broadband speeds by 2015. i worry whether those objectives are not ambitious enough, given the way in which the global economy is moving so quickly. it is our frustration that many do not consider digital as being part of the main policy area. this is something over there for others who might understand these new technologies. you grow up with it. a whole genergation has come to it. you are adapting to this revolution. you are doing your job. i would like the people to take nd to explain that this is something that will

help you do your job. >> the biggest frustration? >> they fragmentation in europe. the difficulties of understanding the real scope that this brings. there is an increasing gap between a gentle generation of entrepreneurs and citizens who are living in europe and to expect certain services and connectivity. their political leaders have the difficulty grasping what is going on. every day and year is fragmented and acts as a global player, china, brazil, the u.s. get ahead of us. we owe it to the opportunity and potential of europe to bring the whole european union into

the 21st century. this requires a lot of work. it is very urgent that we get there. >> here in washington, are your mobile devices working that's what has been your experience that like >> mineworker. if this experience -- mine works. it is expensive. >> it is a real thing not to have to go down the road for two miles to get a signal. >> he is also the co-founder of the european internet foundation. she has been a member of the parliament since 2009. we appreciate you both coming on. thank you as well. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> monday, a series of town hall meetings held by members of congress during the summer recess. top the money dominated the conversation. >> a passing the house as early as march of this year. it is sitting at the senate. this is a very confounding thing. >> it is extremely important that we focus on the jobs across america. that is what president obama will talk about on thursday in his joint session address. i hope the republicans are focused on everyone's jobs. right now they're missing focus on the man who is in the white house. >> more town hall meetings throughout the day monday on c- span starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern.

>> sunday john discusses the economy and jobs as ellises view of the economic and is it his. "newsmakers" on c-span. >> on tuesday, former massachusetts governor will announce his jobs plan at a truck company in las vegas. his speech comes to days before president obama's address to a joint session of congress. live coverage begins at 3:30 p.m. eastern. >> see what political reporters are staying in check the latest contributions with the website for campaign 2012. it helps to navigate the

political landscape with facebook updates and the latest polling data. >> mock gabelli has become an adjective here i. many of them leave the print secretly. not too many people would call themselves that. >> his name is synonymous with cenacle scheming and the selfish pursuit of power. sunday night he argues that the theories may have been in response to the corruption are around him. >> lastly, buddy announces made in american jobs plan.

he criticizes president obama on his job speech in talks about global free trade. this did place outside the chinese embassy. >> why the other politicians are supporting this disastrous experiment that has caused so much suffering. why is president obama pushing so hard for more free trade policy with colombia and panama? doesn't create any new net new jobs ducks that is the question pay i cannot pretend to tell you what is in the hearts and minds

of others. i cannot pretend to tell you what is in the hearts and minds of others. they have to answer that themselves. but i will tell you the facts. and those facts you can make your own conclusions. but the fact is that this experiment with a global free trade has been tried and failed. contrary to what advocates of global free trade predicted when it was put into practice, he destroyed our positive trade balance, it destroyed our factories, destroyed the like -- livelihood of american workers, wiped out industrial cities -- visit detroit -- and it rented our nation dependent on china and other foreign nations for the necessities of life. here is my paragraph. for some people and corporations, however, global free trade has been a bonanza. while our nation is in grave danger, certain corporations and a small group of people have profited fantastically from our failed policies.

they moved their production out source -- offshore, free of our taxes, free of our wages, free of our standards, free of regulations. they made more profit moving factories to other countries than they ever made in america and they use their enormous wealth to finance political campaigns and gains influence over our government. they have bought our political system as they sell jobs out of america. even our newspapers, television networks, pundits, and economic experts are totally blind to what is right in front of us. everywhere they look they see labels that say made in china, made in mexico, or made in some other asian country or some other latin american country,

but they seem not to notice -- i did not notice that label. when they talk about the economy they complain about the little details. they make partisan criticisms about spending too much or too little. they speculate with elaborate charts about monetary policy. as if the fed were the problem. or about this policy, were then they blame america itself on the grounds that we should be more competitive, superhuman -- or we should effect -- accept the fact that we are no more better or entitled to prosperity than any other country. can they see with the problem is?

