going to need to show that cdbg works. frankly, the very flexibility that you love so much and we love so much at hud about cdbg, sometimes makes it hard to show the difference is making in communities, because it does so many different things in so many different places. we will need your help to do three things. first, show that cdbg dollars create jobs in innovative ways. we have begun to show that through the recovery act. through all of the problems we funded, cdbg on a dollar for

dollar basis created the most jobs. we have that data, but that is not an affirmation we have on regular cdbg dollars. we need you to tell the stories and give us the information to show how it is creating jobs. and we need you to focus as much as you possibly can on directing cdbg toward things that will create the maximum number of jobs possible. we need your help in doing that. second, we need cdbg to leverage every private dollar it possibly can. many of you may be aware of this section 1 08 program under cdbg. many of you may not. 108 allows you to use a cdbg to raise private capital towards large-scale catalytic economic development projects and to have that guarantee effectively by

your future cdbg funding. that is a tool that we have the ability to use on a much wider basis. it will allow us to accelerate investments in these large stake -- large-scale cattle in -- catalytic economic development projects. it shows they can leverage all large number private dollars as well. that is a critical tool and that sort of private sector leverage will be only more important as we go forward in challenging budget times. finally, we need to have transparency. we need to have as much information as we possibly can from you about where cdbg is going, how it is being effective -- i know it is not easy to report. the recovery act required you to report in ways you never had to before. it which your teams and staff --

to challenge them to put reports where they had not done before. but the difference between transparency and the data that we have had from the recovery act, it makes the case remarkable. we can show where jobs were created and it has made an enormous difference. we need to show that the folks on capitol hill, to show where it makes a difference, how we have created jobs, and we need that data, that transparency from you to be able to do that. finally, let me close by saying -- we need to do all of those things. we need to be smarter, more innovative, we need to reform our programs, we need to continue to do work at hud to make us the partner we need -- you need us to be. but even after we do all those

things, we will have to fight this year. you will probably saw that the washington post published a series that attack the effectiveness of that program. we are fighting back. the washington post got the story romper digg claimed that there were 700 projects around the country that had wasted money. we have begun looking at every single one of those prices. we found that more than 50% of those projects were complete. they were occupied. we are fighting back on that story but we need your help. my team is going to be coming to all of the beard we need not only to have that data that shows these projects are complete but the photographs, we need the personal stories of the people it -- who had moved into those buildings. let's be clear -- this is going to be a question not about

whether the goals that we have are the right goals, but whether the programs we have our meeting those goals. we have to be able to demonstrate in compelling terms to tell the stories of the people in places that are benefiting from these programs. we have to be clear about the challenges we face. there is a real chance -- there is a proposal from house republicans that wouldn't zero out coleman cdbg. the president has made it tough choice. it would be an increase from what we were be able to fund a share. he proposed a small reduction in homes. in 2011, that would be an increase as well. but the real choice we are

facing is the future of these programs, whether they will continue at all. and so fighting for home and cdbg, restoring our housing counseling fun, fighting to show that these programs can make a difference is what we need to do this year. we're going to need your help and your support and your partnership. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, mr. secretary. i like to present you this study. we will provide this to members of congress. the study reflects that in just 10 cities here in the united states, cdbg has created over 9000 jobs, over $800 million in gross metropolitan products for

those communities, and over 550 million labor income in nearly $65 million in state and local tax revenue per -- local tax revenue, annually. it has been a great benefit to cities all over the country. so this is a study we prepared and we present this to you and your staff. we will also presented at the council to congress as well. i will open it up to members of the committee for questions. i like for you to raise her hand, i will call on you, and tell us what city you are from and ask a question to the secretary has to get moving. we will start over here. [inaudible] if you could talk to the microphone, please. >> [inaudible]

i am from massachusetts, and it is good to see you again. thank you for being with us and your cooperation in removing some of the red states -- red tape. come to my city and we will say you 100 brand new first-time home buyers financed to the first-time home buyers program with home funds. parte been working on our closer issues and getting new people with skin in the game. -- our foreclosure issues and getting people with skin in the game. i think the cities and mayors have shown that we manage and stamp -- we manage stimulus and federal funds better than anyone could, if we can get shovels and the ground and get jobs a lot better and a lot quicker than the states have. i think that leads me to suggest

that you may want to consider bundling some of these federal programs, when you talk about coordinating with the federal agencies, and create a form of revenue sharing that can cut out the revenue -- cut out the bureaucracies. there are enough oversight mechanisms to focus on national objectives, and there is a way to get through the republicans by saying we will eliminate red tape and move the money to the local level. they apparently like local choice and frankly so do we. on the foreclosure issue, i would invite you to do what i did when a constituent came to me. i did not believe how horribly the banks and their services are treating people. i basically took all the information and acted as if i was the borrower in trouble and i tried to get through to someone who has some authority to look at that paperwork and

ask for a loan modification. i was flabbergasted. i started in massachusetts with a law firm representing the servicer. we went to troy, mich., and then to florida. by last conversation was with a gentleman in india who had no idea what i was talking about. i can only imagines what the frustration is of homeowners who are actually working and trying to make some kind of deal to stay in their home. there needs to be some enforcement. all you're getting is let service from the banks. how healthy to look further at that. thank you, mr. secretary -- i would hope that you would look further read that. thank you, mr. secretary. >> many of you may have seen press reports about works we're doing with the eternal -- the attorney general and 10 different federal agencies to

correct the problems of rose signing told us ro -- robosignings and how the banks to treating the customers. the president and i are very focused on holding those banks accountable. one of the ways is to create real servicing standards that would require, for example, a single point of contact, that would require that when you're talking to someone about modification, you cannot be foreclosing on them at the same time. create real standards on how quickly you have to respond to a customer or homeowner, in a whole series of other things. and you have seen the attacks on the consumer financial protection bureau? because we were able to create that bureau, we now for the first time ever had his ability to create servicing standards

that cover every kind of institution. not just the banks, but the non- banks. you know that countrywide and others were big part of the issue that led us to the financial crisis. we now have the authority sound to create servicing standards. it will also push the banks in the settlement to help existing homeowners stay in their homes, to accelerate what they're doing around modifications and principal reductions, so that we could really get some teeth into not just helping future folks, but current folks wrong by the practices that we have found. we're very focused on that. i hope that we will have an announcement on that. >> we're going to go over here. >> i'm from salt lake city. thank you for joining us here

today and for coming to salt lake city and looking at our work on homelessness and housing, as well as the grant to look toward the future developments in the quality of life in our region the will allow us to take a giant step forward. we thank you for that. our businesses are facing a challenging time. we have seen that reflected in terms of reductions in community development, block grant programs, and other programs that really unable our residents and our community to have opportunities for housing, for jobs, for the infrastructure that is vital to our future.

the opportunity. i appreciate that we have never seen in this country the kind of bridging a federal agency to all as communities to work with the federal government's rather than in individual areas. i know in my community that we of may be taken for granted the federal partnership and our residents are not fully aware of the enormous difference that makes year in and year out. i know that that appreciation may be starting to grow but i am wondering how we can on behalf of our residents and working with congress in these difficult economic and political times, how we can improve our understanding within our communities and towards congress particularly about the approach

that is benefiting all of us and our cities. >> this is an important question in normal times. this is an important question right now. to be very clear, this is not a long-term question either, this is literally over the next three-four months, how do we tell this story and how do we connect it to citizens and also to their representatives. if we are not able to, we will have a very difficult time continuing to work and i am proud that we have been able to do this together. part of it is this, being able to tell the story effectively. let me give you an example -- there is one area of funding, that actually increased in the

budget in 2011. that was and homelessness. why's that? because over a decade, we have been able to build the case and that not only have the program's been effective in reducing homelessness, chronic homeless this which is down by about 1/3, but have been also able to show that these investments save money because the cost of being homeless is actually higher than the cost of being house, particularly for the chronically homeless. i do believe that if we can tell the story in this kind of approach what are we paying and what are we getting for the investments that we're making and do it in ways that are scientific, and that is incredibly important. we have to tell the story very directly, whether it is the

events that we did while i was in salt lake, which told that story very directly if the kinds of events that you as mayors have begun to do, those are absolutely critical in telling the story. there is nothing like the person who has benefited from being a new homeowner. i came to washington and that were to the first time. the senior staffer on capitol hill said that politics is self need. there can be huge needs out there but if they are not seen and felt, they will not be mailed. running out of time.

we just have 80 more questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. are so glad you received that document. i'm so glad that you are here, as you always are, supporting us. we had a meeting in washington. one of the president's advisers did not think this was a good idea. i came unglued and i give him my thoughts on it and i told him how important it was. this was for $800,000 from the city in block grants to go hand and to our program for senior housing to get these senior housing in our city for dr support through transportation.

you talked about veterans. we had a veteran who sell at of a tree and he lost his childhood leukemia. -- we had a veteran who fell at a tree. we used the block grants to help him renovate his home so he could get around, this great veteran of ours who had nowhere to go except us and our government. the question to you is if you want to come to every city in this great country represented here, we can show you right out there what we are doing to be the nexus for our great engines to make this country strong. >> telling that story helps. that is my point.

each of you has to figure out how to tell this story. i often hear from members of congress folks in my community, my constituents do not even know this is federal funding. you all care so much, you feel so much ownership about it because the it is flexible. you get to decide how to use it. sometimes, i think -- i was guilty of this uphold local level as well, sometimes we treat it as though it is our money and it is not federal money because it works in the way that it does. each of you making the commitment to go back and do something to tell the story and to let members of congress know that you were telling a story, this does connect to the federal level and without federal support, we would not be able to

do those things. that is what you can do to help. that and as i talked about earlier, the more we can do to direct -- to jobs, this is enormously flexible. we want to keep it flexible. if there was ever a time to pick and choose and to direct -- towards jobs, now is the time to do that. and we have to be innovative, we have to bring as much private capital as possible. the more we can say, you take away a dollar, that means $5 of private capital will not work in your community. using the ways to leverage private capital and the transparency to be able to say, here is what we have done with it. being able to collect the data come help us help you to give us the facts to make the case.

>> mr. secretary, i want to thank you for spending time with us today. it is clear that you are a friend of cities. we are on the same page. we need others to get on the same page that we are on. we will work in partnership to improve housing opportunities and economic development opportunities for those in our communities and we will work together on that. thank you very much, mr. secretary. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> these three presenters are here to talk about the issues of abandoned housing and robert klein is the founder and chair of safeguard properties, -- is of western reserve land and conservancy out of cleveland. we are glad to have you with us. then, jack connick of -- based in washington, d.c. >> thank you, mr. mayor. we appreciate it. thank you for giving us the ability to come here and talk to you all. let me brief you give you a background. i'm not a banker. safeguard properties is a company that provides services to the banking industry. we are accompany that goes into

default, we go out to the property physically and take a look at the property and see what is in the property and report back to our clients. just to give you a scope, we performed roughly over a million 300,000 property inspections and month in a nationwide basis. these are all loans that are in the default stage. some have gone to foreclosure and report back to our clients. what we also do is once the property becomes vacant and the people move out of the homes, it is al responsibility to maintain the property on our client's behalf. the reason why i am here, the reason why we have done this for a number of years and talk about it, what i would like to do is

to report to you, the mayors of the city's, where the boots on the ground. this needs to be brought to the light. after the million or so inspections that we perform on a monthly basis, 28% of them become vacant and the people will get up and move out of the home for one reason or another. i want to emphasize that these properties that have not even gone into foreclosure or are in the beginning stages of the foreclosure process but people will get up and move out. here is what happens when the property becomes vacant.

in most states, it will take the foreclosure process itself anywhere from 18 months, sometimes as high as three years to go through the foreclosure process. i think that everyone agrees and you have heard the secretary report before that as long as their property is occupied and someone is living in the home, our plans function is to keep the individual in the home. we don't want to have taken homes, whether it is then this not being made. the objective is keeping people in their home. you see properties that have become vacant, people have moved out, no one is there any more. there upload to the ground, we see these on a month-to-month basis. we are out there every month.

''' the need to find a way to circumvent the situation. the biggest complaint to get from neighbors of vacant properties is -- we would put a sticker on the door and we will say that we are maintaining the property. we get calls every single day.

what is happening with this property. there is no way that it is in the property. this is protecting the city's come of the neighborhoods. keep in mind that while this is in the foreclosure stage which means it is not in foreclosure, some states will take three years. the servicer, the bank investor has limited legal right of what actions they can take on the property because the might pay a lien holder or a lender but they have not taken possession. they can do certain items to protect the interest. i know the system and howard works.

there is very limited legal rights that a bank can take to take action to protect their properties. i think it is my responsibility in industry and this is to bring this to light because i have been hearing this over and over again, these vacant properties are actually true. as long as the process is vacant, the property will deteriorate. i have seen properties that when we go out to the property, this is still a decent home. 200,000, 300,000. people are living there. it is and neighborhood. the time the foreclosure process completes, the property is worth $60,000. this has been vandalized and has been deteriorating all along. there's just so much we can do. what i want to introduce to the

president of one of the most aggressive land legs in the country that we have to sit here and try to find solutions. there are solutions out there. we have to get out there at one table and sit down and try to find solutions. i have been doing this for 20 years, all i'm hearing is one side of the story. there is a combination that can be achieved if we work together and i would like jim to take that there. >> thank you. hello. thank you, mr. klein. there is a wonderful article in "the economist," that runs about the incredible spirit of the japanese plan as they rebuild from the terrific tragedy that was visited upon them this year. this is the response of mayors throughout the affected prefecture's that are responsible for the rebuilding. this speaks to the power of

mayors in japan. i know having served 19 years as a member of the city councils, having a time getting along with the mayors and how important they are. there are mayors here from all over the country. virtually all of you are affected by the foreclosure crisis and the implications of the fallout. this fallout is best characterized by increased vacancies, steady vacancies in cities like cleveland, detroit, toledo, buffalo, dayton. one out of four foreclosures say that they will never get the value. in the city of cleveland, the federal bank said that the average bank takes 94-954 days

to sell and is taking at 8% to 9% of auditors value. the anger over this collapse has been understandable and justified. we have seen litigation all over the country. this is part of a regional and powerful land bank. this is taken over a thousand properties since late 2009 when there really came into business. we have taken over 200 properties per month. there are some innovations that can apply to your community as well. fannie mae is transferring all low value property in the city of cleveland directly to the

county land bank with a chant of $3,500. freddie mac is starting to transfer properties. hud is transferring all properties. wells fargo and bank of america have entered into agreements with the land bank transferring properties with a check of $7,500 which covers most of the costs. these processes have killed the flipping market in ohio because they have shut off the dusting of low value properties. there is also demolition through the revenue and generated by the sale of properties that do have value. the lack of demolition dollars is killing many of these older cities in the midwest. as i see, your new american city logo, i can tell you that you cannot envision a new american cities in many of these committees and to you take down the old dilapidated american cities. unfortunately, the money is not

there. we have the value of the advertised tom supplement. it is very well documented. values increase when occupied homes when they constructors' are removed. our inability to convince federal officials of this pressing need has continued to be a problem with the demolition dollars continue to be problematic. in ohio, we have passed the -- one other innovation will talk about briefly and one that is the for the ohio senate now. the first one is the house bill called house bill 294 which expedites the foreclosure of tax testament the properties that are vacant because of the glut of foreclosures and many of the cities that were particularly hard hit by the foreclosure crisis. even delinquent properties that have been abandoned, vacant lots, vacant structures were taking up to two years to bring to foreclosure. house bill 294. i have the some of these bills if the mayors are interested.

the second bill that is in the ohio senate was introduced this week will allow the fast track of foreclosures where the owners has for whatever reason decided to walk away from the property. again, i have a summit of the bill here but this will take the foreclosure process again and it could take to two years on these walkaway properties and reduce the time of foreclosures for six months, maybe even less. this reduces the exposure of the vacant property to criminal elements. this return to the market more quickly for resale and it gives neighborhoods a fighting chance by occupying the property more quickly or possibly going the demolition throughout. finding funds to continue this is problematic.

we can help alleviate the problem in a weak market cities. >> we have seen the end results of this proposed -- getting different traction in the country where this is absolutely taking hold and the sooner that you can take the property and put it in irresponsible hands, the more we can hold them accountable and you can make sure that this is being done correctly. i want to introduce jack -- who is on the board of directors of the mortgage bankers association and he chairs the state legislative committee for the mortgage bank association. this has been an issue that has been talked about and focus on quite extensively.

trying to focus on how does the industry get ahold of these properties and make sure that there is an entity that can handle that. >> thank you, robert. as you pointed out, i do share the state legislative regulatory committee at the national mortgage brokers association. i'm here to about my experiences and observations. i have worked for the mortgage banking industry in various roles for about 40 years. i have watched this crisis and crises before this and i see things that do and not work. one of the things that is absolutely true and you heard the statistics around it that this is important that properties move to resolutions as quickly as possible. this is also vitally important that home owners that want to retain their home find ways to retain their home. there are all lot of obstacles that are in the space that need

to be worked out. roberts said something very important. 20% of the property that he sees on by the basis and i just entering the process of already vacant and abandoned. for whatever reason, a document of the property has given up on the real estate and it is and deep. and he is the playground of the devil for -- empty is the property of the devil. lever -- whoever can do something of a resolution nature is hampered by the fact didn't have legal rights. to the extent that that takes years and that allows all of the deterioration and the shenanigans and a blight that occurs from it to happen and to exacerbate the problem. what we wanted to talk to about was the 28%. we don't have an answer to the

whole of the foreclosure crisis but we do have an answer to the 20% of the properties that are creating the largest tract in your cities. they need to be moved to the process as quickly as possible so whether it is the tax authority in the case of the tax expedition built or a property that is empty because of whatever decision that got there, that property knees to get in the hands of someone that can do things with it. when banks that are -- are a great thing that have come about to try to do resolution as arguments with nonprofits in cities for rehabilitation and placing new owners and those properties. all those options exist only after the point at which there is title and the ability to convey that is granted the person of interest. it is that time that is eating everyone's lunch on abandoned

properties that you want to talk about. i do share the state committee, we have a monthly call. we talked to people throughout the country. there's a whole group of people that get on that call. we talk about issues. this is an issue for lenders as it is for you. this is low hanging fruit and no clear solution is because people in ohio have experienced. the quicker they get the property and get it in the hands of the land bank or the demolition, this piece of property and ends the decay. we wanted to bring that model to you and tell you about it and answer your questions about it and ask that you help us convinced the legislatures that this is the right track for properties that can be proven to be abandoned.