there is a big bear standing in the room eating our jobs using as his tool, is fork -- fork unfair trade practices. they complained there is no place to sit or stand in the meeting room but no one notices because there is a befar in there. in 1933 ross perot argued against nafta, contending it would eliminate american factories and jobs. al gore ridiculed him. most of the country cast him off as a crotchety old man.

now almost all ford automobiles have a label that says made in mexico. woefully few others bring it up -- pat buchanan, donald trump -- who argued the need to protect our industries by tariff if necessary. but they were ridiculed. not taken seriously. why is it i am the only presidential candidate who can see the bfear question -- bear. america desperately need a crotchety old man like me who has a clear vision of the facts and a wisdom to notice that there is a reason there is no room to sit safely in the meeting. there is a bear in the room up our jobs, eating our future. could it be i am the only one who has not sold himself out to the big corporations, pacs and their campaign money? we need one candidate who is free to lead america back to prosperity. now let's solve it, and i will finish. without using tariffs -- without using tariffs, we can

bring american factories back home. remember when everything you bought was made in the usa? did you feel proud and secure that america had the factory and technology and efficiency to out-produce any nation on earth? how do you feel now? when almost everything you buy has a label that says made in china. that chinese label is a sad symbol of america's decline. are you not annoyed when you call a local business and the phone is answered by someone overseas who can only provide limited assistance, if any at all? why is there not an american technician on the other end of the phone? does not break your heart to see once-thriving factories and businesses closed and nt with broken windows, defaced with the group but we do graffiti that mocks and insults their deaf. >> has your family been torn apart and scattered because you and your drill been or brothers or sisters had to move away to find a decent job or place to live on reduced income?

let's bring our factories back home. let's be proud as americans again when you shop. when we buy electronic devices, they should all be labeled made in the usa. elect me president and we should bring back to america and the most productive, efficient, say factories at the world has ever known. operated by skilled american labor, producing the highest quality goods at affordable prices. with each product proudly proclaiming, made in the usa. the way to restore jobs in america is by restoring

america's industrial prominence. almost everything we buy in america must be produced by americans employed here, not only to provide jobs for americans but to prevent sending our wealth to foreign countries and evaluating our dollar. -- devaluating our dollar. the only way to do that is to establish reasonable economic barriers to unfair competition. from abroad. we must adopt protective economic policy that will induce the factories to come back home, and more importantly, to induce new factories to emerge from the industrial ruins of our nation. give me the privilege to serve america. let us not only bring back the factories, but let's bring working families back to end the homes.

we do not have a housing problem. we have a jobs problem. housing will follow. let me bring back the business is to empty buildings. let's restore the nation to the land of freedom, security, and prosperity. yes, i am in favor of an economic policy that protect our workers against unfair trade, and in times of scarcity and unemployment, our first duty should be to protect america. protecting american industry from unfair import is not a radical or untested idea. has worked for 160 years to make america the industrial giant of the world. it worked for japan, germany, china, thailand, malaysia, to let them rise from poverty to prosperity. every nation that is significant has had -- [unintelligible] has become or main port. watch america.

we must protect america from this road to ruin. special interest has corrupted our political system, and are profiting while america declines. we must not let the story of america ended this way. if the communist nation of china becomes the new economic world leader, the noble ideals of american democracy will be delegated to the dust end of history. another nation that could not compete. now let me be specific about the three things we need to do. i am not a tariff by. -- guy.

they were fantastic for 165 years but they were characterized by backroom political dealings with some congressmen are doing for unusually high tariffs to protect their district. paris protected america, but i wanted something better. i wanted a means to apply a means to protect our industry based on economic necessity to allow factories to survive with a small profit but to reward -- but not reward them with undeserved profit. i wanted to protect our industries using economics. rather than politics. you was different. we created two simple methods to save and revive the economy. and to bring american industries and jobs back. each method has its own

advantage. i want to emphasize that these solutions will not end foreign trade. we will still import billions of dollars of goods from china and other manufacturing nations, but it will allow our manufacturers to compete against unfair, for producers, and it will encourage foreign manufacturers to move their factories here, using american labor in order to compete more effectively. number one, i call this the tax deduction solution. i would allow a tax deduction only when businesses employ and by american. section 162 and 212 of the internal revenue code to allow a deduction against income for ordinary and necessary business expenses. section 167 and 179 of the code allowed a depreciation deduction for business equipment purchase. clear law.