>> if i could just add -- >> go ahead. >> no one is indicating or talking or even thinking about talking and kind of action on the property that is occupied. i was in detroit and we inspected 1000 properties. these were all low and value properties. we found was that 80% of them are still occupied. these were not the best neighborhoods. these were about 15 properties on there. some of these four vacant but they were still in the commission where they could rehab that property.

their arrest was totally demolition. nothing could be done. -- the rest was totally demolition. you could not rehab the property unless you got rid of those demolitions. no one will do this on a block that -- that has to be demolished. there are ways that we can keep them in there but we tried to keep them in there on a block that will become developed. you have the occupied ones, and the demolition. it is my opinion that all three of those need to be addressed at the same time. you will not have a rehab situation where anyone have a property if you have those that need to go. you have to get them out of the way. you need to create new american cities. >> we need to have some questions here. let's start off with the first one. >> i could not get to your first

question. >> i am the mayor of auburn, washington. i had passed the anchor of 25 years, local community bank. one of the problems we run into is going through that chain until the property can either be sold or the title change. there is a time after foreclosures of six to nine months and many of those cases there are properties that are being serviced by one bank mortgage company to the other. in the meantime, the upkeep is what is causing problems in our cities. they are becoming overground, abandoned, broken windows. we made agreements that last just as long as it is in the hands of that onewe need to havg through the banks and the organizations that allows the

upkeep of a housing during the timeframe where it is going through foreclosure. we may see five different servicing outfits at from the beginning of the foreclosure to the end, as they go through their protest operation agreement. no, >> you are right. those are challenges in the process. that is until a single entity takes possession of the property. it is a lot worse on a vacant and abandoned properties. that is the issue we are talking about. to the extent that we can shorten the time where most of hon. properties deal with that situation, the better for the people involved. there are other issues that need work. in the case of a vacant building a proper dakota the faster

remove it to resolution, the faster we solve that problem as well. what >> all of these solutions require state legislation. >> they do. it is one thing that i learned. we have to cooperate with state governments these model statutes -- one man from michigan dimension to this.

homeowner who walked with legislation -- [unintelligible] we have to engage state legislators. there is a turnover directly not related to that. but our legislators are getting up to speed. their terms expire. >> the reason we are here is the same reason we have gone to other areas of the country, engaged in this dialogue. wrot e political process, bu the most compelling legislation you can -- [unintelligible] you that the from ne

city police this is the right in answer, -- that the city believes this is the right answer, and it is something that is not controversial but seen as positive, which resonates with them. you can be a another voice advocating for this solution. it helps get the state legislatures to pay attention. >> when they have a property, they do not know who to contact.

that has been a problem for years and years. it does not cost the city one penny. we have created a data base that if they come across a problem, and i'm not saying a violation. there will be able to go in the database, put in the property address and be able to track down who the lienholder and servicer is. and which organization is responsible for the property.

i see the devastation firsthand being out in the community. we try to create tools that the city can partner and find solutions to make this work. this is a crisis. it is increasing. we are trying to find tools that we can sit down and work together and find solutions for it. . >> in the other questions? it is so good to see you again. you are doing a great job in northern ohio. we appreciate you very much.

[applause] >> thank you. >> here is what i would like to do. if we can bring up some more. if you could line up along here, i would appreciate it. >> thanks very much, mayor. we are so clear -- pleased to be here with so many community leaders here today. we of volunteers, community leaders, community citizens throughout the community.

we have an employer assisted housing program. every home purchase comes into the economy for several items. every two homes sold creates one job. it is not just about home ownership but a job creation in our communities. it makes a difference in the light of the community. america would be wise to support house and especially in different communities. we have different tools to boost the economy right in your neighborhood. why is workforce housing

important? imagine if you were a policeman, or worker in any of our communities. your salaries combined with the tight credit market is probably making it hard for you to find affordable housing near your job. it is important that those members of your communities live there and can be active citizens. there are a restaurant workers that keep our country working. this house and challenge hurts an employer's ability to attract and maintain good workers. one of the important things when they are looking into a community is that a survey their workers and wants to do business in that area.

employer assisted housing programs are an effective solution for work and housing issues. this program can help an employee become a first-time home owner. they are known to build more and be involved in the neighborhood. s workforce housing advocates, we want to be part of the solution. we are trying to provide different housing employees with

opportunities. it talks about different training that is provided that it's available. they teach workers on how to work with employers. we are a part of employees that house work groups throughout the country and look for ways that we can part with the federal government's and help on the federal level. we are approaching a new round of programs called bring workers home. there are policy forms that focus on the nature of the housing challenges. we are inviting employers throughout the area to come and talk about how each of us can benefit from employer assisted housing. some have been heroes for some of these programs. the 1 areas in wisconsin.

they created a website called wisconsin housing works. it is a resource for local government, lenders, and employment -- employment agencies around the area. i think we heard a lot of the information about secretary donna been about counseling and the importance of how that works, and education of the general home buying process and the different partnerships that can work as well. it is a resource that you can use and copy in different cities in state. there are walters in our home state of maryland that have been incredible worker housing champions. they invited a representative from the state to talk about employer assisted housing programs.

it is called live near your work program. it talks about bringing employers in to fill these vacant commercial venues and do the same for the residential properties in the area, so people can live where they work. they can be in the communities where they are working to help revitalize those areas. the maryland association recognize that if real letters do not know about these programs, they cannot tell their clients about them. we found several examples where there are success stories all across the country in alabama, mississippi, also in philadelphia, that is included

in your packet. there is wonderful employer assisted housing opportunities. there is a great program and we are trying to get an example of that in some of the housing programs. we are working hard to make sure we can increase the economy and housing affordability. any family that can afford it and if irresponsible fire in have that right to homebuyer ship. we want to encourage you to be in contact with your realtors. we want to be there as i financial partner to make this country better.

we really appreciate the opportunity to be here today. thanks. >> thanks very much. we will not take any questions you may have. being done, -- mayor? [unintelligible] >> in the baltimore area?

the city participated a little bit as well. it is important that there are different lenders in the communities. we find ways to make it work. >> thanks. any other questions? >> we are seeing a lot of foreclosures in our market. some have been very negative about home ownership about talking that it should be a five-year wait before purchasing a home. are they doing anything to offset the negative press about investing in a home?

>> one of our platform programs talks about home ownership matters. some communities are the ones that have been hit the hardest. we can focus on the different statistics. all real estate is local. 7% of all foreclosures in the country were in only 42 counties. -- 70% of all foreclosures in the country version only 42 counties. if you are in a community, contact your local organization to get those numbers. we are doing everything we can to try to provide the local statistics. many communities are having

success with the job growth or their community is not as distraught as other communities in the country. >> thank you. the we are going to move on to do mary kay leonard. she is involved with the inner city initiative. they will be engaged in a joint research partnership. the idea is for them to anger institutions for small business demint, and put a focus on job creation as a result of anger institutions. she is a wonderful person.

it is a wonderful opportunity for us to partner with. >> thank you, mr. mayor. it was a pleasure to have you at our summit during the fall in santa clara. -- san francisco. we know that it is only in partnership with you that we can do our job, which is to spark a job creation in the inner city across the country, the economically distressed areas. this is not just a sea of need, but there are real assets which can be leveraged to create jobs for the residents throughout the community in the urban areas. we believe a key to one of these assets is our anger institutions, particularly

universities and hospitals. that is why they are forming their first part of the partnership with this. i want to tell you about some of the research we have done. there is something in the packet that was handed out to you. in 66 of the largest and cities in our country, the anger institution is the largest employer. they could be doing a lot more. we work with anger institutions -- anchor institutions. the first is the concept of shared a value. there is a simple concept on the second page of the paper. the cleveland clinic cannot be

in any place but cleveland. it is tied to the fortune of that community. it is an occasion to attract staff, cities, faculty. they should be able to buy goods and services from the community. the community needs the institution for jobs, to purchase supplies and support the health and social needs of the community. in addition to this inexplicable and it is a multiple way in institution can work with the community. it is not just because it is nice to 2, but they have to work

every single day to succeed. if the winds to a shared by you, thinking about what is before the business, the institution, and a beneficial impact on the community, and then the business decision will be better for all involved and will create long- term share volume. a simple example is hiring. anchors do not often ask themselves the percentage of those hired that come from the neighborhood. another factor, one-third of the

jobs and universities can be helped by people with an associate's degree or less. so you can think about how they can leverage that. purchasing, how often does bathe anchor ask the percentage of construction jobs going to residents of the community. usually if it is tracking it, it will be significantly less than 10%. we have three in detroit that have pledged to increase their collective local spent. echoing through step by step actions to make it a reality.

many arenchors, working in your cities to try to leverage the power of your research institutions in order to grow into related businesses. let me give you the example in san diego. they pulled together businesses and universities to say, how are we going to stimulate the commercial research? the 6000 technology companies employ 40,000 people in san diego coming out of that.

-- 140,000 people in san diego coming out of that. what we are saying to these anchors is start with your own business needs. look at how to commercialize research. how do i do real-estate development? walk around that we'll let you have in the paper. how do i begin to work with others in the community to have those roles in a much more comprehensive way. that is how you get the social value in the community. we are hoping that through this

partnership, we can have a partnership with you. i know you are working with one of the anchors in some sort of a way and using it in an education reform project now. it may be working in your work force training systems. there is more you could be doing to encourage those anchors to leverage their power. i will give you one example. we are working with a new york city small business service. they are talking with their key universities like city of new york, colombia, to understand how they are currently in gauging the community, what more they think they could do, and what will encourage them to do that. there are lots of examples

coming in that we hear about, such as tax advantages. some are simpler like, we need a list of businesses around our neighborhood. the there are multiple things that will come out of these. we will convene in the fall to hopefully learn from each other. we want to create more and more of them with you. thank you. i appreciate it very much. [applause] >> thank you. we can take questions if there

are any. i want to talk briefly about what we are doing in columbus. we have two great partnerships. one is the ohio state university. it is very similar to what you have spoken about. we have an advisory council set up. our objective is a comprehensive economic development changing process, where these institutions will engage in that. hopefully we will come together on ideas. we would love to have the city of columbus engaged in this as well. >> tomorrow, our live coverage

of the republican leadership conference wraps up with presidential candidates buddy roemer and, marcia blackburn, and the rnc chairman. that is live at 12:50 p.m. eastern here on c-span. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] --2011. >> visit us at c-span.org/c ampaign2012. >> michelle bachman announced that she will be running

president next year. during a debate, she along with six other republican presidential confidence -- candidates criticized president obama's handling of the economy. this is the main chance -- manchester, new hampshire. behind me on this stage the republican candidates for president, appearing together on the same stage for the first time tonight. and tonight's debate will be different than any presidential debate you've ever seen. over the course of the next two hours, in addition to questions from myself and journalists from our partners, wmur and the

new hampshire union leader, the candidates will take questions directly from voters right here in manchester as well as from voters at town meetings taking place tonight all across new hampshire. so let's get right to it and meet the candidates. we've asked for no opening statements. however, we will continue a tradition from our past new hampshire debates to ask each candidate in one short sentence, hopefully five, maybe six or seven second to introduce themselves to the voters of new hampshire and the united states of america. let me begin with an example. pime john king with cnn. i'm honored to be your moderator tonight and thrilled to be back in red sox nation. [cheers and applause] let's start with senator rick santorum. >> hello, new hampshire. time rick santorum and i served 12 years representing pennsylvania in the united states senate. but i also have substantial executive experience. making the tough decisions of balancing budgets and cutting spending. karen and i are parents of seven children. [applause]

congresswoman. >> my name is michelle bachmann and i'm a former tax litigation attorney and a businesswoman. we started our own successful company. i'm also a member of the united states congress. i'm a wife of 33 years. i've had five children, and we are the proud faster parents of 23 great children and it's a thrill to be here tonight in the live free or die state. thank you. [applause] >> i'm newt gingrich, former speaker of the house and when 14 million americans are out of work, we need a new president to end the obama depression. [applause] >> governor. >> i'm mitt romney. and it's an honor to be back at st. anselm and hopefully i'll get it right this year and appreciate to be with you and welcome my wife and i have five sons as you know.

five daughters in law and 16 grandkids and most important thing in my life is to make shir their future is bright and america is always known as itself hope of the earth. thank you. [applause] >> i'm congressman ron paul. and i've been elected to the congress 12 times from texas. before i went into the congress, i delivered babies for a delivering and delivered 4,000 babies. now i would like to be known and defend the title that i am the champion of liberty, and i detched the constitution. thank you. -- and i defend the constitution thank you. [applause] >> i'm tim pawlenty. i'm a husband, my wife, mary, and i have been married for 23 years. i'm the father of two beautiful daughters, hannah and mara and i'm a neighbor and running for president of the united states because i love america. and like you i'm concerned about its future. i've got the experience and the leadership and the results to lead it to a better place.

[applause] >> i'm herman cain. i am not a politician. i am a problem solver. with over 40 years of business and executive experience, father of two, grandfather of three, and i'm here tonight because it's not about us, it's about those grandkids. happy to be here in new hampshire. [applause] you'll get to know the candidates as the night goes on. our rules are straightforward. each candidate will be given one minute to answer our leadup questions. at my discretion i may ask other candidates to weigh in on each topic. candidates will get about 30 seconds to answer those followup questions and we're on the honor system. no bells, whistles, you won't see any flashing lights up here. if they're running over time

i'll try to remind them it's time to move on and hope some of the answers will be short, a sentence, maybe just one word. we can hope, right? we've also asked the candidates to answer the questions that they're asked rather than the question they might have wished to be asked. that's enough. that's enough for me tonight. let's get straight to the people of new hampshire. our first question comes from a voter up in plymouth, also there, new hampshire union leader's tom fahey. tom? >> thank you, john. i'm here with mr. marquez serling. a retired professor from plymouth university and he's got a question about jobs. >> yes. mr. gingrich said that our 14 million people unemployed. my question is this -- the democrats say that the republicans don't have any plans to create jobs and jobs in the private sector, not in the government jobs. i would like to know what are

those plans? >> mr. cain, let me start with you tonight. and be as specific as you can. i hope i don't have to repeat this throughout the night. what would you do as president of the united states? to create jobs? >> the thing we need to do is to get this economy boosted. this economy is stalled. it's like a train on the tracks with no engine. and the administration has simp had i been putting all of this -- simply putting all of this money in the caboose. we need an engine in the private sector, lower the capital gains tax rate to zero and spend taxes on repatriated profits and make them permanent. uncertainty is killing this economy. this is the only way we're going to get this economy moving and that's to put the right fuel in the engine which is the private sector. >> let me come down to this. senator santorum, you said you have executive experience and your senate experience. governor pawlenty laid out an economic plan, a lot of tax cuts in that plan. some economists said he had some unrealistic expectations and you could grow the economy nor 5% and 5% a year and 5% a

year, is that possible or too optimistic for the american people who want help but don't want to be misled? >> we need a president that's snick and pro-growth agenda. i won't comment on 5% or 4%. we need an economy that's unshackled. what's happened in this administration is they have passed an owe preff policy and regulation after obamacare first and foremost nt the owe preffness of that bill on -- oppressiveness of that bill and anyone who wants to invest to get they kind of return. when you see the regulations that are going to be put on business, when you see the taxation, throw on top of that what this president has done on energy. the reason we're seeing this second dent is because of energy prices and this president has put a stop sign against oil drilling, against any kind of exploration offshore or in alaska. we need to drill and create energy jobs, just like we're doing by the way. in pennsylvania. where we're doing 3,000 wells this year for gas and gas prices are down, natural gas prices are down as a result. >> try to ask all of you to

keep it to 30 seconds so we can get more in. governor pawlenty, answer the critics. and 5% every year unrealistic. and where is the proof, where is the proof that just cutting taxes will create jobs? if that were true, why during the bush years after the big tax cut where were the jobs? >> well, my plan involves a whole plan, not just cutting taxes. we're proposing to cut taxes and reduce regulation, speed up the pace of government. and to make sure that we have a pro-growth agenda. this president is a declinist. he views america as one of equals around the world. we're not the same as portugal. we're not the same as argentina. and this idea that we can't have 5% growth in america is hogwash. it's a defeatist attitude. if china can have 5% growth and brazil can have 5% growth, then the united states of america can have 5% growth. and i don't spep this notion that we're going -- don't accept this notion that we're going to be average or anemic. i have a 5% growth target and cuts taxes and cuts spending. we need to fix regulation and

have a pro-american energy policy. we need to fix health care policy and if you do those things as i've proposed, including cut spending, you'll get this economy moving. a private economy by shrinking -- >> i don't want to do too much of this because we have to entrunt to get more people in. is 5% overly optimistic and is it fair to compare the united states economy, a fully developed economy, to the chinese economy, which is still in many ways developing? >> tim has the right instincts. which is he recognizes that what this president has done has slowed the economy. he didn't create the recession. but he made it worse. and longer. and now we have more chronic long-term unemployment than this country has ever seen before. 20 million people out of work. stopped looking for work or part-time jobs that need full-time jobs. we got housing prices continuing to decline. and we have foreclosures at record levels. this president has failed. and he's failed at a time when the american people counted on him to create jobs and get the economy going. and instead of doing that, he delegated the stimulus to nancy

pelosi and harry reid. and then he did what he wanted to do, card check, cap-and-trade, obamacare, reregulation, i spent my life in the private sector. 25 years. as i went around the world, this is arne topic. -- is an important topic. how to get jobs going in this country and obama has done it wrong and thotion are in the right wheel house. >> a poll in the "boston globe," 54% of republican voters in this state say they're willing to have higher taxes on the wealth to bring down the deficit. are they wrong? >> the question is would it in fact increase jobs or kill jobs? the reagan recovery which i participated in passing in seven years created for this current economy the equivalent of 25 million new jobs, raised federal revenue by $800 billion a year, in terms of the current economy, and clearly worked. an historic fact. the obama administration is an anti-jobs, anti-business, anti-american energy,

destructive force and we shouldn't talk about what we do in 2013. the congress this year, this next week, ought to repeal the dodd-frank bill and repeal sarbanes oxley and create jobs right now because for those 14 million americans this is a depression now. >> the speaker just said, congresswoman, repeal dodd-frank. answer the american out there that i don't like all of the details but after what happened in 2007 and 2008, i don't want wall street to not have somebody looking at them watching what they're doing. >> well, i'm looking for an answer to that question because i sbuchede the repeal bill to -- introduced the repeal bill to repeal dodd frank because an over the top bill that will lead to more job loss rather than job creation. but before i fully answer that, i just want to make an announcement here for you, john, on cnn. i filed today, my paperwork to seek the office of the presidency of the united states today. and i'll very soon be making my formal announcement. so i wanted you to be the first to know. >> i appreciate that.