my solution will amend those sections and the definition of cost of goods sold to state "any expenditure for any goods or services located, and or produced outside of the united states of america, shall not be deducted from your taxes." this simple amendment to the internal revenue code that a business is free to buy and trade were ever he wants to, but if an employer contracts with anyone in manila, or new delhi to answer the telephone for technical support services, or higher is a radiologist in india to read x-rays, the expense would not be deductible.

also, any business equipment such as a tractor, or a computer, or office furniture made in japan or china, would not be a deductible business expense and would not be depreciable. likewise, any materials, components, parts, or goods, purchased or were produced outside of america would not be allowed as cost of goods sold and would not be deducted from income under the internal revenue code. this would encourage american businesses to buy american. even if it cost a little more so they can deduct the full expense.

american retailers will want to fill their shelves with american products so that when they make a sale, they only pay tax on the profit, not the difference between the sale price and the wholesale cost. it will reverse the effect of the policy that china imposed on american up. it will encourage foreign manufacturers to move their factories here, using american labor, so they can enjoy a better chance to sell to american retailers or businesses and to obtain investors to buy their stock. two, i would eliminate the foreign tax credit. that is section 27a of the internal revenue code that gives taxes to taxes paid to a foreign country. elimination of the foreign tax credit would close a major loophole.

that allows large corporations and wealthy individuals to avoid u.s. income taxes by moving their businesses and investments out of the country. it is unfair to americans those who pay taxes, those who support the country. these wealthy corporations and individuals receive this tax credit. they receive all the benefits and protection of u.s. citizenship, but they do not pay their fair share to support the country that supports and protect them. i hate to use their names, but this solution would eliminate a major trick used by such corporations such as general electric -- always a good company. but it is a trick, using the tax code. allowing it to escape paying any u.s. income tax on its net income of $14.2 billion. this tax deduction solution

cannot be adopted immediately. i mean, it can be adopted immediately. it will require no federal bureaucracy, no government expense, because the provisions would be implemented and enforced by the same staff in place. the tax deduction solution which consists of adding one sentence to the irs code and deleting one paragraph will have an enormous effect. it will restore america's industrial sector. it alone will generate millions of new jobs. it is eloquently simple, yet profoundly effective. no. 3, the final part of my solution, operates as follows. i call that the bear trade adjustment solution. a new way to level the playing

field and protect american industry from unfair competition is to require importers to pay our government and adjustment equal to the unfair advantage they gained by using cheap, foreign labor and avoiding america's health, safety, and environmental standards. i shall ask congress to adopt a statute that no product may be imported into the united states of america unless it is accompanied by a fair trade adjustment form, completed and certified by foreign analysts who have been trained and authorized by the u.s. government, but would be paid by the importer. the analyst would charge a fee to the importer to complete and certify the forms. when the goods arrive in the u.s., the importer must pay to our customs agent the total certified adjustment in order to obtain a release of the goods into our country.

the bear trade adjustment form will contain a blank fields where the analyst will enter the calculation to bellevue the difference between labor cost here and labor cost in the foreign country of origin. showing differences between such costs such as osha and epa here, and the cost there. there will also be an adjustment for unequal tariffs and other cost of imports, and any import subsidies given by the foreign nation. the adjustment is simply an economic calculation. no politics involved. it will cost the u.s. government nothing to implement it. all the administration cost the deadly are paid by the importers who paid a certified analyst to complete the form. for countries that have a wage structure in business regulations similar to ours such as canada, germany, england, there would be no adjustment.

but for china, for the bear, the adjustment could be substantial. it would raise the cost of chinese imports to match the cost of producing the goods here. this will give our manufacturers a chance to compete. this fair trade adjustment will level the playing field. it will only reduce, it will not end the billions of dollars of imports from countries with a lower standard of living, such as china. trade will continue. but it will be fair. the revenue generated by their trade adjustment and by the restoration of our industrial sector grows, will balance our budget, pay down our national debt, and still allow us to reduce income taxes. it will also allow our factories to compete fairly and will restore prosperity to america

while eliminating our trade deficit and saving the value of the dollar. growth is the key element in solving our economic dilemma. this approach yields solid growth. let me close. we need a president to defend our jobs against unfair trade, to level the playing field. we need a president to get the bare out of the room -- bear out of the room. takes guts, it takes the truth. you cannot be political. we will not stop trade. we will defend our jobs from unfair trade. it is the right thing to do. it is fair, it is necessary. i will be criticized by that giant corporations and their free trade chorus as they sell

our jobs. i refuse to take their money, folks. that is why i have a $100 limit. you wonder why. that is why i except no pac money. you wonder why. that is why i have no super pac. and that is why i practice full disclosure. buddyroemer.com is where you can find me. i need 1 million families to stand with me. we need to stand against the bear. i started it. but i need you to finish it. i need you to stand up against the bare and also up to those who stand up to their unchallenged. $100 limit. you will not be the first giver. people from all 50 states have done it. this is about you.

buddyroemer.com is where you find me. there is a bear in the room. it is fat. it is eating our jobs. let us take action. thank you. i apologize for being so long, but i had to explain how you work to this point. because free-trade is so seductive, and it will be held from every rooftop, but it does not work, because many nations do not trade that way. i will be glad to answer easy -- any questions. >> "washington examiner." when you were governor of louisiana, a number of factories were moving to your section of the country. a lot of the politicians in the rust belt that were leading in that area were making a lot of

the same arguments that you are making as far as labor laws, things like that. i want to say there was a plant in shreveport. how do you feel about that, in retrospect? >> nothing in particular happened in my state, but your point is well made. there will be in the country normal and healthy differences of competition. i am not trying to and competition. but i am saying, within a broad range of the labor standards and health standards, safety standards, that all american states fit there.

there are some differences. your plant may be in louisiana or california because it is 15% less expensive, but the quality of living might be different in california. these are normal differences. what to me is not normal -- and it is a good question -- would be to have a state where there were no labor standards. have a state where a 11-year-old children would work 60 hours a week. to have a state where there was no safety at all. and the united states government and surrounding states allow that unfair competition to continue. that is where we are with a few unfair traders in the global competition. so the difficulty in talking about competition is that, it is hard to draw fine distinctions, so i am not trying to.

i am not saying idaho ought to be like pennsylvania. working conditions are different, pay is different. but they are in the same broad category of competition. china, india, japan are in another, the entire constellation of competition. particularly china of those i mentioned. there are no standards there. it is not a question of having weak standards, there are no standards. so i ask you, jonathan, if you lived in america, and had a say on what goods could be sold here, would you allow a state to work children in unsafe conditions, unsanitary and garments, and because the cost is cheap, act like it was okay? i do not think he would and i

do not think we should. >> two questions. one following up on that. the free traders would suggest that the option would be that they have no job. conditions would be even worse than the terrible conditions that exist. >> let me answer that. it is a strong man. -- strawman. there are going to be close, shoes made. manufacturing is not what it used to be, but a, anywhere. that is nonsense. go to china. in the last eight years it has tripled manufacturing. somebody is making these cars. so it is a strong argument to

say -- straw argument to say that the choice between fair trade is no trade at all. i disagree. free trade pretends that both sides came from it -- gain from it. on fair trade cuts that baby in half. it does not work. >> to the moral part of that, you were suggesting how can we live allowing people to work for little wages and unsanitary conditions. my question was the free traders would argue if you took away free trade and you did not have those jobs, the condition would be even worse for them. >> i disagree. just the opposite is true.

we are china's biggest customer. what are they going to do, get an 8% a year trade adjustment and quit trading? nonsense. you know what they will do? they will begin to look at certain parts of china as to how we can reach the american range of acceptable way to practice. the pressure will be to increase wages, not decrease. you are wrong. that moral argument works for the benefit of trade, yes. but fair trade first of all. anybody else. yes, ma'am. >> "national journal." i was wondering if your jobs package would increase oversight of american businesses to be sure that they are not avoiding the minimum wage law, [inaudible] >> excellent question. i will not give another 31- minute speech, i promise. although this is a good subject for it. there are five or six things

involved here. energy independence. our manufacturing plants need an adequate supply of affordable energy. it does not exist in a nation where the greenbacks have said that we cannot drill safely for natural gas. they are wrong. we need a balance here. we need to afford our manufacturing plants and affordable source of environmentally safe lead- produced natural gas. this will happen. in addition, the whole question of immigration. this is a nation of laws. we need an immigration policy that is healthy for immigrants, that encourages immigration, particularly those with skills that are not readily apparent in the marketplace, skills needed in the marketplace, but i do not see how we can avoid stealing