[applause] if you're out there and congresswoman bachmann had not taken that other step and other candidates had taken it and i'm sure they welcome you to the fray. let's continue the conversation. i want to come to congressman paul. you're all here saying the president of the united states is making the economy worse. has he done one thing, has he done one thing right when it comes to the economy in this country? >> well, that's a tough question. no, no. i can't think of anything. but may i ask -- answer the question that you alluded to before about whether or not 5% is too optimistic. no, there's nothing wrong with -- setting a goal of 5% or 10% or 15% if you have a free market economy. we're trying to unwind a keynesian bubble that's gone on for 70 years. and you're not going to touch this problem until you liquidate the bad debt and the malinvestment and go back to work. but you have to have sound money and you have to recognize how we got into trouble and we got into trouble because we had

a financial bubble and it's caused by the federal reserve. you don't look at monetary policy. we will continue the trend of the last decade. we haven't even -- we haven't developed any new jobs in the last decade. as a matter of fact, we've had 30 million new people and no new jobs. it's because the people don't understand monetary policy and central economic planning. free markets will give you 10% or 15% growth or whatever and will not have to turn it off because you think it will cause inflation. it doesn't work that way. >> one minister time. we -- one more time. shorten up the followup answers if you can. another voter with a question. >> thank you, john. i'm here with sylvia smith. she's from littleton. and she is a freelance journalist who's written about the health care industry. she has a question about health care. >> yes. as a journalist who's written frequently about health care and medicine for both newspapers and for corporate

publications, i'm very concerned about the overreach of the massive health care legislation that was passed last year. my question is what would each candidate do, what three steps would they take to defund obamacare and repeal it as soon as possible? thank you. >> congresswoman bachmann, let's start with you on that. >> sylvia, thank you for that great question. i was the very first member of congress to introduce the full repeal of obamacare. i'll make a promise to everyone watching tonight as president of the united states, i will not rest until i repeal obamacare. it's a promise. take it to the bank. cash or check. i'll make sure that happens. this is the symbol and the signature issue of president obama during his entire tenure. and this is a job killer, sylvia. the c.b.o., the congressional budget office, has said that obamacare will kill 800,000

jocks. what could the president be thinking by passing a bill like this, knowing full well it will kill 800,000 jobs? senior citizens get this more than any other segment of our population. because they know in obamacare, the president of the united states took away $500 billion, a half trillion dollars, out of medicare, shifted it to obamacare to pay for younger people. and senior citizens who have the most to lose in obamacare. >> governor romney, just yesterday, governor pawlenty who is to your left on the stage tonight, called your massachusetts plan, which you know has become a focal point of the criticism in this campaign from your friends here, obamney care. is that a fair comparison? >> if i'm elected president i will repeal obamacare. just as michelle indicated. and also on my first day in office if i'm lucky enough to have that office, i will grant a waiver to all 50 states from

obamacare. now, there's some similarities and there's some big differences. obamacare spends a trillion dollars. if it were perfect, and it's not perfect, it's terrible, we can't afford more federal spending. secondly, it raises $500 billion in taxes. third, obamacare takes $500 billion out of medicare and funds obamacare. we of course didn't do that. and finally, ours was a state plan, a state solution, and if people don't like it in our state, they can change it. that's the nature of why states are the right place for this type of responsibility. and that's why i introduced a plan to repeal obamacare and replace it with a state centric program. >> governor, you just heard the governor rebut your characterization obamneycare. >> first to sylvia, she has put her finger on one of the most important issues facing the country which is president obama stood before the nation in 2008 and said he promised to do health care reform, focused on cost containment, along with

republican republicans. >> the question, governor, was why obamneycare? >> i'll get to that. >> 30 seconds, governor. >> another example of him breaking his promise and has to be held accountable. and in order to prosecute the case against president obama, you have to be able to show that you've got a better plan and a different plan. we took a different approach in minnesota. we didn't use top-down government mandates and individual requirements from government. we created market alternatives and empowered consumers. i think that's the way to fix health care in the united states of america. >> and you don't want to address why you dalled governor romney's -- called governor romney's obamneycare? >> the question was what were the similarities between the two and i cited president obama's own words that he looked to massachusetts as a blueprint or a guide when he designed obamacare. >> you chose -- you said were you asked a question but you chose those words. and so one of my questions is why would you choose those words and the comfort of the sunday show studio and your rival is standing right there.

if it was obamneycare on fox news sunday why is it not obamneycare standing right there? >> president obama is the person i quoted saying he looked to massachusetts for designing his program. he's the one who said it's a blueprint and that he merged the two programs and so using the term obamneycare was a reflection of the president's statements that he designed obamacare on massachusetts. >> the president will eat those words in -- and wish he hadn't put them out there and i can't wait to debate them and if you did look at what we did in massachusetts, why didn't you give me a call and ask what worked? and what didn't? and i would have told you, mr. president, that what you're doing will not work. it's -- a huge power grab by the federal government. it's going to be massively expensive. raising taxes. cutting medicare. it's wrong for america. and that's why there's an outpouring across the nation to say no to obamacare. and i'm delighted to be able to

debate him on that. >> mr. speaker, and maybe you do have to consider a mandate. you've been very open to the individual mandate. and it has become at least at the moment a litmus test in this primary. should it be? >> yes, it should be. if you explore the mandate which even the heritage foundation at one time looked at, when you get into a mandate, it not only ends up with unconstitutional powers, it allows the government to define virtually everything and if you can do it for health care you can do it for everything in your life. and therefore we should not have a mandate. but i want to answer sylvia at a different level. this campaign cannot be only about the presidency. we need to pick up at least 12 seats in the u.s. senate and 30 or 40 more seats in the house because if you are serious about repealing obamacare, you have to be serious about building a big enough majority in the legislative branch that you could actually on the first 90 days pass the legislation. so i just think it's very important to understand it's not about what one person in america does. it's about what the american people do and that requires a

senatorial majority as well as a presidency. >> we'll have more time to discuss health care. let's get down to the floor. jennifer, a question from a voter. >> terry, granite state born and bread? >> yes. >> what's your question for the candidates tonight. >> i'm a new hampshire native and been an active republican for years. from a town committee chairman, republican chairman of merrimack county and vice chairman to 2004 delegate for president bush. my question is how will you convince myself? i'm not a libertarian republican. i'm not a tea party republican. i'm just a mainstream republican. and we need both the independents and mainstream republicans to win in november. how can you convince me and assure me that you'll bring a balance and won't be torn from one side or farks in the party and have to have a -- or faction in the party and have to have a balanced approach to governing to solve our problems? >> if you look at my record,

i'm someone who's actually accomplished a lot on big issues. take for example welfare reform. i was in the united states senate. and actually at the direction of newt gingrich i was on the ways and means committee and i drafted the contract with america welfare reform bill. i was -- it was considered this extreme measure. that extreme measure we ended up winning an election and getting those seats and that was the starting point. and i had managed that bill in the united states senate because i cared about the dignity of every person. i didn't believe that poverty was the ultimate disability. i believed that people could work and they could succeed. and we brought people together. i got 70 votes to end a federal entitlement. to end a federal entitlement which is what paul ryan has proposed for medicaid and proposed for food stamps and proposed for other welfare programs. we did it. we set the template and i led and got bipartisan support to do it. >> can i ask you quickly, that wasn't part of the question but are you concerned about the influence. tea party? >> not at all. i think the tea party is a great backstop for america. i love it when people hold up

this constitution and say we have to live by what our founders laid out for this country. it is absolutely essential that we have that backbone to the republican party going into this election. >> i know you agree, congresswoman. so help the gentleman. address his concerns that the tea party somehow and the influence of the tea party somehow pushes him out. >> terry, what i've seen in the tea party, i'm the chairman. tea party caucus in the house of representatives and what i've seen is unlike how the media has tried to wrongly and grossly portray the tea party, the tea party is really made up of disaffected democrats. independents, people who have never been political a day in their life. people who are libertarians, republicans. it's a wide swath of america coming together. i think that's why the left fears it so much. because there are people who simply want to take the country back. they want the country to work again and there's no question, terry, this election will be about economics. it will be about how will we create jobs, how will we turn

the economy around? a pro-growth economy? that's a great story for the republicans to tell. president obama can't tell that story. his report card right now has a big failing grade on it. but republicans have an awesome story to tell. we need every one of us in the three legged stool, we need the peace through strength republicans, we need the fiscal conservatives and the social conservatives. we need everybody to come together. because we're going to win. just make no mistake about it. i want to announce tonight, president obama is a one-term president. [applause] we'll win. >> i'm being polite so far. but mr. cain, as somebody who has no elected experience, this gentleman's question, if you were to be the nominee and you associate yourself with the tea party, politics is about math and coalition building. and a candidate who loses a mainstream republican as he describes himself might not win this state in november. might not win a big state like pennsylvania in november. and address the concern of the

gentleman who seems to think that at least some people in the tea party maybe in their dissatisfaction, their anger at the president, are too negative and too critical? >> they are not too negative and not too critical. as a businessman, one of the first things that you do which has allowed me to be successful throughout my career is make sure you work on the right problem. if we make sure we work on the right problem, i will surround myself with the right people. and then we will put together the right plans that i'm going to take it to the people. i will be a president to do what's right, not what is politically right. so if the other parties disagrees but the american people embrace those common sense solutions, that's how we get things done. so those experiences in the business world, managing large organizations, with a very diverse extentcy are the same skills -- constituency, are the same skills that can get people involved and not exclude the people like this administration has done. >> i want to remind the candidates, and people in the audience, cnn is hosting a tea party debate september 12. watch how this plays out.

the tea party was vocal in 2010 and we'll see how much the influence is in 2012. let's continue our conversation with the voters of new hampshire. jean macken of wmur is in hancock with a voter question. >> thanks very much, john. welcome to the hancock inn and i'm with mike potinsky. small business owner from harrisville, new hampshire. what question do you have tonight? >> for the candidates i would like to know how they plan on returning manufacturing jobs to the united states. >> congressman paul, start with that one. >> pretty important because everything we've done in the last 20 or 30 years we've exported our jobs. and when you have a reserve currency of the world, and you abuse it you export money, that becomes the main export. so it goes with the money. you have to invite capital. the way you get capital into a country, you have to have a strong currency, not a weak currency. today, the deliberate job of the federal reserve to weaken our currency. we should invite capital back. first thing is we have trillions of dollars at least

over a trillion dollars of u.s. money made overseas but it stays over there because they bring it home they get taxed. if you want to, we need to get the fed to quit printing the money and if you want capital, you have to entice those individuals to repatriate their money and take the taxes and deregulate and detax, to advise people to go back to work again. but as long as we run a program of deliberately weakening our currency, our jobs will go overseas. and that is what's happened for a good many years, especially in the last decade. >> governor pawlenty, dorgs the congressman have it -- does the congressman have it right? >> we need to restore manufacturing in this country. and i grew up in a meat packing town and a manufacturing town. i was in a union for six or seven years. i understand what it's like to see the blue collar communities and the struggles that they've had when manufacturing leaves. so i've seen that first hand. but number one, we got to have fair trade. and what's going on right now is not fair. i'm for a fair and open trade.

but i'm not for being stupid and i'm not for being a chump. and we have individuals and organizations and countries around this world who are not following the rules when it comes to fair trade. we need a stronger president and somebody who's going to take on those issues. number two we need to make the costs and burdens of manufacturing in this country lower. we're asking them to climb the mountain with a big backpack full of rocks on their back and we have to take the rocks out. one of them's obamacare. and met somebody in arizona the other day who is moving his ole company out of the country just because of obamacare. the taxes are too high. the regulations are too high. the permitting is too slow and the message everywhere around this country from business leaders large and small including manufacturing is get the government off my back. as president, i will. >> how about to help workers, congressman, get ready for the new jobs in manufacturing? should the united states government, the federal government, be helping community colleges with their vocational training programs and things like that? >> the united states federal government and the states have done numerous job training programs over the years.

with mixed results. this is what we need to do to turn job creation around and bring manufacturing back to the united states. what we need to do is today, the united states has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. i'm a former federal tax lawyer. i've seen the devastation. we got to bring that tax rate down substantially so that we're among the lowest in the industrialized world. here's the other thing. every time the liberals get into office, they pass an omnibus bill of big spending projects. what we need to do is pass the mother of all repeal bills. but it's the repeal bill that will get a jobs-killing regulation and i would begin with the e.p.a. because there is no other agency like the e.p.a. that should really be renamed the job-killing organization of america. >> i'll get you -- and show people, we're asking people who are watching at home, also to tell us on facebook and twitter what concerns them. if you watch up here and take a look, three most important issues this election season regardless of party, jobs, the jobless, and whether you want a

job. senator santorum, your state of pennsylvania, big industrial state that's struggled in recent years. >> we still make things there and represented the steel valley of pittsburgh when i was in the congress. what i learned from growing newspaper butler, pennsylvania, steel town, -- up in butler, pennsylvania, steel town, the broad middle america when we had lots of manufacturing. that's hour the wealth from those who create the jobs get down and we've been outsourcing those jobs. so what we need to do is a lot of what was said i would add one or thing that i'm specifically proposing. we need to cut the capital gains tax in half. and for manufacturers, we need to get a five-year window where we cut it to zero. we want to encourage people to set up jobs here in america. take that r&b credit and take that innovation and then invest that money here to create that broad middle of america and have that wealth really trickle down. >> let's stay on jocks and the economy -- on jobs and the economy. a question related to this on the floor. >> good evening, candidates. governor pawlenty, a possibility exists that new hampshire could soon become the 23rd state to pass right to

work legislation. unions don't like it because they feel making membership voluntary would weaken organized labor. and you've submitted a protest in your home state of minnesota. where do you fall on right to work and would you support a federal right to work law? >> we live in the united states of america. and people shouldn't be forced to belong or be a member in any organization and the government has no business telling people what group you have to be a member of or not. i support strongly right to work legislation. [applause] like i said, for much of his life my dad was a teamster truck driver. my brothers and sisters, many -- i was in a union and we grew up in a blue collar thoun and i understand these issues. my family were reagan democrats. most of them listen to rush limbaugh actually. but the point is i understand these issues. but we don't have a government tell us what organizations or associations we should be in. we tell the government what to do. >> mr. speaker, i assume you

agree. and you come into the conversation, one of the crisms, you tell me -- criticisms, you it will me whether this is fair, as you watch these governors, some people say there's a tone about it and trying to demonize public employees or union workers. >> it's a totally different question. the question was asked right to work. and one of the things the congress should do immediately is defund the national labor relations board which has gone into south carolina to punish boeing which wants to put 8,000 american jobs in south carolina by fundamentally eliminating right to work at the national labor relations board. that's a real immediate threat from the obama administration to limb nailt right to work -- to eliminate right to work. and i think fundamental a&m it's the wrong direction. i do hope new hampshire has right to work. keep it at the state level and they send a signal to the remaining states don't be stupid. why would you want to be california's unemployment level when you could be texas' unemployment level or north dakota? and if you believe in the 10th amendment, we ought to let the states learn from each other.

the right to work states are creating a lot more jobs today than the hasme unionized states. -- the heavily unionized states. the public employee unions are a different issue. >> as a businessman who says your strength in in campaign as someone who created jobs, the question is right to work. >> i do believe that the states should have the right, i believe in right to work. and i hope that new hampshire they who get it passed. and i agree with the speaker and the others who believe that if the federal government continues to do the kinds of things that this administration is trying to do, through the back door, through national labor relations board, that's killing our free market system. and the free market system is what made this economy great. and we have to keep the free market system strong. >> a lot more ground to cover with hour candidates. we're about to take our first break of the evening. we will have several. more ground to cover and more domestic policy and a lot of foreign policy. who you might want as your next commander chief if you choose to make president obama a one-term president and learn a little bit more about these candidates and their personalities. i'll borrow something from my

sports fan experience. every time we go to break or come back from break i'll ask a candidate one at a time a question i'll call this or that. i give them a choice, these are not serious political issues but to show a little bit of the personal side of our candidates. senator santorum, i'll start with you. >> thank you. >> of course. >> leno or conan. >> probably leno. but i don't want either, sorry. >> that's the answer is the answer. facebook, twitter, send us your questions or analysis and some exclusive content. get your smart phone ready. i'll explain that ahead. we'll be right back in just a moment. welcome back to our republican debate at st. anselm in manchester, new hampshire. one of the things we are very

eager to do throughout the campaign is to votch you at home and use technology and innovation. if you have a smart phone look at your screen right now. if you hughesed it before an electronic code on your screen. snap a picture of that chode and get some exclusive access about our debates. and behind the scenes video, some analysis and content. we'll do this throughout the debate and throughout the campaign. now we're going to get back to questioning. our seven republican candidates for president. right before the break we did this thing called this or or that. senator santorum, doesn't stay up very late. a parent. i understand that. he said if he had to he would pick leno over conan. congresswoman bachmann. elvis or johnny cash? >> that's really tough. both. both. >> both? >> yeah. >> i got christmases elvis on my ipod. >> all right. we know what's on the congresswoman's ipod. the union leader, john destosis and has a question. >> congressman paul, this is for you. federal government assists many

industries. green jobs, the auto industry, research and development, subsidies. given the current state of the economy, what standards do you have if any for government assistance to private enterprise? >> well, there shouldn't be any government assistance to private enterprise. it's not morally correct and not legal. it's bad economics. it's not part of the constitution. if you allow an economy to thrive, they'll decide how r&d works or where they invest their money. but when the politicians get in and direct things you get the malinvestment, and do the dumb things and might build too many houses. and they might not direct their research through the right places. so no, it's a fallacy to think that government and politicians and bureaucrats are smart enough to manage the economy. so it shouldn't happen. >> these are the republicans, the conservative candidates, every time you applaud, we would expect to get an answer less government is better. one of the questions we want to explore tonight is when, when do you reach that extraordinary moment where the government might want to do something?