our borders -- sealing our borders. we have a seal the border with england, the atlantic ocean. we do not have that with mexico, so we have to seal the border and begin a helping green card program, all the employers responsible for violations and we have to work out a sufficient -- a system of repatriation of those here illegally. this will be difficult, but illegal immigration hurts legitimate mexican citizens in america. let's just start there. the person hurt most by this are those mexicans who have learned the language, social skills, came here legally, and became citizens. now in some towns a walk down the street and they are looked at with suspicion. the legal immigration hurts us all. -- illegal immigration hurts us all. we can have a system of green

card sanctity and efficiency but we have to seal our borders and become a nation of legal immigrants. back to your specific question, i will hold, as part of my position, as i work with congress -- because it will not be done until i get there, i hate to say that. i will work with congress to honor all those involved but to make sure that our companies in america understand the rules, consider them honest and efficient, and then abide by them. i will hold them accountable. i was upset with the u.s. chamber of commerce last month criticizing arizona for having a role that penalized arizona

businesses for frequent violations of american law on immigration. shame on the u.s. chamber of commerce. we will have to get everyone together and do this right. excellent question. and i just touched the top. whatever we come up with, we will enforce it. >> cnn. the governor of louisiana, for someone that is running on his job record in texas, what the you think of his jobs platform, what are his weaknesses? >> i have not seen his jobs platform. i know the record of texas. although the governor of texas is not nearly as powerful as louisiana -- you can check the law. i think texas had done a great job. i wish louisiana had done as well. we are trying. i have yet to see what his actions were in that.

i would be interested to know what battles he lost. what more did he try to do and failed to get done? a person's defeat light that tells more than their victories. where did he reach to do a perfect job? i need to know the governor of texas better. i do not. when i am home late at night in my apartment in manchester, my tv only works half of the screen, so i do not watch that much television. i get to see the top half of rick perry, and i have listened to two speeches. they are very general. he would never give a jobs speech like this, four specific things to do with the tax code. but it will come. i just have to give him some time to set his ground. seems like a decent guy, do not know him, glad he is in the

race. we will see if he is worthy to be our president. that is what this campaign determined spirit that is why this is not just one day, one week, one state. it is a marathon. you see a man or woman fall down, get mud on their face, lord i have done it, and then you see them stand up and you say, that is my leader. it is too early to pick a winner. if the american public were asked who the next president would be, it will be 20% the current president, 20% someone else, -- there is no winner yet because there is no election. the average american is worried about his job, not about his president. the focus on my campaign -- i have always run the same way. ltd. gives, full disclosure, no pacs. and i have always been laughed at, by the bulk of the campaign.

by really great politicians to i have run against. it tough to beat. i when in the end -- i win in the end when the public decides about who has the most of vision and hope and commitment. i will take you. >> you think you should be in the next debate. there are lots of candidates in the raids. what standard should there be? >> i am the only guy running

stress been a congressman and a governor. these are things that are positive. i am a successful businessman. a bank of about a billion dollars in size, no bailouts. we need surgery to remove the bear. i am wondering, will that have been deaths i know they released a campaign last week. it sounded like me.

this is a mistake. we should not have done that. i am patient. this is a long amount of time. there are 10 more debate scheduled. i do not need 10:00 p.m. i'm going to ask them where they got their money and how many million dollars a chance. i'm like to ask them if they spend as much time growing jobs as they have raised the money. not one question about the money in these debates. i stand with fair trade. i will ask each of them to tell me where they stand.

crack>> that made a debate. shouldn't you be and as members? >> if you the way back 20 years, i am proud of my record. i smiled a lot. i beat a guy he's been $50 million against me. louisiana had the highest and of limerick in america. our teachers were paid worst in america. our bond trading was worse in every state.

we have the most talked is urging the most toxic air and water than anywhere. our bond rating was zuckerberg five times. we have an upgrade of five times ticket this is 20 years ago. teledyne know you from somewhere dec? i do not think this is my debating ability. it is easy to put me as side. that is why i call myself a crotchety old man.