mr. cain, i'll ask you. you're a businessman who at least supported the tarp program. former senator judd gregg was one of the architects of that program during the late hours of the bush administration and you said we needed to do something drastic because we were facing a very drastic situation. >> i said financial meltdown and concluded on my own we needed to do something drastic, yes. when the concept of tarp was first presented to the public, i was willing to go along with it. but then when the administration starts to implement it on a discretionary basis, picking winners and losers, and also directing funds to general motors and others that had nothing to do with the financial system, that's where i totally disagreed. we should -- the government should not be selecting winners and losers and i don't believe in this concept of too big to fail. if they fail the free market will figure out who's going to pick up the piecings. >> let's stay on this topic. let's bring in tom fahey into the conversation. he has a question.

tom? >> thank you, john. i wanted to ask governor romney about the auto industry. general motors and chrysler have rebounded since the obama administration bailed them out. bankruptcy is no longer a threat. would you say the bailout program was a success? >> the bailout program was not a success. because the bailout program waste add lot of money. about $17 billion was used unnecessarily. when the c.e.o.'s of the auto companies went to washington, asking for money from washington, i wrote an op-ed and said the right process for these companies is not a bailout. not a big check from washington. but instead letting these enterprises go through bankruptcy, re-emerge and getting rid of the necessary costs that they had, the excessive debt and re-emerge and that would be the preferred way for them to be able to get on their feet again. instead, the bush administration, and the obama administration, wrote checks to the auto industry, ultimately, they went to the very bankruptcy process that i suggested from the beginning.

but the big difference was $17 billion was wasted. and then president obama given that money was able to put his hands on the scales of justice and give the company to the u.a.w. there's a perception in this country that government knows better than the private sector. that washington and president obama have a better view for how an industry ought to be run. well, they're wrong. the right way for america to create jobs is to keep government in its place and to allow the private sector and the energy and passion of the american people to create a brighter future for our kids and for ourselves. >> let me read you an op-ed piece you wrote. if general motors, ford and chrysler get the bailout you can kiss the american automotive business goodbye. from a profit standpoint they're doing well. kiss goodbye and you disagree with the policy. kigs the industry goodbye. were you wrong? >> no i wasn't wrong because if you read the rest of the op-ed piece what they need to do is go through a bankruptcy process to shed unnecessary costs. if they just get paid, check

after check from the federal government, they're going to be locked in with high u.a.w. costs, legacy costs, they'll never be able to get on their feet. they have to go through bankruptcy. and it turned out that that is what they did. and the head of the u.a.w., he wrote an op-ed piece saying romney is wrong and the government has to give them a check. that's the wrong way to go. use the process of law, use the process of american ingenuity. don't have government try and guide this economy. >> is there anyone here who given that prospect and president bush started the program, given that process, anyone here who would have stepped in and say i don't want to do this but this is the backbone of american manufacturing and i'll do something? >> no. we should not have had tarp or the auto bailout. they have could have gone flow a structured -- could have gone flew a structured bankruptcy without government. if they would have gone through the orderly bankruptcy process and come out in the same place only we would have kept the integrity of the bankruptcy process without the government

putting its fingers into it. >> quickly, please. >> john, i was in the middle of this debate. i was behind closed doors with secretary paulson when he came and made the extraordinary never before made request to congress. give us a $700 billion blank check with no strings attached. and i fought behind closed doors against my own party on tarp. it was the wrong vote then. it's continued to be a wrong vote since then. sometimes that's what you have to do. you have to take principle over your party. >> let's continue the conversation. but we'll come back to this if we have to. jean in hancock has a question. >> thanks, john. this question goes out to speaker gingrich. next month, the space shuttle program will retire after 30 years and last year, president obama effectively killed government-run space flight to the international space station. and wants to turn it over to private companies. in the meantime, u.s. astronauts would ride russian

spacecraft at a cost of $50 million to $63 million a seat. what role should the government play in future space exploration? >> well, sadly, and i say this sadly because i'm a big fan of going into space, and i actually worked to get the shuttle program to skisme at one point. -- to is your cycle at one point. nasa is an example of why bureaucracy can't innovate. all the money we spent at nasa since we planneded on the moon and applied that money for incentives to the private sector we would today have a permanent station on the moon, three or four permanent stations in space, and a new generation of lift vehicles and instead, what we have had is bureaucracy after bureaucracy after bureaucracy and fail pure after failure. i think it's a tragedy. younger americans should have the excitement of they to could be part of reaching out to a new frontier. you asked about limits because we're a developed country. we're not a developed country.

the scientific future is going to open up and we're at the beginning of a whole new cycle of extraordinary opportunities and unfortunately, nasa is standing in the way of it. when nasa ought to be getting out of the way and encouraging the private sector. >> is there any candidate who who say no, this is vital to america's identity, this is vital to america's innovation, i want the government to stay in the lead here when it comes to manned space flight? >> i think the space program has played a vital role for the united states of america. i think in the context -- >> going forward. >> in the context of our budget challenges it can be refocused and repriorityized but we shouldn't eliminate the space program. we can partner with private companies to scale it back and we shouldn't eliminate the space program. >> you mischaracterized me. i didn't say end the space program. we built the transcontinental railroads without a national department of railroads. i said you can get into space faster and better and more effectively and more creatively if you decentralize it and got spout of washington and cut out the bureaucracy.

it's not about getting rid of the space program. it's about getting to a real space program that works. >> i think fundamentally there are some people and most of them are democrats, but not all, who really believe that the government knows how to do things better than the private sector. >> let's go down to the floor. >> they happen to be wrong. >> we'll continue on the role of government. >> and governor pawlenty, i would like to go back to you. housing, there are about a million -- a million homes in the hands of banks and lenders and millions of more homeowners are upside down. and owe more than their home is worth. what would you or your administration do to try to right the housing ship? >> the first thing we need to do is get the government out of crony capitalism. we have in alliance between big government, big unions, and certain big bailout businesses. and as congressman paul said a few moments ago we had politicians in congress trying to micromanage the housing market. and they created a bubble and they created the mess. and now we have all these innocent bystanders, the good people of the united states of america, many middle income and

modest income people who have been detch stated by this. the market is going to have to adjust. the programs that president obama has put forward haven't really worked. they've been a failure. they've been slow. they haven't really solved the problem. but the best thing that we can do is get the economy moving again. and it's not going to happen by growing government. his way failed. we've got to get the private sector going. we have to have people starting businesses. growing businessings. building things. starting places of employment. this is how we're going to get money in people's pockets and get them financially stablized. >> congressman, continue the conversation. and don't make it just about foreclosuers. this is an interesting topic of discussion, especially when money is scarce and you got to start cutting. it's a question of priorities. what should the government be doing? and maybe what should the government be doing in a better economy that it can't do now? talk about foreclosuers. and tell me something if you were president and dealing with it in your first few weeks i might like to do this but can't afford to do this, what goes? be specific as you can. >> i would want to do much less

much sooner. the government shouldn't be involved. when you take the bankruptcies, we've been doing a whole lot. we've been propping them up and have the federal reserve buy all the ill liquid assets that are worthless and stick it to the taxpayers and those who made money when the bubble blew up they got bailed out. corrections are good. the malinvestment and the bubbles that are caused by the federal reserve and the government and we keep propping it up. and that's why this is going -- was predictable it would come. predictable it lasted three years and predictable as long as we do what we're doing in washington it will last another 10 years. we're doing what we did in the depression and doing what the japanese have done. you need to get the prices of housing done to clear the market. but they're trying to keep the prices up and actually have programs in washington where stimulating housing. clear the market and we can all go back to work. but what we're doing now is absolutely wrong. >> let me give you another topic the people say the federal government is too involved and that's food safety. you worked in the business. you see the e. coli scare that's going on in europe right now and trying to cut money.

the f.d.a., other agencies get involved are in front of you. what do you do? >> you look inside the f.d.a. and determine whether or not it needs to be streamlined. and maybe it does. >> should the federal government be doing food safety inspections? >> the federal government should be doing food safety, yes. but the point about what we need to do to help the housing market. we don't just have one problem. we have a crisis of the three e's. we've got the economy. entitlement spending. and energy. we've got to simultaneously work on all of those so we can put 13 million people to 14 million people back to work. that's what we got to do. it's not a single issue. it's the multiplicity and compounding effect of those three critical problems. >> and i was just in joplin, missouri, and been in mississippi and louisiana and tennessee. and other communities dealing with whether the tornadoes, the flooding and worse. fema is about to run out of money and some people say do it on a case by case basis and some people say maybe we're learning a lesson here the states should take on more of this role.

how do you deal with something like that? >> absolutely. every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. and if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that's even better. instead of thinking in the federal budget, what we should cut, we should ask ourselves the opposite question, what should we keep? we should take all of what we're doing at the federal level and stay what are the things we're doing that we don't have to do? and those things we got to stop doing. because we're borrowing. 1.6 trillion more this year than we're taking in. we cannot -- we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. it is simply immoral. in my view. for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids. knowing full well that we'll all be dead and gone before it's all paid off. makes no sense at all. >> we need to go to another break. the candidates want to get in on these and other issues. and remember at home if you have a question on facebook send it to us and a question on

twitter send it to us. you also can use your smart phone to get some exclusive information. we're playing a little bit of an exercise called this or that to learn more about hour candidates. conan and leno and elvis or johnny cash. mr. speaker, dancing with the stars or american doll? -- american idol? >> american high dom. -- american idol. >> stay with us. [applause] >> welcome back to our republican debate here in the first in the nation primary of new hampshire. and we are told a trending topic on twitter. ladies and gentlemen, i want you to look up there in just a bit and we'll get to some of these questions because they're good questions, privatization,

relations with the middle east, what industries in middle america and watching in debate unnold. before we go and out of every break we're doing an exercise called this or that to learn more about our candidates. the speaker had no hesitation american idol over dancing with the stars. congressman paul, blackberry or iphone? >> blackberry. >> blackberry it is. we're going to continue our conversation now. we want to bring up a very important issue. and all of you will want to weigh in on and that's the debate about entitlements. mr. dayne mentioned those -- cain mentioned those and specifically medicare. we got josh mcelvin with a question. >> i have dr. paul cohen who you've been running a family practice in manchester for how long? >> 27 years. >> nice work. what's your question, sir? >> as a member of the baby boomer generation, i've been contributing to medicare through payroll taxes for over 30 years. how do you propose to keep medicare financially solvent for the next 50 years and beyond? >> let's start with dr. paul on

this one. >> well, it's not solvent and won't be solvent. if you're an average couple, and you pay your entire amount into medicare, you would have put $140,000 into it. in your yoif lime -- in your lifetime you will take out three times that much. arithmetic tells you it's not solvent so we're up against the wall on that. so it can't be made solvent. it has to change. we have to have more competition in medicine. and i would think that if we don't want to cut any of the medical benefits for children or the elderly, because we have drawn so many -- so dependent on the government, if you want to work a transition, you have to cut a lot of money. and that's why i argue the case that this money ought to be cut out of foreign welfare and foreign militarism and corporate welfare and the military industrial complex. then we might have enough money to tide people over. but some revamping has to

occur. what we need is competition. we need to get a chance for the people to opt out of the system. just -- you talk about opt being out of obamacare, why can't we opt out of the whole system and take care of ourselves? >> let's continue the conversation. governor pawlenty? congressman paul says opt out. congressman ryan says squeeze savings across the federal budget and a lot out of medicare to -- he doesn't like this whord but to turn it into a voucher program and instead of a federal government the government gives you money and you can go in the marketplace and shop nor it. is that the right way to do it? >> let me address the doctor. doctor, you said in your question that you paid in your whole life and people have made plans, particularly people on the program now or close to eligibility. we should keep our word to people that we've made promises to. so under my proposal, if you're on the program, or near the program, we'll keep our word. but we also have to recognize what congressman paul just said. there was a recent report out that the premiums for medicare and the payroll withholding are only paying about half the

program. so it is not financially solvent. we have to fix it. we have to reform it. i'm going to have my own plan, john, that will feature some differences from congressman ryan's plan. it will feature performance pay rather than just volume pay to hospitals and clinics and providers. it will allow medicare to continue as an option but it will be priced against other options that we're going to offer people as well. some other things. i also said if it was a choice between barack obama's plan of doing nothing and the president of the united states, got one of the worst crisis financially in the country and you can't find him on these issues. he's missing. i'll lead on this issue. >> mr. speaker, i want to bring you into this conversation and want to get the words just right. your initial reaction to the ryan plan. radical right wing social engineering. then you backtracked. why? >> first of all it was a very narrow question which should republicans impose an unpopular bill upon the american people? now, i supported the ryan budget as a general proposal. i wrote a newsletter supporting the ryan budget.

and those words were taken totally out of context. i'm happy to repeat people. -- repeat them. if you're dealing with something as big as medicare and you can't have a conversation with the country and what the country says you're doing the right thing you better slow down. we all got mad at obama because he ran over us. when we said don't do it. well, the republicans ought to follow the same ground rule. if you can't convince the american people it's a good idea maybe ints not a good idea. let me start with that. second, there are certain things i would do different than paul ryan on medicare. i agree with hip strongly on medicaid. but two things. >> quickly. >> congressman tom price has a very good bill that would allow private contracting so those people who want to voluntarily could contract with their doctor or their hospital in addition to medicare and it would be -- outside the current system and relieve the pricing pressure on the current system. we did a study called stop paying the crooks. we think you can save $70 billion to $120 billion in medicare and medicaid and annually by not paying crooks. >> we have to save time.

let me start with the senator first. >> should the republicans slow down? >> no. we have a $1.4 trillion deficit and it isn't getting any better anytime soon. we have to deal with this problem now. and what paul ryan is suggesting, which i wholeheartedly support, is to use a program that's identical to what seniors already have. it's called medicare part d. they have a program right now. which seniors like. it is a program that's called a premium support program. we give seniors depending on income a certain amount of money so they can go out and they can purchase melting care that they want that helps them and this is the key, john, we need to include seniors in controlling costs. what president obama -- let me finish, please. what president obama has done is he put in in the obamacare bill the independent payment advisory board. plage, seniors, -- ladies and gentlemen, seniors, medicare is going to be cut in 2014 by the federal government and rationing of care from the top

down. what paul ryan and rick santorum want to do which is not radical and taking program, medicare prescription drugs that is 41% under budget, because seniors are involved in controlling costs and apply all to medicare, it is the right approach for medicare. >> the speakeraries point, the speaker point, mr. cain, was if you lost the american people and not following you, you have to slow down and until you can get them with you. is that a fair point? >> we don't need to slow down. i hate to tell -- hate to be the one to give you bad news, doctor, you won't get the money you put into medicare if we don't restructure it. with medicare and social security, the problem hasn't been solved. we can no longer rearrange it. we've got to restructure those programs and the paul ryan approach i totally support. and he has been very courageous in taking the lead on this. and you know that commercial where they have demagogued the whole thing with mediscare and having grandma tossed off the

bridge, if we don't fix this problem, it's going to be out -- our grandkids in that wheelchair that they will be throwing off the bridge. we have to fix the problem. >> we want to continue our discussion on entitlements. let's go to the floor. >> mr. cain, back to you. while you're fired up there let's turn to social security. could you be specific regarding ages, income levels. everyone talks about reform. what is your specific, specific social security reform plan in regard to raising the retirement age, what ages, cutting benefits, and at what income level means testing kicking in? thank you. >> let's fix the problem. and that is to restructure social security. i support a personal retirement account option in order to phase off the current system. we know that this works. it worked in the small country of chile when they did it 30 years ago. that payroll tax had gotten up to 27% for every dollar that

the worker made. i believe we can do the same thing. that break point would be 40 years of age. now, young people realize they still got to contribute to the current system. for those people that are on social security that are near -- >> and are you going to raise the retirement age as president of the united states? >> i don't have to raise the retirement age because that by itself isn't going to solve the problem. if congress decides to do that, that's a different matter. let me give you one other example where this approach has worked. the city of galveston, they opted out of the social security system way back in the 1970's. and now they retire with a whole lot more money. why? for a real simple reason. they have an account with their money on it. what i'm simply saying is we have to restructure the program pufinge a personal retirement account option in order to eventually make it solvent. >> we have to keep the conversation moving. people want to weigh in. you'll get a chance to weigh in. jennifer is on the floor with a question. >> governor romney, i would like to ask you this first. the treasury department says

the united states will hit its credit limit on august 2. do you believe we will ultimately have to raise the debt ceiling? >> i believe we will not raise the debt ceiling unless the president finally, finally, is willing to be a leader. on issues that the american people care about. and the number one issue that relates to that debt ceiling is with -- whether the government is going to keep on spending money they don't have. and the american people and congress and every person elected in washington has to understand we want to see a president finally lay out plans for reigning in the excesses of government. you've heard on here a whole series of ideas. about entitlements and snase about 60% of federal spending. that's a big piece. that's a big chunk. ideas from all these people up here. what are the president's ideas? each person has different ideas here. we can try them and try different ideas. different states and different programs at the federal level. but why isn't the president leading? he isn't leading on balancing our budget and he's not leading on jobs. he's failed the american

people, both in job creation and that's why you he's not going to be re-elected. >> what happens if you doesn't raise it? is it ok not to? >> what happens if we continue to spend time and time again, year and year again, more money than we take in? we say to america at some point you mitt a wall. at -- you hit a wall. i won't keep loning money to america to pay these massive deficits because america can't pay them back. and the dollar is not worth anything anymore. in that circumstance, we've saddled our future, the future for our kids in a way that's unacceptable. and so you're going to see republicans stand up and say mr. president, lay down plans to balance this budget. if he does so, if we get democrats to come to the table, and onestly deal with the challenges we have, with the entitlement changes and the challenges in discretionary accounts and with our jobs issues, and finally say you know what? we can't afford another trillion dollars of obamacare. if he will be honest about these tng