it is easier to have the new face with no experience. we're talking about things of others did not talk about. i think i will make the debates. the next one is october 7. it was originally in southern california. the head higher name recognition. i am working in new hampshire. i've paid all my bills. last week was our greatest fund- raising week. i raise enough money last week

to buy one ticket to an obama is fund-raiser. $35,600. one ticket. do you want to know what the differences in this campaign debts one ticket. we are just starting. we're beginning to rise. they would be asking us to be on before it is over. >> do you have any future plans to focus? he was the first reporter. i miss south carolina. i do not have this.

there were -- it was an editoraiial room. i said i am from southern new hampshire. i spend the bulk of my time in new hampshire. i wanted to announce people choose your the one to make their jobs speech. the problem is not in the bottom. the problem is not in new hampshire.

the problem is in the bare again. this is why we are here. everybody knows it is a problem. i gave the three specific actions. to that past year of? >> how detailed to qualify? -- do you feel to qualify? >> is a television world. i was born in 1943. my parents got their first tv set i came back from college in 1964. i am an old guy. i'm healthy. i love life. i can meet. that experience can be useful. i'm not a television kid.

here's my problem. i cannot get on television. i get on the business shows. tonight.ne i'm a banker. i know this business. i have not yet earned the right to get on the national shows. i was not on the shows and i was building banks. i did not take television phone calls. that is not my best interests. now i'm paying a price for that. i'm having to reintroduce myself. i'm having to beg. i have to be available. what gives the piece is me any talking. i like my opponents but they're not talking about the issues.

i have a free range. there is no competition. anyone ever read a book called "blue ocean strategy"? i am in a blue ocean. there's no competition. nobody is talking about this. i am waiting for them. nobody is talking about the bear. they will mention china. i like this campaign so far. my campaign staff is anxious. they want to be on top. it is too early. there is no winner.

we're good to make a winner. we're doing it in new hampshire. we're gonna go is south carolina. to ride to move around. i forgot that part of your question. anyone else deaths thanks for putting up with me. >> it does seem like you're trying to give trade protection a good name. >> against unfair trade. it is like all things. it is like chocolate cake. the one piece will probably increase your life for pleasure and enjoyment. eight pieces? that is what trade is like. i'm a competitor. my bank travels the world helping american companies sell their product. i am proud of this.

i am for trade. unfair trade is unforgivable. this is a crime. this is a moral crime. i want the bill clinton's of the world's and the free traders, i want them to come with me and visit the families across america who are hurting not from free trade, not from fair trade but from unfair trade. it is not right. it is not fair. we tolerate it in china. shame on us. no more questions.

>> challenge to get a program like becker through one that seems to be weaned on free trade? >> the first thing you heard about me in this trade was the $100 limit. at that everyone laughed. what i am opposed to is that it comes in the dark. it comes with a special interests. we have ones that are supposedly independent of the candidates. do you believe they're independent and? of course you do not. they're run by the former campaign manager.

we have one candidates that went to the fund-raiser. they wrote of their independence. i was born at but not yesterday. the system is corrupt. unfair trade growth is not the only symptom of a corrupt system. a tax code that you cannot read. a budget that does imploded with the earmarks. that there is no supervision. we need the government to be strong. to help people on the bottom. to defend our shores. to prevent unfair trade. to protect america. i am not against america. i am against sloppy, fact, bloated, inefficient government.

at the age of 67 and 45 years of political experience, money is in control. the special checks and the winks and nods ron washington. i am a banker and i watched bank reform last year. it did not kill too big to fail. this should be done. they increased capital as of went up. it is not in the ball. two weeks after the bill lost, the president lost. he is a lawyer. he is not a banker.

he was on wall street at a fund- raiser hosted by goldman sachs. i considered it a firm that lied in sold and cheated. he went to wall street and accepted tickets. this system is corrupt. i do not hold president obama to a standard of moral high ground. i challenge any person running for president to join with me. fight for american jobs. he did the president of the united states. this is the only way they will become president. thank y'all.

man, i've got to quit doing this every day. phones up here. >> monday, a series of town hall meetings held by members of congress during the recess. jobs in the economy dominated much of these discussions. >> there are nine pieces of job promoting legislation that has passed through the house this year sitting over at the senate. nine pieces of legislation that is the confounding thing about what is happening in washington, d.c. -- fax it -- action verses in action. >> we have to focus